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: 179 bytes --]

in a way, yes.

Dean McEwan, If the drugs don't work, [sarcasm] take more...[/sarcasm].

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:08:26 -0800 (PST) David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4183 bytes --]

From: David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com>
To: Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rms@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:08:26 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301011706400.21656-100000@dlang.diginsite.com>

well libc uses the kernel headers and basicly all userspace programs use
libc so that makes oracle a derivitive work of the kernel??????

luckly that's not how things actually work.

David Lang

On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Paul Jakma wrote:

> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 00:31:13 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie>
> To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
> Cc: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rms@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source
>     drivers?
>
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> > Copyright law is pretty explicit about the situations the GPL
> > applies to.  If something can be reasonably considered to be a
> > "derivative work" of a GPL work, the GPL applies and the new work
> > needs to be GPL.
>
> and:
>
> > but only a song.  If nvidia's driver only uses some simple
> > declarations from include files and no large (>7 lines? >10lines?
> > what's large?) inline functions AND the nvidia driver uses only the
> > standard interfaces to hook into the Linux kernel, then it's not a
> > derivative work and nvidia gets to choose the license.
>
> It has long been held that linking to GPL code is suffient to
> consitute 'derived work' status, hence the existence of the LGPL.
>
> The NVidia shim makes use of several kernel subsystems, the PCI
> device layer, the VM, the module system (well really, the kernel
> makes of use of the functions the module provides :) ), IRQ
> subsystem, the VFS, etc.. These systems are rather large bodies of
> code - without which the NVidia kernel driver could not work.
>
> So I am not quite sure on what basis one could argue the NVidia
> driver is not a derivative work, and hence it seems to me the NVidia
> driver is technically in material breach of GPL.
>
> You seem to be basing your opinion on:
>
>  "the nvidia driver uses only the standard interfaces to hook into
>  the Linux kernel"
>
> How are the standard interfaces not covered by the GPL?
>
> I know Linus' has often posted to l-k that he doesnt care about
> binary only modules as long as they stick to the exported interfaces.
> However, are all the kernel developers agreed on this? And if so, can
> this exception be formalised and put into the COPYING file? If not,
> then is NVidia not in breach of the kernel's licence?
>
> > Rik
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma	paul@clubi.ie	paul@jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
> 	warning: do not ever send email to spam@dishone.st
> Fortune:
> Programmers do it bit by bit.
>
> -
> 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/
>

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

[Milosz Tanski]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 588 bytes --]

There is (was) an effort for opensource 3d drivers (including nvidia
ones), infact i rember they got quake II and III working in 32bit color
mode, if i rember correctly. If you go grieff, then go visit
http://utah-glx.sourceforge.net/ and help out. Make the drivers better
then the nvidia ones (ya right!) so they will be forced to use your code
on other paltforms (and then nvidia would be forced to use it, and thus
open up their code). I'll see you in two years, when you fully complete
the drivers? Ok, bye. 

P.S: I think the code there is under a BSD (BSDish, MITish licence,
...).

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

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

[Paul Jakma]

On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Milosz Tanski wrote:

> be forced to use it, and thus open up their code). I'll see you in
> two years, when you fully complete the drivers? Ok, bye.

NVidia would not release the neccessary specs to the project to allow 
them to write acceptable drivers. That is why they are so lacking - 
but its amazing they even got that far.

> P.S: I think the code there is under a BSD (BSDish, MITish licence,
> ...).

XFree licence, yes. Which allows binary only modules.

regards
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul@clubi.ie	paul@jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
	warning: do not ever send email to spam@dishone.st
Fortune:
The best things in life go on sale sooner or later.

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

[Alan Cox]

On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 06:34, Milosz Tanski wrote:
> There is (was) an effort for opensource 3d drivers (including nvidia
> ones), infact i rember they got quake II and III working in 32bit color
> mode, if i rember correctly. If you go grieff, then go visit
> http://utah-glx.sourceforge.net/ and help out. Make the drivers better
> then the nvidia ones (ya right!) so they will be forced to use your code
> on other paltforms (and then nvidia would be forced to use it, and thus
> open up their code). I'll see you in two years, when you fully complete
> the drivers? Ok, bye. 
> 
> P.S: I think the code there is under a BSD (BSDish, MITish licence,

Utah-GLX supports the older Nvidia cards, and works in XFree86 4.2 at
least - although since its based on an older Mesa not all stuff works
well with it.

Alan

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

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 207 bytes --]

Sounds better... But still incorrectly licensed.

Dean McEwan, If the drugs don't work, [sarcasm] take more...[/sarcasm].

On 	Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:34:05 -0500 	Milosz Tanski <mtanski@wideopenwest.com> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2780 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 589 bytes --]

There is (was) an effort for opensource 3d drivers (including nvidia
ones), infact i rember they got quake II and III working in 32bit color
mode, if i rember correctly. If you go grieff, then go visit
http://utah-glx.sourceforge.net/ and help out. Make the drivers better
then the nvidia ones (ya right!) so they will be forced to use your code
on other paltforms (and then nvidia would be forced to use it, and thus
open up their code). I'll see you in two years, when you fully complete
the drivers? Ok, bye. 

P.S: I think the code there is under a BSD (BSDish, MITish licence,
....).

[-- Attachment #2.1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

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

[Milosz Tanski]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 315 bytes --]

Before jumping to conclusions, go check out the site, read the licences
etc. If i rember correctly some modules are under a BSD like licence
(correct me if i'm wrong). I don't think the utah-glx folk are using the
kernel (kernel modules), but i haven't looked close enouth at it (and
dosn't seam like you did too).

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

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

[Hell.Surfers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 412 bytes --]

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...

On 	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:05:35 -0500 	"Scott Robert Ladd" <scott@coyotegulch.com> wrote:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3487 bytes --]

From: "Scott Robert Ladd" <scott@coyotegulch.com>
To: "Paul Jakma" <paulj@alphyra.ie>, "Mark Rutherford" <mark@justirc.net>
Cc: <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 12:05:35 -0500
Message-ID: <FKEAJLBKJCGBDJJIPJLJAEPFDOAA.scott@coyotegulch.com>

Paul Jakma wrote
> "what you get for christmas?"
>
> "a lump of coal"
>
> at least you get /something/. however, you didnt get what counts,
> programming info for the card.

I, and many other Linux users, do not consider nVidia's drivers to be "a
lump of coal." What "counts" is being able to use my hardware effectively.
Closed-source drivers may not be ideal, but few things in life are.

Even the conservative Debian distribution (which I use) has the nVidia
drivers available in the distribution.

In order of preference (for me):

1) High-quality drivers with open source
2) High-quality drivers with closed source
3) Poor-quality drivers with open source
4) Poor-quality drivers with closed source

Out of four possibilities, we're getting the next-to-best thing. Certainly,
I'd *like* to have the specs for nVidia's cards -- but given competition
between nVidia and ATI, I don't see that happening. One advantage nVidia has
(small as it may be) is high-quality drivers for Linux; it's one reason my
Linux systems have TNT2 and GeForce 4 cards installed.

Note that my Windows boxes run ATI cards; I'm not an nVidia shill.

One of Linux's historical weaknesses (when compared to the competition) is
video support. While I urge nVidia to open their specifications (and in the
end think it would be in their best interest), I'm also very pleased that
they provide high-performance drivers for free (as in beer).

...Scott

--
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
Professional programming for science and engineering;
Interesting and unusual bits of very free code.

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

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

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.
-- 
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

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

[J Sloan]

A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:

>
>        I have an SiS 315E card in my box, and it works great, and haven't 
>looked at any other card since installing it.
>  
>
Yeah but I can play quake 3 arena, unreal tournament,
and return to castle wolfenstein with my nvidia card,
and you can't do that with your sis card.

Good binary 3D drivers are way better than no 3D
drivers -

A microsoft-free 3D fps addict,

Joe