Re: [LI] Fwd: Linux headed for disaster? >> Doesn't Patents protect Or Isn't Binary code ENOUGH !!! <<

[Raj Mathur <raju@xxxxxxx>]

Now that we have Gopi's well-expressed opinions on the current GPL vs
no-GPL debate raging in the list *duck*, I'd also like to suggest the
judicious use of /.../ to highlight text.  As can be seen from their
inclination, /characters/ are meant to represent forward-leaning
characters, i.e. italics.

I differ from Gopi in the use of *...* .. *action* is used to express
a deed in my book *reaching up for the stars*

Another option is to use _text like this_, though that is normally
reserved for references like names of books and articles.  the _text_
means underlined text.

And BTW, it's so much more fun to flame in lowercase, gently (with a
chainsaw? :-)

Regards,

-- Raju

>>>>> "Gopi" == Gopi K Garge <gopi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Gopi> Hanish, You might want to use prefix and suffix using a
    Gopi> character like "*" to highlight a point or a term in your
    Gopi> email; using upper case implies that you are shouting (as in
    Gopi> a flame...), which I presume is not what you are ... or are
    Gopi> you ? .. ;-)

    Gopi> --Gopi

    Gopi> C Hanish Menon sez:

    >> Hi

    >> This is a doubt I have, may be what I am thinking is wrong,
    >> Please do clarify.

    >> On Tue, 07 Dec 1999, Arun Sharma wrote: > But there are
    >> situations under which people want to preserve their >
    >> intellectual properties. And they should be free to do
    >> so. XFree86 4.0 > is being smart here in defining a binary
    >> interface. So if a graphic > chip vendor wants to release a
    >> binary only driver, I can use it with > XFree86 4.0. Sure it
    >> may not work as well as a source only driver, but > it's better
    >> than nothing.  >

    >> When talking about not releasing Source based drivers we are
    >> talking about the possibility of one coming to know about the
    >> Hardware logic built into these cards or so if I am not
    >> wrong. Which the hardware vendor doesn't want others to use
    >> with out permission from him. But is this Binary only driver
    >> realy solving the above problem? My points for this are

    >> a) He can PATENT it if its REALY UNIQUE. and this should
    >> protect him from others taking undue advantage or copying his
    >> effort with out getting consent from him.

    >> b) The Software drivers If I am not wrong May/Maynot provide
    >> enough info always. (I know it depends). But at the levels of
    >> Drivers, If someone is REALLY INTERESTED in GETTING to KNOW the
    >> HARDWARE LOGIC, the BINARY CODE IS IN ITSELF MORE THAN
    >> SUFFICIENT MOST OF THE TIMES.

    >> Thus I DON'T see as to WHAT advantage do hardware vendors have
    >> in NOT RELEASING SOURCE based Drivers. PLEASE CLARIFY.

    >> --------- Keep :-) HanishKVC http://hanishkvc.tripod.com/

    Gopi> --