[coreboot] coreboot binary policy

[David Hendricks]

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Marc Jones <marcj303 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:44 AM Alex G. <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/29/2015 09:48 AM, Marc Jones wrote:
>> > Hello coreboot,
>>
>> Hi Marc
>>
>> > Please limit comments to specific items in this version. If you have
>> > additions for the next version (if needed), the draft document is open
>> > for comment.
>> >
>> >
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wMdDUAZR2Z9V7hcs3IhIOqw6sYQxb3vPEmbITTCrOwU/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> That looks pretty good. I think you've done a great job of clarifying
>> the requirements of ISA vs non-ISA blobs compared to the last version.
>> I've made some comments on it to ask for clarification about the
>> versioning requirements.
>>
>> While not necessarily specific to this version, are we still considering
>> forbidding "no-reverse engineering" and "no-modification" clauses for
>> blobs?
>>
>>
> Thanks, I think it is all open for discussion and could go in the next
> version. It might be a good idea, but that might be too limiting and we
> would have to remove all blobs and they would be hosted somewhere else,
> which defeates the utility of the blobs dir. We would like intel to push to
> blobs/ but I think that would be a huge blocker for them.
>

+1. It's tough enough for us to get rid of a few lines of GPL boilerplate.
Getting companies to significantly change their boilerplate licensing for
blobs will be a blocker.

Just treat them as we always have.

-- 
David Hendricks (dhendrix)
Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20151030/01e214eb/attachment-0001.html>