Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751862AbWCMCXp (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:23:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750883AbWCMCXp (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:23:45 -0500 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.168]:48396 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751862AbWCMCXo (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:23:44 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:19:11 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: linux-kernel-owner+davids=40webmaster.com-S1750982AbWCLRJa@vger.kernel.org, "Dave Neuer" , "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: Re: [future of drivers?] a proposal for binary drivers. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 In-Reply-To: <161717d50603120909w41413b00g6ad82af79b051fd3@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060311091623.GB4087@DervishD> <161717d50603120909w41413b00g6ad82af79b051fd3@mail.gmail.com> X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:19:15 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 127.0.0.1 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:19:16 -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1654 Lines: 35 Sorry for any format issues, I'm not able to use my normal email client right now. > Static Controls also explicitly says that the analysis of whether > scenes a faire applies is vastly different for a work of greater > complexity and size than the TLP ("Neither do the cited cases support > the district court's initial frame of reference. [cases cited], > involved copies of Apple's operating system program -- a program whose > size and complexity is to the Toner Loading Program what the Sears > Tower is to a lamppost. Given the nature of the Apple program, it > would have been exceedingly difficult to say that practical > alternative means of expression did not exist..."). The whole issue here is people who claim that copyright allows them to own *any* way to make an NE2000 network card work with linux v2.6. How can you say that practical alternative means exist if the claim is that every such way is owned? You can use hardware that's already supported in the kernel. You can use other operating systems than Linux. But Static Controls could also have made cartridges for other printers or printers from other manufacturers. The issue is not the complexity of the TLP, the issue is simply that you cannot use copyright to get protection that is capable of being expressed in functional terms. You cannot own every way to express a functional idea. That's what patents are for. DS - 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/