Hi,
In order to make my mind about this subject...
You're complaining solely of the changes in files:
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k.h
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_hw.c
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_hw.h
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_regdom.c
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_regdom.h
But not in files:
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_base.c
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_base.h
* drivers/net/wireless/ath5k_reg.h
Right?
To my eyes what he did about the first files is wrong but without
malice. I think he took a small sample for the whole, which he
shouldn't.
In the case of the later 3 files, their copyright notice says:
"at your choice" you may distribute under the terms of the BSD
license or under the terms of the GNU GPL v2
So if they chose to distribute those 3 files under the terms of the GNU
GPL v2, it is correct to change the copyright notice of those three files
alone in order to remove a license that the distributor chose not to use
anymore.
But it is incorrect in my point of view to have done so on the former 5
files.
I hope it's those 5 files everyone is crying foul about...
Rui
--
You are what you see.
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 25th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?
