Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932683AbXABJkv (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 04:40:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932722AbXABJkv (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 04:40:51 -0500 Received: from ns.firmix.at ([62.141.48.66]:52319 "EHLO ns.firmix.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932683AbXABJku (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 04:40:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Open letter to Linux kernel developers (was Re: Binary Drivers) From: Bernd Petrovitsch To: Trent Waddington Cc: "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" , Erik Mouw , Giuseppe Bilotta , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3d57814d0701012230v2e8b31eeqef7e542d73fc08d9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200612162007.32110.marekw1977@yahoo.com.au> <4587097D.5070501@opensound.com> <13yc6wkb4m09f$.e9chic96695b.dlg@40tude.net> <200612211816.kBLIGFdf024664@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <20061222115921.GT3073@harddisk-recovery.com> <1167568899.3318.39.camel@gimli.at.home> <3d57814d0612310503r282404afgd9b06ca57f44ab3c@mail.gmail.com> <200701020404.l0244n3b024582@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <3d57814d0701012230v2e8b31eeqef7e542d73fc08d9@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Firmix Software GmbH Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 10:40:33 +0100 Message-Id: <1167730833.12526.35.camel@tara.firmix.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2.1 (2.8.2.1-2.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Firmix-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on ns.firmix.at X-Spam-Score: -2.411 () AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Firmix-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.411 required=5 X-Firmix-Spam-Score: -2.411 () AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1547 Lines: 34 On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 16:30 +1000, Trent Waddington wrote: [...] > I think you're repeating a myth that has become a common part of > hacker lore in recent years. It's caused by how little we know about > software patents. The myth is that if you release source code which > violates someone's patent that is somehow worse than if you release > binaries that violate someone's patent. This is clearly, obviously, > false. If you're practising the invention without a license in your > source code then you're practising the invention without a license in > binaries compiled from that source code. Period. While this is true (at last in theory), there is one difference in practice: It is *much* easier to prove a/the patent violation if you have (original?) source code than to reverse engineer the assembler dump of the compiled code and prove the patent violation far enough to get to a so-called "agreement" on the costs. > Nvidia are not releasing source code to their drivers for one reason: > it's not their culture. They don't see the need. They don't see the > benefit. Which also may well be true. Bernd -- Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/ mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55 Embedded Linux Development and Services - 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/