I have offered a few times to use something different if someone can come up with a good catch-all word that covers trade secrets, patents, copyrighted code, along with anything similar that I might have forgotten to mention. So far I have received a few rants back but nothing I could actually use in a sentence
Obvious terms like "secrets" don't work because we're really talking about a mix of "secrets" and "legally protected" stuff. The best I could come up with was "secret sauce" but that's kinda hokey too.
Trademarks have nothing to do with secrets or keeping things restricted. It is just to document you produced a certain item and nobody else can claim that their knock-off products was created by you.
Copyrights are not about keeping anything secret either. It's about restricting the types of copying you can do of certain, specific, and abritrary types of goods.
Patents are not about keeping secrets. In fact they are suppose to do the entire opposite. You are suppose to be putting your inventions into the public domain in order to get a patent in the first place.
What is more trademarks are not suppose to stop people from copying your products. Patents are not about copying either. Only copyrights are about copying. With patents you violate patents whether or not you invented something independently yourself and you just happen to accidentally do something covered by a patent or you intentionally copied a patent document it is not relevent, except in when awarding damages. It makes no difference if you copied or it was independently created.
The fact that people can dream up scenarios were any of these three things can be used to create secrecy or restricted access to information goes to show how fundamentally broke and corrupt the very concept of IP is.
Now the only truly legitimate form of IP, in my opinion, is going to be trade secrets. People sign NDAs to work on stuff they need to follow those NDAs. If a corporation wants to keep something secret they should be able to. However if somebody is able to reverse engineer their product and use that knowledge then that is 100% OK also. It's all fair game.
The only legit restrictions that people should be required to follow are ones that they volunteered for and agreed to follow.
Now with video cards you also have additional things like DMCA... which is so much screaming heaping bullshit I cannot even begin to fathom. Ostensibly it's about piracy, but it is in fact a cold, very purposeful, completely deliberate and malicious (from a free market standpoint) set of laws and punishments designed to leverage copyright to provide the large international media corporations (and friends) the ability to dictate software and hardware design for the sole purpose of maintaining market dominance and controlling distribution channels. You obey 'Hollywood' or the government will shut you down.
Last edited by drag; 01-10-2012 at 06:04 PM.
OK, so your problem isn't really with the term itself, you just want a whole lot more detail. Put bluntly, you're not going to get that from Engineering folks, only from Legal.
Microsoft = Office Suite + DirectX. This is enough to explain why Linux will never get into the Desktop Market.
"Microsoft > Linux. This is enough to explain why Linux will never get into the Desktop Market."
Microsoft > Linux, can actually be used an explanation for its complete and utter failure on the desktop front. Just look at the math. See the ">". It explains everything.
Microsoft can equal whatever it wants all day. Doesn't matter. Its all about the ">".
Look at this!
> > =
This proves there is no hope. No hope for open source. No hope for anything at all.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>BRICK WALL! - end of universe
You missed his point entirely, as did the poster above you. The problem is not one of better or worse the problem is one of market acceptance. To be blunt MS Office is basically ubiquitous, until we can make an ODF based office suite the dominant one people are going to be using a Microsoft endorsed OS (Windows or OS X), and DirectX being the most popular api for writing games against providing most of the hardware abstraction means that developers are going to be trained on that api and not necessarily proficient in any others which means that at least AAA games are going to tend to stick to being Windows.
Edit: Ironically OS X by not being DirectX compatible is helping us with the DirectX issue
Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 01-11-2012 at 12:49 AM.
Those are the same people who cry over Wayland, Gnome3, or whatever that is new. They are never happy with anything. So let's just ignore them and delete their comments everytime they have something to say.
Great work on Mesa 8.0.
Congratulations to all developers involved.
Last edited by asdx; 01-11-2012 at 02:01 AM.