Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 12:02:30 -0500
From: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario
In-reply-to: <439E8565.3000900@aitel.hist.no>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Message-id: <200512131202.30743.gene.heskett@verizon.net>
Organization: None, usuallly detectable by casual observers
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
References: <547AF3BD0F3F0B4CBDC379BAC7E4189F01EE9BB3@otce2k03.adaptec.com>
 <439E8565.3000900@aitel.hist.no>
User-Agent: KMail/1.7
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2805
Lines: 57

On Tuesday 13 December 2005 03:25, Helge Hafting wrote:
>Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
>>For instance, there are reasons, somewhat outside the control of the
>>Hardware Vendor, for binary drivers. Often, in the hopes of
>> achieving standards compliance, Hardware vendors are cornered by
>> legalities over the copyright associated with those standards that
>> ties their hands either from releasing interface documentation or
>> from releasing source code. Yet all these vendors would be
>> overjoyed to have Linux drivers for their Hardware in order to
>> increase the sales of their products.
>
>Uh, a copyrighted standard?  They are trying to live up to a secret
>standard, one they cannot publish?
>Don't sound like a standard to me - a standard is something known,
>that is the purpose of standardization.
>This sounds like "we standardized the voltage for household lamps,
> but we won't tell if it is 110V, 220V or something completely
> different." I really hope I misunderstood this.

Standards bodies typically get their supporting income from the sale of 
the standard specification in fancy printed pdf's.  As its a small 
market, the only way to survive is the highway robbery model where a 
copy is maybe over $1000 USD.  Its a bad model for the FOSS crowd as 
they may not have the bucks to spend on a real copy.  Generally, their 
copyrights are VERY well enforced by their shysters which compounds 
the issue.

All of our preaching is to the choir, as the standards bodies could 
care less, if you want a copy, pony up.  Thats life, unforch.

>Standards compliance should never get in the way of open source.
>Sure - if the owner modifies the source, then the thing may no longer
>comply with the standard.  In some cases even illegal or dangerous.
>But in that case, it is the fault of the owner, not the vendor. The
> vendor can simply say that anyone changing the (distributed) source
> should get their own certification.
>
>Helge Hafting
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-- 
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should use this
address: <gene.heskett@verizononline.net> which bypasses vz's
stupid bounce rules.  I do use spamassassin too. :-)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/