On Wed, 2015-03-18 at 14:39 +0100, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: > > Unfortunately, some of the blobs in alsa-firmware are purportedly licensed > under the GPLv2, > > but without source code available. > > > The same problem exists for some blobs that were moved out of the linux > > tree, but since they were included in Linux tarballs for many years > > without objection from the copyright holders it is probably safe for > > kernel.org and other distributors to continue distributing them. > > However I am not prepared to put anyone at legal risk by adding more of > > these. > > Clear. > > > I think we need someone to review the licence status of blobs in > > alsa-firmware and determine which of them are clearly redistributable. > > Then these can be added to linux-firmware.git and to Debian's > > firmware-nonfree. > > Who should be a person which can help with this? debian-legal?
I doubt it, that's about deciding whether licences are DFSG-free and I think we already know none of these are. > Should we rise the severity to serious? Why? I don't think any of the firmware with unclear status is distributed by Debian. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings All extremists should be taken out and shot.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
