On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 11:42:02PM +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 03:17:53PM +0100, Martin Schlander wrote:
Torsdag 02 november 2006 10:33 skrev Stefan Dirsch:
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 08:55:22AM -0000, B.Weber@warwick.ac.uk wrote:
I suspect it's unlikely packman would want to host these as they're dodgy both legally and morally. Only nvidia should have to take the risk. (Although no-one seems to have sued Debian and canonical yet)
Hmm. Sure that Debian/Ubuntu provides prebuilt NVIDIA packages?
I'm pretty sure packages exist for Ubuntu, although they might be 3rd party. I'm absolutely sure FC have them via the 3rd party ilvna repo: http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/6/i386/
Both of these are third party packages, Ubuntu was forced to stop shipping their pre-built packages a while ago for the obvious legal reasons.
If anyone wants to take the legal risk on their own, sure, feel free to take it on.
But good luck, some of us kernel developers take this kind of infringement quite seriously...
Greg, thanks for threatening.
How is the fact that I consider the distribution of a pre-built nvidia driver that links against my copyrighted GPL code a "threat" when it is others that are doing the illegal act? Am I supposed to just turn a blind eye to others who violate the license of the code that I release under the GPL? Would any closed-source company do the same if it was the other way around? So, why is it such a "bad" thing for us to protect our licenses? I've said all of this and more many times in the past, in public, it's not like no one knows where I stand on this issue :) thanks, greg k-h --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org