Message-ID: <3C73E3D1.6070206@petreley.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 09:58:41 -0800
From: Nicholas Petreley <nicholas@petreley.com>
Reply-To: nicholas@petreley.com
Organization: Petreley.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020214
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NVidia driver with 2.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

>
> Since the nvidia driver is not gpl in the first place, the patch
> is most likely in violation of nvidia's license already. Maybe they
> let it go but... if they were mean and evil they could sue the guy
> who posted the patch in the first place.
> -

ROFL! Such paranoia!  

I doubt NVidia would sue. It's not just a case of being nice or 
mean, good or evil.  They have to feel as if the company was damaged 
in some way by the patch, or make a case that there was the potential 
for damage. Then they'd have to see if I have enough money to make it 
worth their while to sue.  If I didn't have enough money (and I don't), 
they'd evaluate whether I did anything that threatened their IP (such
as reverse engineering their binary to figure out how to come up with 
the patch).  Clearly that's not what this patch is all about. 

The only thing left is a "test case" to discourage anyone from messing
with their source code.  Somehow I just don't get the feeling that 
they're going to pursue a test case in order to discourage people 
from helping expand the number of potential customers for their 
hardware. ;-)

If I'm wrong, then bring on the lawyers!  That would give me LOTs of 
good column material. 

-Nicholas Petreley


-
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/