Talking to Logitech on the phone regarding webcam support for linux

[John Wendel]

Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On 07/02/07, Rick Stevens <rstevens at vitalstream.com> wrote:
>>
>> Not necessarily.  Some of TI's wireless network stuff, for example, can
>> easily be convinced to broadcast at higher-than-normal power levels and
>> at completely bogus frequencies.
>>
>> If they open up the driver, the source will be published and anyone with
>> a tiny bit of know-how can wreak havoc with local wireless networks.
>> Now, you could argue that TI should redesign the chipset (they have)
>> but what about all the chipsets that are already out there?  Knowing how
>> lawyers are, TI would get hit with lawsuit after lawsuit.  That being
>> the case, can you blame them for keeping the source closed?  I don't.
>>
> 
> That's a great arguement. Let me sum it up, to be certain that I
> understood correctly:
> "TI has sold very powerful hardware: stuff so powerful that it might
> be illeagal or even dangerous. So instead of letting everybody use it,
> their best interest is in allowing only crippled Windows computers to
> use it. Allowing all systems to use the powerful hardware could open
> them up to a potential lawsuit."
> 
> Let's put GM in the same position. Does this sentance sound logical?
> "GM has sold some large, heavy vechicles: vehicles so large and heavy
> that they might be illegal or dangerous. So instead of letting
> everybody drive them, their best interest is in allowing only elderly
> handicapped people drive them. Allowing all drivers to drive the
> vehicles could open them up to a potential lawsuit."
> 
> Dotan Cohen
> 
> http://what-is-what.com/what_is/foss_floss_software.html
> http://ultu.com
> 

Dude, it's the FCC, logic doesn't apply! But good one anyhow.

--

John