Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: ipw3945 status | From | Kasper Sandberg <> | Date | Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:25:37 +0200 |
| |
On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 17:58 +0100, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > Kasper Sandberg wrote: > >> Because it would involve a moderate rewriting of the driver, and we'd > >> have to carry a delta against Intel's code forever. > > without knowing this for sure, dont you think that if a largely changed > > version of the driver appeared in the tree, intel may start developing > > on that? cause then they wouldnt be the ones that "broke" compliance > > with FCC(hah) by not doing binaryonly. > > > > Where can I find this FCC law that seems to be crippling open source > wlan development? > > I am not from the USA, so I don't have to comply with the FCC. Could we > make a non-crippled totally open source driver for use by people outside > the USA? as with encryption, arent some of the encryption stuff widely used in the opensource community also illegal in the united states?
> > For example, here in the UK one can own radios that can transmit on any > frequency one likes, but if you actually press the TX button without a > the appropriate License, you break the law. im quite certain this is also the case in for example Denmark. > > James >
- 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/
| |