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

--1041397716667
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

AND NOBODY HAS TO BEG ANYTHING FROM NVIDIA, OR GAIN THEIR SUPPORT, not for their price, the GPLs SOUL PURPOSE.

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

On 	Wed, 1 Jan 2003 05:01:12 +0000 	<[e-mail]> wrote:

--1041397716667
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.116.70.75]) by smtp.cwctv.net  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44);
	 Wed, 1 Jan 2003 05:00:39 +0000
Received: ([e-mail]) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S267091AbTAAEwx>; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:52:53 -0500
Received: ([e-mail]) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S267111AbTAAEww>; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:52:52 -0500
Received: from smtp-outbound.cwctv.net ([213.104.18.10]:38934 "EHLO
	smtp.cwctv.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S267091AbTAAEwv>;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:52:51 -0500
Received: from cwctv.net ([172.16.33.41]) by smtp.cwctv.net  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44);
	 Wed, 1 Jan 2003 04:58:47 +0000
From:	<[e-mail]>
To:	[e-mail], [e-mail],
	[e-mail]
Date:	Wed, 1 Jan 2003 05:01:12 +0000
Subject: RE:Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Liberate TVMail 2.6
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="1041397272201"
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender:	[e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List:	[e-mail]
Return-Path: linux-kernel-owner+Hell.Surfers=[e-mail]

--1041397272201
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

read up on why the GPL exists, its not to protect a billion dollar company, its to protect honest contributors from having their work stolen by big buisness like just what happened when Nvidia used various GPLd HEADER FILES IN ITS MODULES AND KEPT SOURCE CLOSED. by "DEAD HORSE".

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

On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:44 -0500 Ed Sweetman <[e-mail]> wrote:

--1041397272201
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Received: from mx1.it.wmich.edu ([141.218.1.89]) by smtp.cwctv.net  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44);
	 Wed, 1 Jan 2003 04:48:42 +0000
Received: from hermes.it.wmich.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by hermes.localmail (8.1336/8.12.4) with SMTP id h014mk52003764
	for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: from smtp.wmich.edu ([127.0.0.1])
 by hermes.it.wmich.edu (NAVGW 2.5.2.9) with SMTP id M2002123123484510962
 ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:45 -0500
Received: from wmich.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by smtp.wmich.edu (8.1336/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h014mi8l003760;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:45 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:48:44 -0500
From: Ed Sweetman <[e-mail]>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021218
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: A Guy Called Tyketto <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-Path: [e-mail]

A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 03:13:00AM +0000, [e-mail] 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.
Note: "you" is everyone complaining about nvidia not gpl'ing their drivers.

Gotta agree with that.  You get along much better in life not believing 
you deserve this and that. Nobody owes you driver support because they 
make hardware. And bullying companies to do so makes you no better than 
they are when they bully other companies out of business, buy them out 
and use their advanced ideas in their crappy products.

Apparently nvidia is the graphics leader because people dont know how to 
  write accelerated graphics code for nvidia chipsets. And apparently it 
has little to do with engineering the card and chips and manufacturing 
those pieces and assembling them.  And apparently they're better 
protected by software laws from someone stealing their hard work and 
making products without having to spend R&D on it than laws on copying 
various hardware patents and such.

going to a company and telling them they have to agree with your beliefs 
is a quick way to get absolutely nothing.  Nvidia has survived before 
linux became the big deal on wallstreet and news. They can survive quite 
  well with windows users alone.  They dont need linux user support.  So 
how is trying to boycott nvidia products up in anger and sending angry 
emails going to help you get what you want? You dont have the market 
power needed to make that work. It just makes companies see linux as a 
bunch of spoiled brats complaining when they dont get what they want and 
throwing a tantrum.

We allow certain binary-only modules in the linux kernel.  That has been 
  long established and it's the end of the story.  This is brought up 
like every year and it ends the same way. You dont like what nvidia does 
then dont buy their stuff, but going around and trying to tell other 
people to do so is counterproductive and foolish. We dont have the 
leverage and pretending you do makes every step closer we were to 
gaining support inside nvidia turn into a step backwards.  Why should 
they give their drivers away gpl?  What is the gain in that? Show them 
the gain and hope they come around.

What are their motives in not going gpl? has anyone asked them that? 
People assume it's out of security for their product but there is no 
precident for them to be worried about that and it sounds silly.

If you are bothered by the license the drivers you use are under then 
why did you buy nvidia in the first place?  I always buy my hardware 
based on linux support.  If i had hardware that wasn't well supported or 
needed special binary modules i'd trade it with a friend or sell it on 
ebay and get something that didn't.  With a new nvidia card you cant go 
saying you're too poor to get anything else.  So you get a piece of 
hardware that you know is not supported by gpl drivers well and then 
complain about it?

There is always the old way of reverse engineering the hardware and 
continuing the gpl nvidia driver support.  It's much harder but it's 
still done. The need for gpl support must not be that high to get people 
motivated to dive into that mess yet so I dont see much motivation on 
nvidia's side to change how they do things.

ok. dead horse 0   people 1.  no doubt a rematch will proceed.

--1041397272201--