"Open Source Constitution"?
bruce at perens.com
Sat Apr 9 21:42:02 UTC 2005
Chuck Swiger wrote:
> How is this case different from the wireless driver case? Both nVidia
> and ATI refer to their products as having GPUs, where the video
> rendering is done by a seperate, dedicated "Graphics Processor Unit",
> rather than by the main CPU.
I don't want the code that runs /in/ their GPU. I want the code for the
Linux kernel driver.
> Also, which license are the nVidia and ATI drivers infringing?
The GPL license on the Linux kernel, for their driver. The GLX library
which they link into X does not - at least at first glance - appear to
be an infringing product.
> Futhermore, can't you simply access these cards using the VESA
> standard interface to get a simple 2D linear framebuffer...?
That's immaterial to the question of infringement.
> I suppose it's mostly harmless if people forget that Linux contains a
> lot of software which predates the GPL and is under different licenses.
If you are talking about user-mode components, that's also immaterial.
Let me assure you that the Debian team has never taken the copyright
terms of any work for granted. Indeed, I wrote the Open Source
Definition just to help the Debian team get this right.
More information about the License-discuss