From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: autobuild of tegrarcm Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 09:25:26 -0600 Message-ID: <53D66B66.4010703@wwwdotorg.org> References: <18236773.n1AHpLtjGA@fb07-iapwap2.physik.uni-giessen.de> <20140727182320.GA14656@simplex.0x539.de> <15635619.1sXO2FqnMG@fb07-iapwap2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <15635619.1sXO2FqnMG@fb07-iapwap2> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Marc Dietrich , Philipp Kern , Allen Martin Cc: nonfree-sMDJvqjagnvx+JS5GvM4/R2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org, Julian Andres Klode , dktrkranz-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, ftpmaster-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 07/28/2014 02:03 AM, Marc Dietrich wrote: > added tegra ml, tegra maintainer, and tegrarcm maintainer. > > I think the license isn't appropriete for this software at all. See m= y notes > regarding this here [1]. So lets take the chance and ping nvidia agai= n on this > issue. I'll ask Eric to comment on this again, although please note that he's=20 out on vacation this week. That is, unless Allen has any comment? > [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-tegra/msg11945.html > > Am Sonntag, 27. Juli 2014, 20:23:20 schrieb Philipp Kern: >> Hi, >> >> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 09:55:20PM +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote: >>> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Philipp Kern wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:31:21AM +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote: >>>>> The proprietary license only applies to the binaries included in = some >>>>> header> > >>>>> files. FYI, here is the license: >>>> it seems like an oversight: LICENSE says "The files tegra20-minilo= ader.h >>>> and tegra30-miniloader.h are provided pursuant to the following li= cense >>>> agreement". But there is also tegra114-miniloader.h, which bears t= he >>>> same "not usable without a specific agreement" header. >>> >>> thanks for finding this. I think this can be fixed easily. I'll ask= my >>> NVIDIA contact to update the LICENSE file regarding this. >>> >>>> Interestingly NVIDIA tells us in the license that it is "revocable= ", >>>> which >>>> is not the case for the graphics driver one. I presume we're alrea= dy >>>> talking about the binary code form here. It does not really make m= e happy >>>> that we can only distribute this to sublicensees that agree to be = bound >>>> by the license and to owners of NVIDIA hardware. Both is untrue wh= en >>> >>>> looking at buildds. ): >>> Does the term "revocable" cause problems with the distribution? Doe= s this >>> mean that users downloading the code (or the binary) must delete it= if >>> NVIDIA tells debian to do so? Of course this is not possbile becaus= e we >>> don't know the identity of the users downloading this code. Also we= don't >>> ask the users to aggree with the license before downloading/running= the >>> program. >>> >>> The code in the miniloader files is not run on the machine which ru= ns >>> tegrarcm. It is run on the target SoC, which is likely Tegra, becau= se all >>> other SoCs won't run this bootloader. So I think this is more or le= ss >>> harmless. >> >> whenever I go back to this license, I feel bad about it. Adding Luca= who >> accepted it. >> >> The graphic driver license clearly exempts Linux from the problemati= c >> provisions. The tegra one does not even try. Here's 2.1: >> >> 2.1 Rights and Limitations of Grant. NVIDIA hereby grants to You= the >> following non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable right under >> NVIDIA=E2=80=99s copyrights to use, copy, distribute and sublicens= e the >> SOFTWARE (solely in binary code form) to Your sublicensees (a) sol= ely >> for use in connection with NVIDIA hardware or software products; a= nd >> (b) pursuant to the terms and conditions of any form of end-user >> software license agreement; provided, that Your sublicensees agree= to >> be bound by this LICENSE or terms and conditions that are as >> protective of NVIDIA=E2=80=99s Intellectual Property Rights in the= SOFTWARE as >> this LICENSE >> >> I'm unsure if the latter part means that the users need to consent b= efore we >> can offer it (e.g. click-through). Unless we do not actually sublice= nse. >> OTOH if we'd sublicense, then the users would not need to destroy co= pies >> when we need to. >> >> And then there's clause 3: >> >> 3. TERM AND TERMINATION >> . >> This LICENSE and the licenses granted hereunder shall be effective= as >> of the date You download the applicable SOFTWARE (=E2=80=9CEffecti= ve Date=E2=80=9D) >> and continue for a period of one (1) year (=E2=80=9CInitial Term=E2= =80=9D) >> respectively, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the >> =E2=80=9CTermination=E2=80=9D provision of this LICENSE. Unless e= ither party notifies >> the other party of its intent to terminate this LICENSE at least t= hree >> (3) months prior to the end of the Initial Term or the applicable >> renewal period, this License will be automatically renewed for one= (1) >> year renewal periods thereafter, unless terminated in accordance w= ith >> the =E2=80=9CTermination=E2=80=9D provision of this LICENSE >> . >> NVIDIA may terminate this LICENSE at any time if You violate its >> terms. Upon termination, You will immediately destroy the SOFTWARE= or >> return all copies of the SOFTWARE to NVIDIA, and certify to NVIDIA= in >> writing that such actions have been completed. Upon termination o= r >> expiration of this LICENSE the license grants to Licensee shall >> terminate, except that sublicenses rightfully granted by Licensee >> under this LICENSE in connection with Paragraph 2 of this LICENSE >> provided by Licensee prior to the termination or expiration of thi= s >> LICENSE shall survive in accordance with their respective form of >> license terms and conditions. >> [...] >> >> Do we have a precedent for such a clause? The whole language about o= ne year >> terms and announcements of termination worries me. That'd mean that >> someone'd need to monitor NVIDIA's announcements and then request re= moval >> from a stable release in time? Or will that only happen towards sing= le >> users? (I.e. must the notification be direct?) >> >> I guess the language about NVIDIA's products can be ok, given that t= he >> compiled product is only useful on NVIDIA hardware anyway and will n= ot be >> executed on buildds=E2=80=A6 >> >> Kind regards >> Philipp Kern > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra= " in > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >