On Jun 18, 2007, Hans-Jürgen Koch <[email protected]> wrote:
> So, if a manufacturer used a ROM instead of a flash memory with the
> intention to make software modifications impossible, then it is bad,
> and when he did it for economical reasons, then it is a "natural barrier"?
This sounds about right to me.
Intent is very significant, but then, what vendor would justify the
choice of ROM as "intent to prevent modifications", if this amounted
to copyright infringement?
Vendor would be entitled to the benefit of the doubt as to the
motivations in this case, so it would likely be unenforceable anyway.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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/
[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]
