Why graphics drivers are proprietary

[Mark LaPierre]

On 10/03/2012 06:27 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 20:05:38 -0400
> Mark LaPierre<marklapier at aol.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 10/02/2012 04:18 PM, Alan Evans wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
>>>> So final users would have had the best hardware running the best drivers
>>>> (open source too).
>>>> This is something which must not be permitted to happen. :-/
>>>
>>> Not if it helps to sell the competitor's hardware.
>>
>> Programmers, and corporations for that matter, have the right to decide
>> how they choose to distribute their property.
>
> Software is not property.
>
>> Corporations are people too
>
> Only in some broken countries but you are correct they still have to
> survive.
>
> Companies do open source seriously do it because it suits them for their
> own purposes. Thats generally a good thing because self interest is a
> great motivator and far better than the kind of sham token support from
> many companies.
>
> Free market economics sucks at finding optimal behaviour, it's just it
> sucks less than most of the other models tried 8)
>
> Alan

If I were to write a book, or paint a picture, or create a poster, or, 
by any other creative means, produce some product from my efforts it is 
my right to decide how, when, or if, I choose to distribute, transfer, 
or share said product.

If my employer is paying me to create that product then the product 
belongs to my employer, under whatever circumstances and conditions set 
forth by my employer and the conditions of my employment, by the same 
right.  The fruit of my labor is my employers property.

Software is no different.  Software I write for my employer belongs to 
my employer to do with as my employer decides.  Software I write on my 
own belongs to me.  I retain the rights to said software until I decide 
how and when to release it.  That software is not different, morally or 
legally, from any other product I produce.  If I create a drawing that 
drawing is my property, no different from that software I wrote, or that 
book that I wrote, or that airplane that I built.  It is my property and 
it it is my right to dispose of said property at my pleasure.

My comments above should not be construed to say that I favor or condone 
the practice of patenting software.  Software is similar to the product 
of any other creative practice.  Books, drawings, photographs, and 
software property should be protected under copyright.  Even the Free 
Software Foundation agrees with this position by reason of promulgating 
the practice of licensing software property under open source licensing. 
  Let me restate that.  The FSF promotes licensing of software property 
under open source license.

-- 
     _
    °v°
   /(_)\
    ^ ^  Mark LaPierre
Registerd Linux user No #267004
https://linuxcounter.net/
****