Looking at net-wireless/b43-firmware-5.100.138: # cat broadcom-wl-5.100.138/README This driver was extracted out of the GPL source package for NETGEAR WNDR4500 It contains the Broadcom wireless driver 5.100.138 This driver includes firmware version 666.2 http://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/WNDR4500-V1.0.0.40_1.0.10_src.tar.zip WNDR4500-V1.0.0.40_1.0.10_src/src/wl Downloading the file above, we find the file that is used above for extracting firmware: WNDR4500-V1.0.0.40_1.0.10_src/src/wl/linux/wl_apsta.o This is apparently a prebuilt module from WNDR4500-V1.0.0.40_1.0.10_src/src/linux/linux-2.6/drivers/net/wl/wl_apsta In Makefile in directory above, we read: # Copyright (C) 2010, Broadcom Corporation. All Rights Reserved. # # Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any # purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above # copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. # # THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES # WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF # MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY # SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES # WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION # OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN # CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. Maybe same should be true for V3 firmware as well (see bug #446558).
The firmware isn't open source and redistribution is expressly forbidden by the broadcom license.
Wait, which license are you referring to? The ebuild has LICENSE="as-is", which only means that no one tracked down the best license that can be used. Same firmware can be distributed under different licenses. This archive: http://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/WNDR4500-V1.0.0.40_1.0.10_src.tar.zip (of which broadcom-wl-5.100.138.tar.bz2 is a repack) seems to suggest that Broadcom released the firmware with no restrictions, with license I quoted above. Source is not included in archive above, probably because the license does not require that, so WNDR4500 does not include the kernel sources, just the relevant licenses (which the license does require). The sources can be probably tracked down, but it doesn't matter for redistribution of firmware.
Note that "Broadcom" license forbidding redistribution as you said applies to broadcom-sta (and is distributed with it), not broadcom-wl.
(In reply to comment #2) > This archive: > http://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/WNDR4500-V1.0.0.40_1.0.10_src.tar. > zip > (of which broadcom-wl-5.100.138.tar.bz2 is a repack) seems to suggest that > Broadcom released the firmware with no restrictions, with license I quoted > above. Where do you see that? As I understand it, the license you've quoted above (BTW, it's the "ISC" license) applies to the Makefile only. It would be very bold to conclude that it applies to anything else than the file containing it. But maybe the following is a hint: $ readelf -p .modinfo src/wl/linux/*.o | grep license [ 78] license=Proprietary [ 94] license=Proprietary [ 94] license=Proprietary
(In reply to comment #4) > Where do you see that? As I understand it, the license you've quoted above > (BTW, it's the "ISC" license) applies to the Makefile only. It would be very > bold to conclude that it applies to anything else than the file containing > it. The ISC license looks like a header in all (missing) module sources, but you are right -- the firmware could be a blob under a different license that's later included into the module. > But maybe the following is a hint: > > $ readelf -p .modinfo src/wl/linux/*.o | grep license > [ 78] license=Proprietary > [ 94] license=Proprietary > [ 94] license=Proprietary Maybe. :) If only there was a way to get the exact license under which Netgear got the file. If it's anything like broadcom-sta's "Broadcom", then it's even more restrictive than the current "as-is".
Just for comparison, a Makefile from broadcom-sta: # Copyright (C) 2010, Broadcom Corporation # All Rights Reserved. # # This is UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODE of Broadcom Corporation; # the contents of this file may not be disclosed to third parties, copied # or duplicated in any form, in whole or in part, without the prior # written permission of Broadcom Corporation.
The firmware is extracted from the proprietary driver which is licensed "Broadcom". I have updated the ebuild to reflect this fact. I know that the driver is distributed in a "gpl" bundle, but the driver isn't gpl. If you want the firmware relicensed please ask broadcom not us.
(In reply to comment #7) > The firmware is extracted from the proprietary driver which is licensed > "Broadcom". I have updated the ebuild to reflect this fact. Can you please provide a links to a driver that contains said license? > If you want the firmware relicensed please ask broadcom not us. I have actually asked Netgear to provide the license under which they received wl_apsta.o Doubt they will reply, though.
(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > The firmware is extracted from the proprietary driver which is licensed > > "Broadcom". I have updated the ebuild to reflect this fact. > > Can you please provide a links to a driver that contains said license? This appears to have already been done above. Firmware can be extracted from the wl/sta driver, both of which appear to be under proprietary licenses. No other linux distro thinks this is open source, nor do I. If you have an issue: http://www.broadcom.com/contact/ > > > If you want the firmware relicensed please ask broadcom not us. > > I have actually asked Netgear to provide the license under which they > received wl_apsta.o Doubt they will reply, though. I don't care if they reply, Netgear isn't Broadcom.
(In reply to comment #9) > This appears to have already been done above. No, it hasn't been done. Your guess is as good as mine. > Firmware can be extracted from the wl/sta driver, both of which appear to be under proprietary licenses. No, you can't extract the firmware from the sta driver. b43-firmware doesn't do that. What is the "wl" driver? You didn't provide a link. Does it have a license? > No other linux distro thinks this is open source, nor do I. I am not claiming it's open source, I am trying to locate the license. > If you have an issue: > http://www.broadcom.com/contact/ Don't understand the hostility. If you can't show why the license is correct, that's not a reason to blame me for that. > I don't care if they reply, Netgear isn't Broadcom. b43-firmware essentially extracts the firmware from Netgear's archive. If the archive is redistributable, then there should be no mirror restriction in the ebuild.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > This appears to have already been done above. > > No, it hasn't been done. Your guess is as good as mine. > > > Firmware can be extracted from the wl/sta driver, both of which appear to be under proprietary licenses. > > No, you can't extract the firmware from the sta driver. b43-firmware doesn't > do that. What is the "wl" driver? You didn't provide a link. Does it have a > license? I know it's confusing, "broadcom-sta" is a module named "wl" so some people call it wl. It's the same driver. > > > No other linux distro thinks this is open source, nor do I. > > I am not claiming it's open source, I am trying to locate the license. > Again, this is already done above. > > If you have an issue: > > http://www.broadcom.com/contact/ > > Don't understand the hostility. If you can't show why the license is > correct, that's not a reason to blame me for that. > > > I don't care if they reply, Netgear isn't Broadcom. > > b43-firmware essentially extracts the firmware from Netgear's archive. If > the archive is redistributable, then there should be no mirror restriction > in the ebuild. netgear having rights to distribute has nothing to do with us having rights to distribute. Please provide NEW information, or stop updating the bug.
I will stop replying, but only because you indulge in childish behavior. You twist my arguments, and refuse to refer to specific information, hoping that no one will notice that. Both b43-firmware and b43legacy-firmware extract firmware from wl_apsta.o module, which, despite its name, was never provided in drivers distributed to users by Broadcom. It was probably distributed to vendors under a proprietary license, but it may have not. I don't particularly care myself, I just tried to remove some license-related confusion in portage. Thanks for doing nothing to aid that.
