Re: Open letter to Linux kernel developers (was Re: Binary Drivers)

[Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@firmix.at>]

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