ഓം wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Rahul Sundaram > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> श्रीधर नारायण दैठणकर wrote: >>> The kernel is GPLed, but the firmware may not be. >> There is in fact a potential license violation here. Refer "mere >> aggregation" clauses in the license. >> >> Rahul > > There is either a violation (though with some perception and point of > view) or there is no legal violation (with some other perception and > point of view) but that can be *no* **potential violation**. > > If you prefer could take a look at what makes you think there *is* potential!
Since I am not a lawyer, I can only talk about potential violations. I already gave a hint. Read the license. In brief, if something is derived from a GPL'ed licensed codebase it should be under the same license too. The firmwares files in the kernel certainly is not GPL'ed. If there is clear separation, then the mere aggregation clause applies. That isn't the case atleast in some instances since the driver is closely tied to the firmware and vice versa. Rahul -- ______________________________________________________________________ Pune GNU/Linux Users Group Mailing List: ([email protected]) List Information: http://plug.org.in/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/plug-mail Send 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for mailing instructions.
