![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Fredrik Markstr?m (fredrik.markstrom@avalonenterprise.com) wrote: > Thanks for the prompt respons. > > I do agree that it would be better for everyone to release it under > GPL and I have already expressed that to our customer. > > At this point I feel that we have two possibilities, help our customer > violate GPL or say no to the project. I'd prefer a third option where > I could tell the customer that we can setup the project in a certain > way (some "cleanroom" setup ?) to ensure that the results can not be > considered derived work. A 3rd option I think would be for them to put the bits that they worry about the IP in firmware executed in a processor on the ether chip, then make a nice clean interface that a GPL'd driver talks to. Of course that relies on there being a suitable processor in the chip; if not then perhaps you should remind them to think about the software before spinning their chip! Dave -- -----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code ------- / Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy \ \ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | MIPS,x86,ARM,SPARC,PPC & HPPA | In Hex / \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-11-22 19:51 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||