RE:Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

RE:Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 245 bytes --]

AND NOBODY HAS TO BEG ANYTHING FROM NVIDIA, OR GAIN THEIR SUPPORT, not for their price, the GPLs SOUL PURPOSE.

Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...

On 	Wed, 1 Jan 2003 05:01:12 +0000 	<Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 7841 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 424 bytes --]

read up on why the GPL exists, its not to protect a billion dollar company, its to protect honest contributors from having their work stolen by big buisness like just what happened when Nvidia used various GPLd HEADER FILES IN ITS MODULES AND KEPT SOURCE CLOSED. by "DEAD HORSE".

Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...

On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:44 -0500 Ed Sweetman <ed.sweetman@wmich.edu> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2.1.2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 5704 bytes --]

From: Ed Sweetman <ed.sweetman@wmich.edu>
To: A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com>
Cc: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:44 -0500
Message-ID: <3E12732C.3080009@wmich.edu>

A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 03:13:00AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:
> 
>>no Nvidias drivers arent like coal because coal is useful for fires, what 
>>happens when Nvidia decide those cards are too old? But just new enough 
>>to not show the competition their code, Nvidia are a drain on the community 
>>with nothing useful to show for it.
>>
>>Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...
>>
> 
> 
>         Then why complain about it? Don't buy NVidia cards! if you don't like 
> what they're doing with the code and the drivers, don't buy or use their 
> product. Simple as that. There's always ATI, SiS, and many other cards with 
> fully GPL coded drivers for it. Just because one may think that NVidia is the 
> best card out on the market, doesn't mean (unfortunately) they have to 
> accomodate every OS that uses it, and do it the same way that every other 
> company does. You have a choice, but also, so do they.
> 
>         I have an SiS 315E card in my box, and it works great, and haven't 
> looked at any other card since installing it.
> 
>                                                         BL.
Note: "you" is everyone complaining about nvidia not gpl'ing their drivers.

Gotta agree with that.  You get along much better in life not believing 
you deserve this and that. Nobody owes you driver support because they 
make hardware. And bullying companies to do so makes you no better than 
they are when they bully other companies out of business, buy them out 
and use their advanced ideas in their crappy products.


Apparently nvidia is the graphics leader because people dont know how to 
  write accelerated graphics code for nvidia chipsets. And apparently it 
has little to do with engineering the card and chips and manufacturing 
those pieces and assembling them.  And apparently they're better 
protected by software laws from someone stealing their hard work and 
making products without having to spend R&D on it than laws on copying 
various hardware patents and such.

going to a company and telling them they have to agree with your beliefs 
is a quick way to get absolutely nothing.  Nvidia has survived before 
linux became the big deal on wallstreet and news. They can survive quite 
  well with windows users alone.  They dont need linux user support.  So 
how is trying to boycott nvidia products up in anger and sending angry 
emails going to help you get what you want? You dont have the market 
power needed to make that work. It just makes companies see linux as a 
bunch of spoiled brats complaining when they dont get what they want and 
throwing a tantrum.

We allow certain binary-only modules in the linux kernel.  That has been 
  long established and it's the end of the story.  This is brought up 
like every year and it ends the same way. You dont like what nvidia does 
then dont buy their stuff, but going around and trying to tell other 
people to do so is counterproductive and foolish. We dont have the 
leverage and pretending you do makes every step closer we were to 
gaining support inside nvidia turn into a step backwards.  Why should 
they give their drivers away gpl?  What is the gain in that? Show them 
the gain and hope they come around.

What are their motives in not going gpl? has anyone asked them that? 
People assume it's out of security for their product but there is no 
precident for them to be worried about that and it sounds silly.

If you are bothered by the license the drivers you use are under then 
why did you buy nvidia in the first place?  I always buy my hardware 
based on linux support.  If i had hardware that wasn't well supported or 
needed special binary modules i'd trade it with a friend or sell it on 
ebay and get something that didn't.  With a new nvidia card you cant go 
saying you're too poor to get anything else.  So you get a piece of 
hardware that you know is not supported by gpl drivers well and then 
complain about it?

There is always the old way of reverse engineering the hardware and 
continuing the gpl nvidia driver support.  It's much harder but it's 
still done. The need for gpl support must not be that high to get people 
motivated to dive into that mess yet so I dont see much motivation on 
nvidia's side to change how they do things.

ok. dead horse 0   people 1.  no doubt a rematch will proceed.

Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

        First off, could you please your MUA to use 80 columns? having to 
manually put in carriage returns to read your mail gets rather tedious...

On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 05:01:12AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:
> read up on why the GPL exists, its not to protect a billion dollar
company, its to protect honest contributors from having their work stolen
by big buisness like just what happened when Nvidia used various GPLd 
HEADER FILES IN ITS MODULES AND KEPT SOURCE CLOSED. by "DEAD HORSE".

        I know why the GPL exists.. however, that does not mean or indicate 
that a company could not use the GPL for their own reasons. They a) wrote 
their own code, b) may have used headers that were GPL'ed, but does not mean 
or insinuate that just because they use GPL'd headers that they must have 
their SOURCE open. Many companies use GPL'd material, for their own purposes, 
and not have to have their own personal source open. You may want to read into 
the actual documentation for the GPL and LGPL.

        Besides.. Who is an honest contributor who worked on NVidia's own 
module? Did anyone outside NVidia write it? no. NVidia wrote it, NVidia 
released it, it's NVidia's IP. you're confusing Headers with the actual code.

        Like Snoop Dogg said. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

                                                        BL.
> 	(authenticated bits=0)
> 	by smtp.wmich.edu (8.1336/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h014mi8l003760;
> 	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:45 -0500 (EST)
> Message-ID: <3E12732C.3080009@wmich.edu>
> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:44 -0500
> From: Ed Sweetman <ed.sweetman@wmich.edu>
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021218
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com>
> CC: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
> References: <0aebf3510030113DTVMAIL9@smtp.cwctv.net> <20030101035618.GA7829@wizard.com>
> In-Reply-To: <20030101035618.GA7829@wizard.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Return-Path: ed.sweetman@wmich.edu
> 
> A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 03:13:00AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:
> >
> >>no Nvidias drivers arent like coal because coal is useful for fires, what 
> >>happens when Nvidia decide those cards are too old? But just new enough 
> >>to not show the competition their code, Nvidia are a drain on the 
> >>community with nothing useful to show for it.
> >>
> >>Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...
> >>
> >
> >
> >        Then why complain about it? Don't buy NVidia cards! if you don't 
> >        like what they're doing with the code and the drivers, don't buy or use 
> >their product. Simple as that. There's always ATI, SiS, and many other 
> >cards with fully GPL coded drivers for it. Just because one may think that 
> >NVidia is the best card out on the market, doesn't mean (unfortunately) 
> >they have to accomodate every OS that uses it, and do it the same way that 
> >every other company does. You have a choice, but also, so do they.
> >
> >        I have an SiS 315E card in my box, and it works great, and haven't 
> >looked at any other card since installing it.
> >
> >                                                        BL.
> Note: "you" is everyone complaining about nvidia not gpl'ing their drivers.
> 
> Gotta agree with that.  You get along much better in life not believing 
> you deserve this and that. Nobody owes you driver support because they 
> make hardware. And bullying companies to do so makes you no better than 
> they are when they bully other companies out of business, buy them out 
> and use their advanced ideas in their crappy products.
> 
> 
> Apparently nvidia is the graphics leader because people dont know how to 
>  write accelerated graphics code for nvidia chipsets. And apparently it 
> has little to do with engineering the card and chips and manufacturing 
> those pieces and assembling them.  And apparently they're better 
> protected by software laws from someone stealing their hard work and 
> making products without having to spend R&D on it than laws on copying 
> various hardware patents and such.
> 
> going to a company and telling them they have to agree with your beliefs 
> is a quick way to get absolutely nothing.  Nvidia has survived before 
> linux became the big deal on wallstreet and news. They can survive quite 
>  well with windows users alone.  They dont need linux user support.  So 
> how is trying to boycott nvidia products up in anger and sending angry 
> emails going to help you get what you want? You dont have the market 
> power needed to make that work. It just makes companies see linux as a 
> bunch of spoiled brats complaining when they dont get what they want and 
> throwing a tantrum.
> 
> We allow certain binary-only modules in the linux kernel.  That has been 
>  long established and it's the end of the story.  This is brought up 
> like every year and it ends the same way. You dont like what nvidia does 
> then dont buy their stuff, but going around and trying to tell other 
> people to do so is counterproductive and foolish. We dont have the 
> leverage and pretending you do makes every step closer we were to 
> gaining support inside nvidia turn into a step backwards.  Why should 
> they give their drivers away gpl?  What is the gain in that? Show them 
> the gain and hope they come around.
> 
> What are their motives in not going gpl? has anyone asked them that? 
> People assume it's out of security for their product but there is no 
> precident for them to be worried about that and it sounds silly.
> 
> If you are bothered by the license the drivers you use are under then 
> why did you buy nvidia in the first place?  I always buy my hardware 
> based on linux support.  If i had hardware that wasn't well supported or 
> needed special binary modules i'd trade it with a friend or sell it on 
> ebay and get something that didn't.  With a new nvidia card you cant go 
> saying you're too poor to get anything else.  So you get a piece of 
> hardware that you know is not supported by gpl drivers well and then 
> complain about it?
> 
> There is always the old way of reverse engineering the hardware and 
> continuing the gpl nvidia driver support.  It's much harder but it's 
> still done. The need for gpl support must not be that high to get people 
> motivated to dive into that mess yet so I dont see much motivation on 
> nvidia's side to change how they do things.
> 
> ok. dead horse 0   people 1.  no doubt a rematch will proceed.


-- 
Brad Littlejohn                         | Email:        tyketto@wizard.com
Unix Systems Administrator,             |           tyketto@ozemail.com.au
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :)   |   http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
  PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569  F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 05:08:36AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:
> AND NOBODY HAS TO BEG ANYTHING FROM NVIDIA, OR GAIN THEIR SUPPORT, not for their price, the GPLs SOUL PURPOSE.
> 
> Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...

        One other thing. No-one GAVE NVidia GPL'd material. It's available for 
them to use it, just like it is for us. If you have a problem with that, you 
may want to take it up with GNU, the FSF, and RMS, if you want to deal with 
all the slack. But that's your fight, not ours.

                                                        BL.
-- 
Brad Littlejohn                         | Email:        tyketto@wizard.com
Unix Systems Administrator,             |           tyketto@ozemail.com.au
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :)   |   http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
  PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569  F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

[Andre Hedrick]

Tyketto !!!!

AMEN !!!!

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group


On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:

>         First off, could you please your MUA to use 80 columns? having to 
> manually put in carriage returns to read your mail gets rather tedious...
> 
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 05:01:12AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:

<snip>

> 
>         I know why the GPL exists.. however, that does not mean or indicate 
> that a company could not use the GPL for their own reasons. They a) wrote 
> their own code, b) may have used headers that were GPL'ed, but does not mean 
> or insinuate that just because they use GPL'd headers that they must have 
> their SOURCE open. Many companies use GPL'd material, for their own purposes, 
> and not have to have their own personal source open. You may want to read into 
> the actual documentation for the GPL and LGPL.
> 
>         Besides.. Who is an honest contributor who worked on NVidia's own 
> module? Did anyone outside NVidia write it? no. NVidia wrote it, NVidia 
> released it, it's NVidia's IP. you're confusing Headers with the actual code.
> 
>         Like Snoop Dogg said. If you don't like it, don't buy it.