[Libre-silicon-devel] Some questions regarding the NVDLA and "NVIDIA Open NVDLA License and Agreement v1.0"

Mohammad Amin Nili manili.devteam at gmail.com
Mon Jul 16 22:18:26 CEST 2018


Thanks a lot David. That was very helpful.

Best regards,
Manili

> On Jul 16, 2018, at 11:30 PM, David Lanzendörfer <david.lanzendoerfer at o2s.ch> wrote:
> 
> Hi manili
> 
>> Thanks for the reply.
> You'r welcome :-)
> 
>> Ok let’s start step by step:
>> 1. If I understood right, what you mean by “software” is/are A) whole
>> software stack (i.e drivers, compilers and etc.) and B) front-end (i.e. the
>> RTL, synthesizing scripts and etc.). So these things are all under the
>> license. As a result is it possible to modify these things and relicense
>> them?
> RTL isn't covered under the license.
> Can't be, because it's RTL, which is a technology specific implementation 
> which can not be protected under a copyright anymore.
> 
>> 2. So you are right, there is nothing about the back-end (i.e. transistors
>> layout). So if your team at HK try to create a libre, royalty-free layout
>> scheme for NVDLA from scratch it will result in a legal issue for you?
> That's the whole key issue.
> We can't legally build their IP cores with the LibreSilicon process and sell 
> it within our products and then provide the GDS2 files and ALF layout files on 
> GitHub
> 
>> 3. Sorry I’m a little confused, the issue is about what currently “IS" in
>> the license file or about what currently "IS NOT” in the license file?
> No reason to be confused.
> They could have take the MIT or Apache license (not the GPL because that would 
> have tainted the issue with the unfree IP cores).
> Their IP cores are not Libre. In fact their silicon is unfree AF.
> Very simple. Their silicon is *not* Libre.
> The fact that they had to introduce a new license which doesn't collide with 
> their unfree IP proofs it.
> 
> Cheers
> 	-lev



More information about the Libre-silicon-devel mailing list