[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: nvidia and FC2



On Thu, 20 May 2004 20:33:58 -0600
"Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz simpaticus com> wrote:

> At 10:43 5/20/2004, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> >They don't have to produce the drivers. Interested and capable
> >developers only require information on how to talk to the hardware.
> 
> OK, so you want them to release this information.

NVidia isn't the issue.   But gleeful acceptance and excuse making for
using their closed source offering isn't helpful.
 
> >They're not doing you any favour, but that's still besides the point.
> >They would spend far less resources by liberating info on how to talk to
> >the hardware.
> 
> OK, so you believe it would be cheaper for them to "liberate" the poor 
> information.

It would be nice if when you buy a product you could expect to get
a useful operating manual.
 
> >NVIDIA has already stated why they can't make
> >the drivers free software: they have third party licensed software that
> >they didn't do themselves.
> 
> OK, so you understand that they have signed non-disclosure contracts and 
> are legally forbidden to disclose this information. Because they licensed 
> code someone else wrote, they have a binding legal obligation to keep that 
> code private. And yet you lambast them for not releasing that code, and you 
> tar and feather them for not opening up the code.

I don't see how this enters into the discussion.   All we're talking about 
is the end result.   We should be talking about how to get an open-source
option, not making excuses for closed source companies.

>  From what I can see here, you think that they should save some dough and 
> make you happy by freely handing out information which they don't own and 
> are by contract obligated to keep private.

No.   But it would sure be nice if more people were interested in 
being true to the principles of the FOSS operating system they
are using and not so accepting of closed source.

> I fail to see this as anything other than advice to be completely 
> unethical, breach their contracts and licenses, and dishonor their 
> commitments. Since I'm sure you'll claim virgin purity, perhaps you'll 
> enlighten me to which part of your exact words quoted above I may have misread?

Constantly berating people who respect the values and freedoms of open
source software isn't helpful.   It might _help_ if you weren't so willing
to make excuses for using closed-source solutions given your willingness
to capitalize on a FOSS operating system.

Regards,
Sean.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]