Re: GPL and Nvidia

lets see, In Britain we dont have "lawyers" we have solicitors, "no legal ground" yes I do have legal ground, having the hardware is irrelevent, I have the drivers, the "improperly" licensed drivers as they are, I dont discriminate againtst nvidia users, I am unhappy I cant help them with those modules, they include GPL routines as well as LGPL ones, so that part of the argument is irrelevent, rejecting non-GPL/LGPL modules is impossible because all modules are GPL (they contain gpl code, to work)but some (illegally) are distributed incorrectly, Nothing is hazy, I rather enjoy using 486s, Nvidia can open source because ATI could reverse engineer anyway, something I may do to get open source drivers released, something I HAVE just done with v.90, Nvidia doesnt even have decent proprietary texture compression, ive never got them to say what company made it, if its not just another excuse at all. A patch is derived work, Linux isnt crippled without Nvidia, and Linus could only switch to 
LGPL if it was still only his own work, when Nvidia included GPLd files it was a "linked file" and I didnt mention /proc, perhaps its time I seeked legal advice.

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