video cards

[Jeffrey Watts]

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
>
>  Copyright exists only as being a law.

You like to wordsmith your positions posthumously so as to appear right.

I understand that a law is the foundation of copyright in this country
(hence "copyright law").  But then again, it is for almost anything.
I was commenting that your choice of words was imprecise and only
served to sensationalize your arguments.

This is a technical forum, precision is very important.

>  Whether civil or criminal is irrelevant: it is still in violation of the law.

No sir, that is very incorrect.  Criminal infringement requires the
government to act on behalf of an injured populace.  In civil matters
the injured parties must seek justice on their own.  This is a very
important distinction (see my earlier point about precision).

There are no injured parties in this circumstance (as the principal
author has said it's fine), and thus this distinction is critical.
You may feel that it is "illegal" - which in itself is a rather
sensational term to choose, I would choose "infringes" - but you sir
are not an injured party as you do not hold the Linux copyright.
Furthermore, I believe that it is obvious that you are not a lawyer
and are in general ignorant of the legal system and thus you are, to
use a rather vulgar phrase, "talking out of your ass".

>  Both of your examples are migrating from non-free to free. This situation is
>  the exact opposite: free toward non-free.

No sir.  If I recall correctly, before the nVidia driver nVidia cards
did not fully work under Linux.  I believe it had basic VESA support,
but nothing more.  You might argue that that is "working", I'd
disagree as people do not buy nVidia cards to use 1990s standards.
This is clearly a situation where one might expect an eventual Free
driver to resolve the current necessity of using a non-Free driver.

However, now that I've answered your rebuttal could you please address
my larger point that you danced around?

Jeffrey.

P.S.  Please excuse my double-response Luke, I keep forgetting that
this mailing list doesn't have Reply-To: set.

-- 

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine