This matches for the most part the license for openSUSE, see /etc/YaST2/ licenses/base/license.txt : ... With the exception of certain files containing the “openSUSE” trademark discussed below, the license terms for the components permit you to copy and redistribute the component. With the potential exception of certain firmware files, the license terms for the components permit you to copy, modify, and redistribute the component, in both source code and binary code forms. This agreement does not limit your rights under, or grant you rights that supersede, the license terms of any particular component. ....
It should be noted that openSUSE is actually distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 (as an "aggregate work"). The "EULA" on the first page explains this (in more legalese than I care to repeat here).
Except for the part ' With the potential exception of certain firmware files' , this gives us all required freedoms. Firmware is usually tricky....so looking at this I found some Firmware files with the License string 'openSUSE-Firmware', and [2] on the net (but not sure how up-to-date this page is). Does anyone know the rationale behind openSUSE-Firmware license?
The issue with firmware is that it is usually effectively proprietary (*.ihex files are not in the "preferred form of the work for making modifications to it" when it comes to firmware). There are projects such as Linux-libre[1] which attempt to remove all of the proprietary firmware from the upstream Linux kernel repository. It's an ongoing effort -- though I'm unsure if anyone has packaged Linux-libre for openSUSE.
openSUSE comes by default with the OSS and non-OSS repository. Richards remark here was that files from non-OSS are installed without making the user aware about the nature of these unfree components.
This is something that has bothered me and I've opened a FATE request about it[2]. My main issue is that the decision to "allow proprietary repositories" is not up-front enough (you can disable it during the install but the fact there isn't a checkbox is an issue in my opinion). Now, RMS probably wouldn't be happy with this (because it still encourages the use of proprietary code). But on the other hand, at least users can make a choice on the topic. At the end of the day, until we remove openSUSE:Factory:NonFree there isn't a chance that RMS will endorse openSUSE as a free distribution[3] (he doesn't endorse Debian for similar reasons -- even though the universe repos are disabled by default).
But we could leave the user the choice (during installation) to include non- free componentes / non-oss repo. By this we can make sure that exotic software as well gets supported, if we separate the non-free Firmware into the non-OSS Repo.
Please leave your comments and views on the linked FATE request so the request can be prioritized effectively. [1]: https://www.fsfla.org/ikiwiki/selibre/linux-libre/ [2]: https://features.opensuse.org/321763 [3]: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html -- Aleksa Sarai Software Engineer (Containers) SUSE Linux GmbH https://www.cyphar.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org