Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Sep 1998 19:23:22 -0400 | From | David Feuer <> | Subject | Re: Linux, UDI and SCO. |
| |
Khimenko Victor wrote: > > 19-Sep-98 17:34 you wrote: > > Erik Corry wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 10:31:26PM +0400, Khimenko Victor wrote: > >> > In <19980919193105.A22160@arbat.com> Erik Corry (erik@arbat.com) wrote: > >> > > >> > EC> But you can release a UDI driver simultaneously under two > >> > EC> different licenses. So everyone can be happy. > >> > > >> > Not at all. LGPL will be 100% enough for such purposes. > >> > >> I see no way of forcing hardware manufacturers to use LGPL. > >> > >> The only way would seem to be to not put UDI in the official > >> kernel, but there are sure to be distributions that put it > >> in anyway (Xi graphics will, I would guess) and individuals > >> will always be free to do so. > > > Ummmmm.... That's really easy. 1st case: change the kernel license to > > disallow commercial drivers. 2nd case: change the module code to only > > load drivers containing the right string in the right place. That > > string would of course be a protected certification mark. These are > > sort of ugly and rude. Can anyone think of something nicer? > > This is not really needed. Inclusion of OSD-compiance in USD-certification > will be enough :-) Since "Big Boss" (who will sign checks :-) is aware that > certified driver is "Good Thing" while non-certified driver is "Bad Thing" > (even if he is not aware what's driver is in first place :-)
It's not a bad idea, but there are a couple of problems with it, in my mind. The first one is money. It takes a lot of money to make the kinds of advertisements necessary to let the pointy-hairs know about he certification and how it is important. Can an appropriate organization (LI, SPI, FSF, etc.) get enough money together to support that kind of campaign? I doubt it. TV costs thousands of dollars (hundreds of thousands?) per _minute_.
There's another big thing. Hardware vendors will probably be able to talk customers into believing that the certification is really just a formality, or unimportant, or politically motivated, or done to make money, or whatever, and that it is really insignificant. See how well many Win95 programs sell without certification! I suspect a licensing change is the way to go, or else possibly a cruel and unusual hack (see my message) to keep binary drivers from working in other releases.
By the way, what is OSD? And USD?
--
Remove "NOSPAM" to reply. ______________________________ / David Feuer \ | dfeuer@NOSPAMbinx.mbhs.edu | | feuer@NOSPAMhis.com | | daf@morseNOSPAM.usno.navy.mil| \ david@NOSPAMfeuer.his.com / -----------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |