On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Luke -Jr [email protected] wrote:
And if you were paying attention, LINUS DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION LIKE THIS BECAUSE HE DOES NOT HOLD COPYRIGHT OVER ALL THE CODE INVOLVED.
Sure he does. You seem to believe that underpants gnomes hand out "authority" over things. You acknowledge that the copyright situation is a bit murky. I'm pointing out that the person with the original copyright (and who is the namesake, leader, and spiritual guide) is the "authority". Are you saying he's not? Find me a person that doesn't believe Linus has "authority" over the Linux kernel and I'll show you a fool.
Again, you're talking in "what ifs" and "maybes". I'm talking "reality". See my prior comments about "practicality". If Linus Torvalds does not support suing nVidia for damages it's extremely unlikely that you'd find a judge dumb enough to disregard his opinion. Furthermore the community historically has supported Linus. I highly doubt that there would be a huge grassroots uprising against binary nVidia modules, especially considering that it's very likely that the majority of Linux users are using nVidia graphics chips, and I bet many of them are using those "evil" drivers you rail against.
You say it's "possible" that they could be sued. I'm saying that it's _practically_ impossible as the only people with enough clout and credibility to lead such an effort simply _do not support it_. You can argue around it all you want Luke. Feel free to have the last word, as it's clear that you'll defend to the death all of the incorrect stuff that you say. Buy ATI cards if you like, and feel superior to the rest of us.
Jeffrey.
P.S. I'm still chuckling about your HURD comment.