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

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

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 498 bytes --]

They are stealing by changing GPL files, and not giving the source, its not for personal use so they are DISTRIBUTING it, and INCLUDING IT. BUT they dont give out their DERIVED source. I work with C everyday and when you put in a header file you are including it, all kernel headers are GPL. I read the license 4 times a day and have since 1995.

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

On 	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:13:42 -0800 	A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 9039 bytes --]

From: A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com>
To: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:13:42 -0800
Message-ID: <20030101051342.GA8365@wizard.com>

        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

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

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

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 393 bytes --]

It matters not whether it was gave or taken, GPL=GPL either way, I shall contact MR. Stallman, as and when I get some legal advice, I AM DEFENDING THE GPL, YOU ARE BULLYING, SUBVERTING AND TWISTING THE GPL. I am a staunch advocate of the FSF.

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

On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:15:18 -0800 A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2117 bytes --]

From: A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com>
To: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:15:18 -0800
Message-ID: <20030101051518.GB8365@wizard.com>

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

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 284 bytes --]

you are incorrect about how the GPL works you are attempting to anger me but I dont care, go and learn, finish school, then annoy me.

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

On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:51:45 -0800 A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3475 bytes --]

From: A Guy Called Tyketto <tyketto@wizard.com>
To: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:51:45 -0800
Message-ID: <20030101055145.GA8790@wizard.com>

On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 05:30:18AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:
> They are stealing by changing GPL files, and not giving the source, its 

        And just how the smeg do you KNOW they're CHANGING these files, aye? 
Do you have some super secret K-9 nose that the rest of us don't, and can 
tell? Have you reverse engineered the binary to see? Please, enlighten us.

not for personal use so they are DISTRIBUTING it, and INCLUDING IT. 

        This does not make sense. You're saying they're changing GPL'd files, 
though they can use them any way they choose, as long as they notify the 
original author of the changes they made. Whether they redistribute the CODE, 
is up to them. They chose not to. As long as they have notified those who 
wrote the headers, no GPL violation has been made.

BUT they dont give out their DERIVED source. 

        Once again, there is no clause in the GPL that states they MUST give 
out the code. All they need to do is notify the author. Also, They MUST give 
out the code, if they've MODIFIED the headers. You'd be stewing and eating 
your boots for dinner if NVidia released the code, and you found no headers to 
be modified. their code, they can do anything they want. But for the headers, 
all they'd need to do for changing their code, is to keep a current version of 
the headers from the kernel, and program their C code to their content. Once 
again, No. GPL. Violation.
 
I work with C everyday and when you put in a header file you are including it,
all kernel headers are GPL. I read the license 4 times a day and have 
since 1995.

        And we don't deal with C at all. The kernel is programmed in COBOL, 
ADA, Modula-2, Mumps, and Pick. Hell, I just might port it part of it over to 
Logo. Oh damn.. Apple will sue me for that.. Let's port it to C! I'll learn 
it, with my trusty Visual C, and Borland C compilers! </sarcasm>

                                                        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: 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 05:59:12AM +0000, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:
> you are incorrect about how the GPL works you are attempting to anger me
 but I dont care, go and learn, finish school, then annoy me.
> 

        I am? I'm sorry. I did not mean to anger someone who is more 
experienced and sagely than a mere fool such as myself. I suppose I'll throw 
away my Bachelor's degree in Comp. Sci from '96, all the C programs I've coded 
since 91, all the logo since '81, as well as the projects I'm currently 
working on. I am such a fool. Back to programming Zaxxon on my Apple IIe for 
me. Perhaps even Karateka.. or Spy Hunter.

        BTW: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html . Bookmark it. And come 
back when you have a better MUA. It's starting to remind me of WebTV.

                                                        BL.

        P.S.

        Kryten: There's something familiar about you, too.. I get a name...
                Smee... Smeeg Heeeeeed!!
        Rimmer: Smeghead?
        Kryten: That's it!
        Rimmer: He remembers me!!

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

[Andre Hedrick]

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:

> They are stealing by changing GPL files, and not giving the source, its

Before you call Nvidia a "THEIF", look in the mirror and read the legal
license associated with the drivers you have, and you do not have
hardware.

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=legal_info

The attached EULA is what you forgot to read, or maybe forgot understand.

   International Offices
   England:
   Theale Court, 11-13 High Street
   Theale, Reading, Berkshire, RG7
   5AH
   England
   Tel: +44 (118) 903 3000
   Fax: +44 (118) 930 5691

> not for personal use so they are DISTRIBUTING it, and INCLUDING IT. BUT
> they dont give out their DERIVED source. I work with C everyday and when
> you put in a header file you are including it, all kernel headers are

Well recall you said it was time for you to consult your
"lawyer"/"solicitor", well lets see if I can help you do it faster.
I am tired of your rants about NVIDIA and the commerial viability of
binary library objects with public source wrappers.

With any luck you can be the person to win or loose the case and make GPL
viable or not.

Are you willing to take the risk?

Regards,

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group

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

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 274 bytes --]

the eula is irrelevent, it should be GPL, oh and I read the drivers on a computer with an geforce card. which i now own;)

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

On 	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:38:58 -0800 (PST) 	Andre Hedrick <andre@linux-ide.org> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2791 bytes --]

From: Andre Hedrick <andre@linux-ide.org>
To: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net, info@nvidia.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE:Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:38:58 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10212312322560.421-100000@master.linux-ide.org>

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:

> They are stealing by changing GPL files, and not giving the source, its

Before you call Nvidia a "THEIF", look in the mirror and read the legal
license associated with the drivers you have, and you do not have
hardware.

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=legal_info

The attached EULA is what you forgot to read, or maybe forgot understand.

   International Offices
   England:
   Theale Court, 11-13 High Street
   Theale, Reading, Berkshire, RG7
   5AH
   England
   Tel: +44 (118) 903 3000
   Fax: +44 (118) 930 5691

> not for personal use so they are DISTRIBUTING it, and INCLUDING IT. BUT
> they dont give out their DERIVED source. I work with C everyday and when
> you put in a header file you are including it, all kernel headers are

Well recall you said it was time for you to consult your
"lawyer"/"solicitor", well lets see if I can help you do it faster.
I am tired of your rants about NVIDIA and the commerial viability of
binary library objects with public source wrappers.

With any luck you can be the person to win or loose the case and make GPL
viable or not.

Are you willing to take the risk?

Regards,

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group


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

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

[Andre Hedrick]

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:

> the eula is irrelevent, it should be GPL, oh and I read the drivers on
> a computer with an geforce card. which i now own;)
> 
> Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...
> 

Well, I am glad you now own a "geforce card".
You are now a customer.
You can now execute your rants about the binary drivers with Nvidia.

Regards,

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group

Note to self, never be stupid enough to comment on data or information 
from "Hell.Surfers", again !!!  Somebody LART me please!