Anthony DeRobertis said: > The only time I think they would allow otherwise would be if the > copyright holder distributed object code under the GPL. I don't know > what they'd do then.
I'd argue (not that a court would necessarily agree) that "The Work" described in sections 1 and 2 is the object code, so I can make and/or distribute copies of The Work. These copies can be unmodified object code, or modified object code if the modifications were made directly to the (author-distributed) object code, without compiling the "Preferred form for modification". I'd argue that section 3 applies only if I want to distribute the result of compiling the "source". So, since I've never seen the "source" for the firmware files that started this thread, I'd argue that verbatim distribution of the firmware image (even in .o format) is permitted under the GPL. But it still is not suitable for the Debian, because of DFSG#2 --Joe
