[nycbug-talk] Fwd: Firmware license

[G. Rosamond]

More on the firmware issues. . .This is from OBSD-misc, and we had 
initially discussed Intel's Centrino as NYC*BUG was launched .  . .

Of course there's another email to hit at Intel.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Jason Crawford <jasonrcrawford at gmail.com>
> Date: October 27, 2004 11:34:47 AM EDT
> To: jketreno at linux.intel.com
> Cc: misc at openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: Fw: Firmware license
> Reply-To: Jason Crawford <jasonrcrawford at gmail.com>
>
>     While Intel may feel it is not in Intel's best interest to release
> its wireless firmware under the BSD license, there are many companies
> that do business with open source code, not worrying about "IP"
> issues, and they have gained many customers in the open source world
> that they would otherwise not have had. And since Intel is not a
> company that will want any customers from the Open Source world, I
> will no longer be buying or recommending any Intel products, including
> at my place of work where I have purchasing power. Just because code
> is released Open Source does not mean you will lose profits, I hope
> that your lawyers will see it that way soon.
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:54:40 -0400 (EDT), Sunny Raspet 
> <slr at mordac.info> wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I just received this from Mr. Ketrenos after
>> contacting him to express my displeasure with Intel's licensing.  I
>> found it interesting enough to share with the list.
>>
>> Enjoy, or not, as the case may be.
>>
>> -Sunny Raspet
>>
>> --- Forwarded message follows ---
>>
>> From jketreno at linux.intel.com Tue Oct 26 16:30:44 2004
>> Received: from orsfmr001.jf.intel.com (fmr12.intel.com 
>> [134.134.136.15])
>>     by rincewind.mordac.info (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id
>> i9QKUh2F004061
>>     for <slr at mordac.info>; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:30:44 -0400 (EDT)
>> Received: from talaria.jf.intel.com (talaria.jf.intel.com 
>> [10.7.209.7])
>>     by orsfmr001.jf.intel.com (8.12.9-20030918-01/8.12.9/d: major-
>> outer.mc,v 1.15 2004/01/30 18:16:28 root Exp $) with ESMTP id
>> i9QKX97Z003202;
>>     Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:33:10 GMT
>> Received: from linux.intel.com (hdlrvguser-343.hd.intel.com
>> [10.127.53.106])
>>     by talaria.jf.intel.com (8.12.9-20030918-01/8.12.9/d: major-
>> inner.mc,v 1.11 2004/07/29 22:51:53 root Exp $) with ESMTP id
>> i9QKPRUI009498;
>>     Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:25:29 GMT
>> Message-ID: <417EB444.1000905 at linux.intel.com>
>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:32:04 -0500
>> From: James Ketrenos <jketreno at linux.intel.com>
>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b)
>> Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4
>> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> To: undisclosed-recipient-list at linux.intel.com
>> Subject: Firmware license
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.31 (www . roaringpenguin . com / 
>> mimedefang)
>> Status: R  Simple headers
>>
>> You are receiving this email because you recently made an inquiry
>> regarding the
>> license terms surrounding the firmware for the Intel PRO/Wireless
>> network adapters.
>>
>> After speaking with Intel legal and business teams, the conclusion is
>> that the
>> BSD model outlined by you and others is not compatible with the
>> restrictions
>> Intel must place on the firmware.  We appreciate the nature of the
>> request but
>> are unable to support a BSD release.  The firmware is made of Intel
>> code and
>> code provided by third parties, and the license obligations we have to
>> the third
>> party code prevents us from releasing the code under a BSD license.
>>
>> It is Intel's intent that the license covering the firmware be
>> sufficient to
>> allow [re]distribution to end users while ensuring that the
>> intellectual
>> property of Intel and its suppliers be properly protected. It is our
>> experience
>> that the majority of users have been satisfied with the current 
>> license
>> provisions and/or understand Intel's position, and are able comply 
>> with
>> the
>> license while enabling distribution to their end users. While we
>> understand that
>> the preference would be the release of the firmware driver under the
>> BSD, we
>> have enabled you with the means to redistribute the firmware to third
>> parties
>> through a broad, albeit proprietary, license.
>>
>> While we appreciate the open discussion on the issue re the BSD
>> request, we
>> trust that you will understand that Intel has provided its analysis of
>> the
>> request.  Accordingly, this will be treated as the final messaging for
>> this
>> particular firmware driver issue.
>>
>> James
>
>