Re: Binary Drivers

Erik Mouw wrote:

"However, we thought the legal and technical expense involved in
 writing this binary driver and possibly violating the Linux kernel
 copyright was well spend."

So Microsoft is right, the legal status of Linux software _is_ unclear. You just gave them every reason to continue their campaign against Linux. <Don't use Linux, its legal status is unclear, you may get sued>.

The problem is, nobody wants to decide what to do with closed source software in Linux. I don't care how you decide, for or against binary drivers (well, actually I do but my opinion doesn't matter), just decide already!

tom
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Binary Drivers
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

• References:
  • Binary Drivers
    • From: James Porter <[email protected]>
  • Re: Binary Drivers
    • From: Tomas Carnecky <[email protected]>
  • Re: Binary Drivers
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
  • Re: Binary Drivers
    • From: "Scott Preece" <[email protected]>
  • Re: Binary Drivers
    • From: Erik Mouw <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch] change WARN_ON back to "BUG: at ..."
• Next by Date: Re: fuse, get_user_pages, flush_anon_page, aliasing caches and all that again
• Previous by thread: Re: Binary Drivers
• Next by thread: Re: Binary Drivers
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]