One deserves evything he can make by himself. And if you did not notice, Israel is participating in the project. Since Israel can not be possibly providing the funding it's obvious that Israel is providing the technology.
quote : "Israel has most probably conducted several nuclear bomb tests"
ha-ha... Where exactly Israel could have done this ? Look at the map !!! Try to find Israel. If you succeed - try to find a place to make a nuclear test !
As for stealing the technology, etc... Israel has a highest percentage of scientists and engineers in the world. We just don't have to steal technology - we can develop just about anything with much less effort.
Just rewrite all your makefiles for gmake - which is cross platform and can use any compiler and use one of these libraries (ACE or Rogue Wave) along witg STL - and you are set.
You simply don't understand - driver is not that a simple module implementing a few ioctl()s ! Good driver (for anything more complex than a serial mouse) has lots of optimizations - none of which I'll be able to reverse engineer.
I would like to summarize my conclusions after reading all the comments and articles I was referred to.
Botom line - the lawer was right, user-space driver is the only option for a company that does not want to take chances of establishing a legal precedent.
Two main problems:
1. The situation about binary modules is not clear - even Linus's so called "exception" is not that clear as some people want it to be. Meaning that I can not convince the company management that the chances of being sued are minimal. Meaning that we can not use binary modules.
2. The situation with embedded products is even more complicated (as somebody pointed out) because we actually do ship a GPL code - we ship the device which runs GPL Linux kernel.
P.S. As for the technical issues about partitioning the driver into kernel and user space portions or using a BIOS model (a-la Sony Playstation) - well, the question actually was about legal issues:)
P.P.S. To all these who never worked for a hardware company and believe that the company can opensource it's drivers - well, one simple example : NVIDIA Detonator 3 driver increased the performance by 30% IIRC. Don't you think that ATI would love to look at the source code ?
If you intend to develop the idea yourself - just do it. If you succeed - you will have the money to pay the lawers. If you intend to sell or make money from your patent in some other way - any big or even not so big company will use your idea without paying you and you will not be able to enforce your patent !
The bottom line : if you don't have the money to pay patent lawer - you don't have the mony to enforce your patent!
Slashdot Mirror
" one million-bit key " is stupid, if, for instance, this key is based on a 8 letter password with has barely 16 bit entropy.
I guess this company will appear in a "dog-house" section of Bruce Schneier mailing list...
I had no idea that Texas is actually in Israel :)
Hmm....
Personally I could give 42 shits to your opninion, as most of the americans would do - you ar ein minority...
In that case you do not support American agression in Afganistan ? And all the steps US has taken against Al-Qaida ?
One deserves evything he can make by himself. And if you did not notice, Israel is participating in the project. Since Israel can not be possibly providing the funding it's obvious that Israel is providing the technology.
The article is insane...
quote :
"Israel has most probably conducted several nuclear bomb tests"
ha-ha... Where exactly Israel could have done this ? Look at the map !!! Try to find Israel. If you succeed - try to find a place to make a nuclear test !
As for stealing the technology, etc... Israel has a highest percentage of scientists and engineers in the world. We just don't have to steal technology - we can develop just about anything with much less effort.
Just rewrite all your makefiles for gmake - which is cross platform and can use any compiler and use one of these libraries (ACE or Rogue Wave) along witg STL - and you are set.
I've done this... it works...
You simply don't understand - driver is not that a simple module implementing a few ioctl()s ! Good driver (for anything more complex than a serial mouse) has lots of optimizations - none of which I'll be able to reverse engineer.
You wold prefer that NVIDIA won't release their drivers for Linux ?
read my prev. posting : summary.
Thanks for all the postings...
:
:)
I would like to summarize my conclusions after reading all the comments and articles I was referred to.
Botom line - the lawer was right, user-space driver is the only option for a company that does not want to take chances of establishing a legal precedent.
Two main problems
1. The situation about binary modules is not clear - even Linus's so called "exception" is not that clear as some people want it to be. Meaning that I can not convince the company management that the chances of being sued are minimal. Meaning that we can not use binary modules.
2. The situation with embedded products is even more complicated (as somebody pointed out) because we actually do ship a GPL code - we ship the device which runs GPL Linux kernel.
P.S. As for the technical issues about partitioning the driver into kernel and user space portions or using a BIOS model (a-la Sony Playstation) - well, the question actually was about legal issues
P.P.S. To all these who never worked for a hardware company and believe that the company can opensource it's drivers - well, one simple example : NVIDIA Detonator 3 driver increased the performance by 30% IIRC. Don't you think that ATI would love to look at the source code ?
Yep... and what about the power ? I think they would have to increase the power to a level when I'll be able to use your Wi-Fi antenna as a toster :)
I"m not saying that it's right, but it is very defferent from Yahoo!france case!
There is a lot of difference between publishing and giving access to a material published bu someone else!
Why do you want to file a patent anyway ?
If you intend to develop the idea yourself - just do it. If you succeed - you will have the money to pay the lawers. If you intend to sell or make money from your patent in some other way - any big or even not so big company will use your idea without paying you and you will not be able to enforce your patent !
The bottom line : if you don't have the money to pay patent lawer - you don't have the mony to enforce your patent!
http://www.kazaa.com/notsupported.htm