On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 01:17:52PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:

On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Ben Hutchings [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 05:36 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Kalle Valo [off-list ref] wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

+ NO LICENSES OR OTHER RIGHTS,
+WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, BASED ON ESTOPPEL OR OTHERWISE, ARE GRANTED
+TO ANY PARTY'S PATENTS, PATENT APPLICATIONS, OR PATENTABLE INVENTIONS
+BY VIRTUE OF THIS LICENSE OR THE DELIVERY OR PROVISION BY QUALCOMM
+ATHEROS, INC. OF THE SOFTWARE.

This -- however is new to linux-firmware -- and I hereby raise a big
red fucking flag. All other licenses on linux-firmware provide at the
very least a limited patent grant. What makes Qualcomm special ?

[...]

There are several licence texts that don't mention patents at all.  I'm
assuming that the companies submitting firmware for inclusion in Linux
or linux-firmware do intend to grant whatever licences are required to
distribute it to end users.

Agreed, this would be the only fair thing.

quoted

Several licence texts explicitly exclude patent licences relating to any
*other* products of the same company, but that's quite redundant.

Sure.

quoted

However this language seems to explicitly exclude *any* patent licence.

Yeap, they are making it crystal clear.

quoted

You're right to raise a red flag because, assuming Qualcomm does have
patents that cover the firmware alone, this seems to disallow
redistribution in whatever jurisdictions those patents apply.

I'm also fearful of this setting a precedent for other vendors.

<-- snip -->

To avoid patches as this one should we define some basic guidelines
for linux-firmware acceptable licenses?

How about this small change to clarify ?

From b0b9bd8328f797836ce0db6157232d017220594b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <redacted>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:41:25 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] README: clarify redistribution requirements covering patents

Firmware licenses should include an implicit or explicit
patent grant to end users for full device operation.

Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <redacted>
---
 README | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/README b/README
index f2ed92e..d2a56ec 100644
--- a/README
+++ b/README

@@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ and also cc: to related mailing lists.
 
 Your commit should include an update to the WHENCE file clearly
 identifying the licence under which the firmware is available, and
-that it is redistributable. If the licence is long and involved, it's
+that it is redistributable. Being redistributable includes ensuring
+the firmware license provided includes an implicit or explicit
+patent grant to end users to ensure full functionality of device
+operation with the firmware. If the licence is long and involved, it's
 permitted to include it in a separate file and refer to it from the
 WHENCE file.
 And if it were possible, a changelog of the firmware itself.

-- 
2.0.0