Joe Wreschnig writes: > On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 17:18, Michael Poole wrote: >> A little Google shows that Yggdrasil has made such an argument: >> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/04/msg00130.html >> >> Unfortunately for Mr. Richter, Linux does not seem to contain any >> copyright notices attributable to him or Yggdrasil before 2000. As I >> cited elsewhere, this is at least FOUR YEARS after firmware was >> included in the kernel, so he cannot fairly claim infringement. He >> should have known that binary firmware existed in the kernel before. > > I think it's fair to say he was misled by repeated statements that Linux > was under the GPL, e.g. from README: > > It is distributed under the GNU General Public License - see the > accompanying COPYING file for more details. > > Given the huge amount of code in Linux, it's very possible he didn't > even see any of the non-GPLd code at first, and I would consider it > totally reasonable to trust the README of a program at the outset.
You, sir, beg the question. If you wish to argue in a non-circular manner, please do so at any time. Do not expect the rest of us to take your word that X is true simply because you claim X. (I expect you will need a definition for X: it is the claim that including firmware blobs in the kernel is a violation of the GPL.) Michael Poole
