Still no kmod for new nvidia
ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au
Sat Jul 31 13:24:54 UTC 2010
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 06:56 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> There was a court case where a company was using a copyrighted phrase
> for access control. A competitor won when they also used the same
> phrase for access control purposes.
> That was a long time ago and people seemed to feel that when a
> customer bought something, they owned it. In today's environment that
> case might have gone differently.
Now, and long ago, buying something gave you the thing to use. It never
made it legal/right for you to blatantly rip off the design.
i.e. Copyright and patents have been around for decades.
You've always been liable for a whole mess of legal trouble if you
ripped off someone else's product. It's not a new problem.
Even if you do manage to get away with reverse engineering something
that's not covered by a patent, or you find some loophole, you still
stand the chance of getting your just deserts from the original
manufacturer, when they, with their years of R&D into their product that
they have, and you don't, trump your attempt with a new and better, or
deliberately incompatible, model.
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
More information about the users