Xilinx Microblaze copyrights question

[Chris Johns]

On 31/01/2015 8:32 am, Peter Dufault wrote:
> The wording is very bizarre:
>
> "Except as otherwise provided in a valid license issued to you by Xilinx, and to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law: (1) THESE MATERIALS ARE MADE AVAILABLE "AS IS" AND WITH ALL FAULTS, AND XILINX HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR STATUTORY..."
>
> If there is no other valid license the source is made available "AS IS".  But what does "made available" mean?  How can it be used?  They then go on to restrict their liability, making it plain it is expected that the code will be used without the "other valid license".  To further add to that expectation they specifically mention situations where it can't be used under any circumstances.
>
> I wouldn't want to hazard a guess as to what this mess legally means.  This is a "I'll have my cake and eat it too, please" copyright.  I'm sure an aggressive lawyer would have a field day with it.
>
> Yes, the code should be avoided if there isn't another "valid license" somewhere that clarifies things.  Has part of the RTEMS discussion with Xilinx specifically asking for an appropriate "valid license" and providing a suggested one?  That's the tack I'd take.
>

Here is the long version.

In my view the key issue is the confidential statement and the fact you 
have to have downloaded an SDK to obtain the code and the SDK is covered 
by a EUL you must agree too.

My understanding is Xilinx and their lawyers are concerned about their 
code being used on devices that are not make by Xilinx which is an 
understandable position to take given the investment they have made. 
Code placed into RTEMS is free for people to take a use and the RTEMS 
project cannot determine if the code is only being used on Xilinx 
devices therefore we are never sure we comply.

My personal view is the code we are wishing to leverage and use has low 
IP value and is often just register definitions or device set up 
described in publicly available documentation. The benefits to projects 
like ours is the ability to bring up a new device quickly with vendor 
tested code. Limiting the access to this code raises the cost of entry 
for new devices and in this specific case it is hurting the Microblaze. 
We cannot use the Linux version of the code because it is GPL.

The Microblaze and Zynq are a little more complex due to the 
programmable logic side of things. A complex projects using these 
devices will need to integrate with the programmable logic tools from 
Xilinx, eg Vivado. The flow on effect here is these tools are designed 
to match up with the Xilinx SDK. If we cannot use or access this code we 
run the risk of breaking when the tools are upgraded. Xilinx have in the 
past had a loose coupling between the hardware tools and the SDK and 
have been able to move and change things as they needed too. Xilinx 
understand they need to find a way to define a clear and solid interface 
between the hardware tools and the SDK. My hope is the RTEMS project can 
work with Xilinx in this area and be a part of this work.

There is real demand for RTEMS on these Xilinx devices which is really 
good news so we need to keep moving and this means we need to develop 
clean code for now.

Chris