Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:36:44 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: License oddity in some m68k files |
| |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 05:24:45PM -0700, Matt Waddel wrote: > >> Alan Cox wrote: > >> > >>> On Gwe, 2006-01-20 at 07:21 -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote: > >>> > >>>> The language in the source files is pretty strong and this looks > >>>> like > >>>> Motorola should be asked to rerelease the files with a normal > >>>> copyright notice in place of the current language... > >>>> > >>> > >>> Its standard boilerplate from the period. Its a perfectly normal and > >>> clear copyright notice. > >>> > >>> Alan > >>> > >> Actually, that is the exact language our lawyers still give us to > >> use today when we have not settled on license terms when we want to > >> share code in a severely limited fashion. > >> > >> I still think it best that they (Freescale) modify their language > >> to reference the actual license grant in the README. > > > >Good luck finding anyone in Freescale that would have any idea about > >this. > > > >- kumar > >- > > I have been given permission to fix the "UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY > SOURCE CODE OF MOTOROLA ..." section in the source files of fpsp040/ > directory. > > One suggestion, so we don't have to revisit this topic in 16 years > from now again, shouldn't we just remove the UNPUBLISHED ... comment > altogether and replace it with Greg Kroah-Hartman's suggested verbiage > as in the patch below?
Sure, that works for me. Anyone going to forward this upstream?
Thanks a lot for looking into this,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |