Re: Will there be Intel Wireless 3945ABG support?

[Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>]

Ar Maw, 2006-07-11 am 17:35 -0700, ysgrifennodd James Ketrenos:
> The obvious distinction between scsi firmware and the regulatory
> daemon blob being discussed here is that the regulatory daemon runs on
> the host vs. an adapter.  

"It isn't a pirate copy of the movie because my copy is on VHS and
theirs is on DVD"

Derivative works are not really a question of where something is, think
about a distributed computation, or a tool which partly compiles a
program into VHDL for high performance execution.

I'm not sure this is a useful kernel list argument anyway since I am
sure Intel legal will have considered the question and reached their own
conclusions and also vendors and Intel will continue beating each other
up until a neat solution is found.

> There are no questions from a licensing standpoint.

For Intel sure, if it owns all the bits then it can do what it likes
with its bits.


> To that end I would encourage anyone that may be interested in using
> such a piece of code to read the regulatory notice packaged with our
> drivers, and linked for your reference here[1].

Oh I understand *why* the issue arises, and as a licensed radio amateur
I'm quite well aware of the concerns. I'm also permitted to use 2.4Ghz
at higher power for amateur purposes.

Alan