video cards

[Jeffrey Watts]

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> 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.

-- 

"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