b43-dev.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: "Gábor Stefanik" <netrolller.3d@gmail.com>
Cc: b43-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] b43/b43legacy - Credit Broadcom with enabling the development of the drivers
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:42:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1285018961.17079.10.camel@macbook.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinoe86gtsMJMJ-jitj3yHo35FBdyiqbPKuUAe_R@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 18:36 +0200, G?bor Stefanik wrote:
> Only one problem: the license agreement of these drivers explicitly
> forbids any reverse-engineering for any purpose. 

Which is kind of irrelevant, since the law already prohibits you from
violating the regulatory framework. Making it *also* a potential
copyright violation (except where it's deemed unenforceable) really
doesn't make a blind bit of difference, surely?

> One can debate a lot about whether these are enforceable - however, in
> the US, a similar case (though that one was about resale, rather than
> reverse-engineering) was recently decided in the plaintiff's favor.

I don't believe the reverse engineering was done in the US, was it?

> And I believe Broadcom would indeed sue if they thought they were
> risking their FCC approval by not doing so. 

I don't see how it really affects their FCC approval. The fact that they
do the regulatory enforcement in software is what enables you to
trivially bypass it. 

You are breaking the law by hacking the driver to violate the rules. You
knew that anyway -- it really shouldn't make any difference if they
*also* tell you it's illegal to hack the driver. And it doesn't change
the fact that they have made it possible.

-- 
dwmw2

      parent reply	other threads:[~2010-09-20 21:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-19 18:40 [PATCH] b43/b43legacy - Credit Broadcom with enabling the development of the drivers David Woodhouse
2010-09-20 16:36 ` Gábor Stefanik
2010-09-20 16:56   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-20 19:02     ` Ehud Gavron
2010-09-20 19:09       ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-20 21:22         ` Ehud Gavron
2010-09-20 21:33           ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-20 21:51             ` Ehud Gavron
2010-09-21  4:01               ` Peter Stuge
2010-09-21  4:24                 ` Baybal Ni
2010-09-21  4:44                   ` Peter Stuge
2010-09-21 22:38                   ` Larry Finger
2010-09-22  5:05                     ` Michael Büsch
2010-09-22 11:14                       ` David Woodhouse
2010-09-22 17:26                         ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-22 11:07                     ` David Woodhouse
2010-09-20 21:42   ` David Woodhouse [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1285018961.17079.10.camel@macbook.infradead.org \
    --to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=b43-dev@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netrolller.3d@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).