Re: Intel Microcode

[Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1493 bytes --]

On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 10:49 -0400, Tom Rymes wrote:
> On 08/23/2018 10:38 AM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 10:26 -0400, Tom Rymes wrote:
> > > On 08/23/2018 9:34 AM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 19:36 +0200, Peter Müller wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > > I see the desire to err on the side of caution, plus the desire to put
> > > pressure on Intel to modify the license, but I'd argue it's overkill.
> > 
> > It is just ridiculous from my angle. Their primary sales argument is to
> > be on top of the list of each benchmark out there. They probably forgot
> > about that.
> > 
> > But this is more about a slight change to hide that they messed up
> > *massively* here and a very bad attempt to cover it up. Now they got a
> > proper Streisand going. Well done Intel.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> I'm all for holding off on this as a principle thing, as it's clear that 
> Intel's lawyers are trying to pull a fast one. From a practical 
> standpoint, though, it's probably less of a problem.

That's indeed a very good question. Licenses are there to be enforced.

I want the GPL and other licenses that IPFire is under to be honoured
and I will enforce them if I need to. And therefore I will do the same
with any other license of any other software that we use. Otherwise
there is no point in using any license at all.

Let's hope that Intel will change this very soon and make sure that we
are able to supply the fixes to their CPUs for free.

-Michael

> Tom