Messages in this thread | | | From | Kalin KOZHUHAROV <> | Subject | Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing. | Date | Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:41:31 +0900 |
| |
Just one statement (below)...
Gene Heskett wrote: > On Wednesday 27 October 2004 22:25, Han Boetes wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>The people from the OpenBSD project are currently lobbying to get >>the firmware for Intel wireless chipsets under a license suitable >>for Open Source. >> >>Since this will not only benefit BSD but also the Linux Project (and >>even Intel) I would like to mention the URL here for people who want >>to help writing to Intel. >> >> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20041027193425 >> > > Please be aware that for the so-called "software radios" > chips/chipsets, the FCC, and other similar regulating bodies in other > countries has made access to the data quite restrictive in an attempt > to keep the less ruly among us from putting them on frequencies they > aren't authorized to use, or to set the power levels above whats > allowed. These restrictions can vary from governing body to > governing body so the software is generally supplied according to > where the chipset is being shipped. The potential for mischief, and > legal/monetary reprecussions is sufficiently great that I have > serious doubts that Intel will budge from their current position > unless we can prove, beyond any doubt, that the regulatory > limitations imposed will not be violated. > > Since open source, where anyone who can read the code can see exactly > what the limits are, and 'adjust to suit', virtually guarantees > miss-use, sooner if not later, for no other reason than its human > nature to experiment, Intel/moto/etc therefore has very good reasons > to treat its chip<->software interface as highly secret & > proprietary. To own a gun (in USA at least) is legal and easy. To use it is your choice. It may be illegel at times, but you still can (legally) have one.
> Thats not saying that they may at some point furnish a 'filter' that > presents the rest of the world with a usable API to control it, but > the filter will see to it that attempted illegal settings are > ignored. The only way I can see that actually working is to actually > put that filter inside the chip, customized for the locale its being > shipped to. The radio control portion of the chip itself wouldn't > even be bonded out to external world pins or bga contacts, just the > port of the filter that the outside world talks to. > > I'd rather doubt they want to make 20 to 40 different filtered > versions of the same chipset just to satisfy TPTB in some 3rd world > country thats less than 1% of the total sales. Even the relatively > dense market where Han lives is probably less than 5% of the total > for a popular chipset. > > I'm a broadcast engineer who has been dealing at times with the FCC > for over 40 years, so you could say I'm biased. But thats not real > bias, its just from being fairly familiar with the regulatory > territory. > > I'd like to see an open source solution to this problem myself, but > just because its open source we are asking for, with the attendent > liabilities that implies, I would not hold my breath till it happens. > > If you do, you'll probably be talking to the rest of the world through > a Ouija board. >
Just stirring the soup you see, Kalin.
-- || ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ || ( ) http://ThinRope.net/ ( ) || ______________________ ||
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |