Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/amlogic-boot-fip: new package

[Vyacheslav via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>]

Hi.
Thanks all for replies.

24.01.2022 23:45, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello Neil,
> 
> Thanks for the additional feedback.
> 
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:41:49 +0100
> Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com> wrote:
> 
>> The binaries must be split into 2 categories:
>> - Pre-built: bl2, bl31, bl21, bl32, fip_create, aml_encrypt_*, ddr*.fw, acs_tool.py
>> - Built in the Vendor U-Boot source: acs.bin bl301.bin
> 
> Right.
> 
>> In 2019, Amlogic finally added a LICENSE for the pre-built binaries, before
>> nobody knew what was the term of the distribution.
>>
>> commit 6abaf9a869a6584b3cfca8b96d0946ed49bc9b64
>> Author: Lawrence Mok <lawrence.mok@amlogic.com>
>> Date:   Mon May 6 12:34:56 2019 -0700
>>
>>      add LICENSE file and text referring to it [1/1]
>>
>>      Change-Id: Id291f42bec3ddb0c2162e6540ce1f35d1cb1d079
>>
>> The LICENSE can be found at [1] in Khadas github.
> 
> And this license is the one used at
> https://github.com/LibreELEC/amlogic-boot-fip which Vyacheslav wants to
> package in Buildroot, and this license is extremely restrictive.
> Basically, it says that excepts private use of the content of this
> repository, you can't do anything with it.
> 
>> Concerning the acs.bin & bl301.bin, they use the U-Boot build system and
>> config header files and all these were also updated with the following SPDX:
>> /* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */
> 
> I don't really see what the license of the U-Boot build system and
> config headers has to do with the resulting license of the binaries.
> 
>> commit 94de43d3d940cf75b4a9e4fd2a2715be8eff6138
>> Author: Jiucheng Xu <jiucheng.xu@amlogic.com>
>> Date:   Wed Dec 16 10:11:00 2020 +0800
>>
>>      license: Fix the license of amlogic related codes [1/1]
>>
>>      PD#SWPL-39001
>>
>>      Problem:
>>      A customer want to add amlogic driver in uboot to
>>      their private bootloader. Since the driver codes
>>      are licensed under GPL-2.0, and customer have
>>      to open their code, so we need fix the license
>>      issue.
>>
>>      Solution:
>>      Fix the license of our related code in uboot by
>>      adding MIT license
>>
>>      Verify:
>>      Franklin
>>
>>      Change-Id: I2f3571e8720d1f4db069f882353d6ae050702cba
>>      Signed-off-by: Jiucheng Xu <jiucheng.xu@amlogic.com>
>>
>> Note, none of the vendor who publicly published the Amlogic U-Boot
>> source has this change, so we can consider acs.bin & bl301.bin
>> generated from GPL-2.0 as the commit explains.
> 
> This is really a stretch. The question is which source files are
> compiled into acs.bin and bl301.bin ? If they use parts under the
> GPL-2.0, then indeed we can assume the whole is also under GPL-2.0, as
> it is the only license under which derivative works can be published.

These sources usually published inside Amlogic U-Boot source

> 
> But the repository at https://github.com/LibreELEC/amlogic-boot-fip/
> contains a lot more things than acs.bin and bl301.bin.
> 
>> The pre-built binaries stored on the LibreELEC repository only comes from
>> public Vendor sources (Khadas, HardKernel, Libre Computer, FriendlyARM, Radxa)
>> and checked against vendor repositories we have access to.
>>
>> We assume they got permission from Amlogic to publicly redistribute these binaries
>> as we (BayLibre) were allowed to redistribute the VDEC firmware in [2] & [3].
> 
> If that's the case, then why does
> https://github.com/LibreELEC/amlogic-boot-fip has this LICENSE file
> with scary terms?
> 
> I am really surprised by how unclear the licensing terms are for those
> blobs. This should scare pretty much any company from doing products
> based on Amlogic SoCs.
> 
> Would it be possible to clarify this with Amlogic, and instead of their
> silly terms of "you can't do anything with it", have a license that at
> least allows distribution on Amlogic platforms?

I will try to contact Amlogic via JetHome, but most likely after the 
Chinese New Year.

> 
> Again, thanks for your support on this!
> 
> Thomas
> 

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot