> > In other words...Can embedded linux developers hide their close
source
> divers
> > in a custom close source BIOS, that is called from an open
source "wrapper
> > module"?
>
> No.
I disagree. Inevitably what it would come down to is that somebody
would have to be able to convince a judge somewhere that the closed
source BIOS is a derived work of the GPL'ed kernel. That would be
quite a stretch if the "BIOS" uses no GPL'ed functions or header
files and can compile and be useful without Linux or an OS at all.
I believe Linux has an NDIS wrapper driver to allow closed source
Windows network drivers to be used with Linux on the PC. Does this
mean that these Windows drivers must now be made GPL? This is really
the same thing.
>
> > PCs have close source BIOSes.
>
> Some do, some do not.
True, 99.9% do, .1% do not. Seriously, this seems a ridiculous
statement-- what brand PC currently ships with an open-source BIOS?
>
> > My problem is the SD flash card interface is patented and its
governing body
> > doesn't allow release of open source drivers for the SD
interface.
>
> That's not true, we have SD drivers in the Linux kernel now.
They are probably MMC drivers, not full SD. SD cards are backward
compatible with MMC. Either that or they were developed illegally or
reverse engineered in a country that allows that. SD association
licenses are pretty clear. You might be able to get away with it if
you don't use the word "SD" in any marketing, advertising, or
documentation for your product but that seems a dishonest way to do
business.
//Jesse Off
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|