Re: [EXT] Re: mwifiex firmware mrvl/sd8987_uapsta.bin missing in the firmware git

[Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>]

On Fri, 25 Sep 2026 09:27:35 -0700
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 04:58:14PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> > The License terms have in 2.3(b):
> > "(b)     to copy and distribute as needed, solely in connection with an
> > Authorized System and for use in combination with a NXP Product,"
> > 
> > If I read it correctly, the firmware cannot life in such a repository, since
> > the repository is used by different machines. Is my interpretation correct?
re-establishing context again: "such a repository" means that fw packages as
e.g. alpine packages and then put into the official alpine repositiory.  
> 
> I'm no expert and am not providing legal advice.
> 
I am not either, but there are NXP people in CC hoping to say something
more official or finally un-stall this issue.

> I see there is some roughly similar (but a little weaker-soundging)
> language in some existing linux-firmware licenses. e.g., "permitted
> solely operating in conjunction with <company> authorized products".
> 
Often it is restricting *use* not *distribution*. 

> I also see the linux-firmware README only says:
> 
>     Your commit **must** contain a `Signed-Off-By:` from someone authoritative on
>     the licensing of the firmware in question (i.e. from within the company
>     that owns the code).
> 
> I take that to mean that linux-firmware doesn't really try to own the
> licensing rules. They defer to the company that owns the IP.
> 
There are rules what licenses might forbid and what not in LICENSE-CRITERIA.md.
At least submitting it to the firmware repo (so from NXP sight a third
party repo) sounds like some permission for distribution.

Regards,
Andreas