On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > >> > The person who has the device doesn't neceessarily have the firmware, > >> > because > >> > the firmware can be removed. > >> The person doesn't have the device at that point -- only part of it. > > The same reasoning applies for both examples if you refer to the > > combination of > > hardware plus CD as a "device". > But that imagined device is broken: it needs another component to read > the CD, load the firmware off of it into the computer's memory, > process it there, then upload that to the device itself.
Then by the same reasoning the all-hardware device is broken too. It needs "another component" (driver) to function. Neither the version with the CD nor the version with the eeprom will function by themselves. > >> > Of course, there are relatively few examples where you'd *want* to > >> > remove the eeprom from the device, but similarly there are few examples > >> > where you'd want to sell the device without accompanying it with a CD. > >> Of course, those examples include this one: inadvertently losing track > >> of the CD. > > That's a difference, but it ...just means I need to > > rephrase the question: > > > > "So what's the difference between a device with firmware, and a device with > > a CD plus a non-free license letting you copy the CD?" > > > > In that case, losing the CD doesn't matter because the user can get another > > copy. The user can't modify the software on the CD, but then he had no > > permission to modify it when it's in hardware either. > I'm not sure this last is true, for the same reasons that I may saw > any book I have purchased in half and sell the result to you. Modifying software stored in an eeprom involves some sort of copying that cutting a book in half doesn't, and therefore is prohibited under copyright law. There's no difference between the CD and the eeprom here.
