Re: [PATCH 2/2] tegrarcm: License update for miniloader files

[Allen Martin <amartin-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 09:08:54PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/17/2013 09:25 PM, Allen Martin wrote:
> > This changes the license under which the miniloader files are
> > distributed to the same license used for the binary portions of the
> > Tegra L4T distribution.  This should hopefully make the license more
> > palatable to distributions.
> > 
> > Also changed the description to say that the license applies to all
> > files in the miniloader directory instead of individually listing the
> > files.  This should hopefully prevent it from becoming stale.
> 
> This still seems rather over-complex:-(
> 
> > +2.1.1  Rights.  Customer may install and use one copy of the SOFTWARE
> > +on a single computer, and except for making one back-up copy of
> > +the Software, may not otherwise copy the SOFTWARE.  This LICENSE
> > +of SOFTWARE may not be shared or used concurrently on different
> > +computers.
> > +
> > +2.1.2  Linux/FreeBSD Exception.  Notwithstanding the foregoing terms
> > +of Section 2.1.1, SOFTWARE designed exclusively for use on the Linux or
> > +FreeBSD operating systems, or other operating systems derived from the
> > +source code to these operating systems, may be copied and redistributed,
> > +provided that the binary files thereof are not modified in any way
> > +(except for unzipping of compressed files).
> 
> Given that 2.1.2 appears to override 2.1.1 in the context of this SW,
> why even include 2.1.1? I know we're re-using the L4T license here, but
> I'd really prefer to just use something plain and simple that doesn't
> include irrelevant lawyer-speak.
> 
> > +No Rental.  Customer may not rent or lease the SOFTWARE to someone
> > +else.
> 
> Isn't that going to cause problems for distros? IANAL, but that doesn't
> sound GPL compatible, since it's an additional restriction that I don't
> think the GPL imposes.

This probably requires coordination with L4T since it's the same
license file, and we should keep them the same if at all possible.
I'm going to defer this license change to version 1.5 and push the
other patches out that you acked since ChromeOS is waiting on the SPI
fix.

-Allen

-- 
nvpublic