Re: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclearcopyright notice.

[Richard B. Johnson]

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Josselin Mouette wrote:

> Le mardi 05 avril 2005 ˙˙ 11:50 -0400, Richard B. Johnson a ˙˙crit :
> > > > You are mixing apples and oranges. The fact that the GFDL sucks has
> > > > nothing to do with the firmware issue. With the current situation of
> > > > firmwares in the kernel, it is illegal to redistribute binary images of
> > > > the kernel. Full stop. End of story. Bye bye. Redhat and SuSE may still
> > > > be willing to distribute such binary images, but it isn't our problem.
> >
> > Wrong! It is perfectly legal in the United States, and I'm pretty
> > sure in your country, to distribute or redistribute copyrighted
> > works. Otherwise there wouldn't be any bookstores or newspaper
> > stands.
>
> It is not legal to distribute the mix of a GPL software (the Linux
> kernel) and a proprietary file (the firmware). I wasn't aware of the
> "mere aggregation" interpretation, and I'm probably a bit late to say I
> disagree with it - mainly because you'd have a hard time convincing a
> court this is the case.
>
> > There is nothing about firmware that is any different than any
> > other component of a product. If the product was legally obtained
> > and it requires firmware to run, then there are no special
> > considerations about how one inserts the firmware into the
> > product.
>
> Indeed, but that's not what I'm talking about.
>
> > If you are a GPL-religious-zealot who believes that you are
> > supposed to get the technical design (i.e. the software schematics)
> > of the hardware device for free so you can copy it, then you are
> > going to have to learn something about intellectual property.
>
> Maybe you should try to understand what people are saying before
> teaching them anything.
>
> > The firmware, in most cases, are the bits generated by a design
> > program that creates the function of the device. It's what the
> > manufacturer paid 5-10 engineers over a period of a year or so
> > to produce. The rest of the design is just some chips you
> > can get off-the-shelf. Even if the manufacturer said; "Here you
> > are.... You can have the design....". You don't have the
> > "compilers" and other stuff necessary to turn this design
> > into the firmware unless you planned to steal the design.
> >
> > So, you either accept the firmware component, thanking the
> > manufacturer for it, or you go cry foul someplace else. This
> > whole firmware thing is a non-issue, blown way out of
> > proportion by people who don't have a clue.
>
> You are completely missing the point. I don't care whether the firmwares
> should be free, or whether they could be free. The fact is they are not
> free, and Debian doesn't distribute non-free software in the "main"
> archive. The fact is also that mixing them with a GPLed software gives
> an result you can't redistribute - although it seems many people
> disagree with that assertion now.

As previously explained, if I buy a screen-card I get a driver
that will allow it to run under Windows. If I extract the stuff
from that driver that allows me to run it under Linux, that
constitutes fair use. Otherwise there are criminal issues like
restraint-of-trade and similar problems for the manufacturer.
That firmware is free for use on/in the device you purchased.

> Finally, you shouldn't forget that, technically speaking, using hotplug
> for uploading the firmware is much more flexible and elegant than
> including it in the kernel. Upgrading the firmware and the module should
> be two independent operations. People who are advocating the current
> situation are refusing technical improvements just because they are
> brought by people they find convenient to call "zealots".

Throwing in a bit of truth to a pile of bullshit still leaves
the bullshit. It isn't relevant to the issue whether or not
upgrading firmware as a separate function from loading a module
is "good" or "bad".

> --
> .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
> : :' :           josselin.mouette@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> `. `'                        joss@xxxxxxxxxx
>  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.11 on an i686 machine (5537.79 BogoMips).
 Notice : All mail here is now cached for review by Dictator Bush.
                 98.36% of all statistics are fiction.