Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Le mardi 04 novembre 2008 à 10:23 +1100, Ben Finney a écrit : > > How does this follow? Surely if the firmware is already being > > distributed by the project, that's a *smaller* incentive to the > > vendor to change the license. > > Past experience shows that manufacturers aren’t really listening to > arguments such as “we won’t distribute your drivers unless you do > that”. See nVidia if you want a good example.
My understanding was that nVidia *do* listen, and have engaged the discussion numerous times; they just openly disagree. That's fine, they're free to do that, and I'll continue to recommend against their hardware for that reason. > On the contrary, by distributing firmware images in a way that makes > them already technically modifiable and subject to > reverse-engineering, it becomes clear that they have nothing to lose > by distributing the sources, and much to win as it allows the > community to help them in maintenance tasks. I find this interesting; if so, it would appear to be a different tactic from what we find effective in host-CPU-targeted works. Do you have a reference for an occurrence of this tactic succeeding? > In other words, I think the carrot has better leverage on [some > vendors] than the stick. Doubtless that's true in some cases. -- \ “I hope if dogs ever take over the world, and they chose a | `\ king, they don't just go by size, because I bet there are some | _o__) Chihuahuas with some good ideas.” —Jack Handey | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
