EDIT: I think it is very clear that you can't copyright a concept of something. You can only copyright the implementation of something.
Last edited by duby229; 03-12-2013 at 07:24 PM.
And then there were patents..."a method or proceedure for..." indeed.
...and when it comes to wireless, Linux is light years ahead of any BSDs, proving this idea once more.
Last edited by 0xBADCODE; 03-12-2013 at 09:12 PM.
* Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
* Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish.
* Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
* Freedom 3: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements (and modified versions in general) to the public, so that the whole community benefits.
Free Software and Open Source are about whether you are permitted to continue modifying and distributing source.
Also, it seems you tried to exploit cthulhux's name. Not good for your own reputation; it makes you look like a troll (not that you are one, mind).
RMS wanted Ogg Vorbis to be both free and competitive with other proprietary standards, such as MPEG, which is widely in use.
In fact, if you have an MP3 file you're probably using it.
Anyway, it's established as THE standard, and you can put it into any software if you can front the royalty fees.
RMS wanted an alternative that was free for everyone to implement, something that would be able to be put into ANY program or device, not just those licensed under GPLv2+.
Would you rather have an open source standard implemented in some closed source programs, or would you support the patent and price wrought that is MPEG and other proprietary media standards, because they're your only choices if you want to succeed in this marketplace.
This puts a whole new meaning to atheros imo. How many wireless vendors do this? How many wired vendors do this? This is just one step closer to getting a truly open source system.
Intel has closed firmware on its wired NIC's? Wasn't aware of that, unfortunatly, unless someone does have open firmware for their wired NIC's, Intel are still unbeaten in performance, stability and quality on wired NIC's though I think.
Anyway, from the github README:
So from the horse's mouth, so to say, they call it a SoC (which I find bit the wrong term, I believe it would be called a micro-controller really). Though the in case of the AR7010, it sounds its nothing more then a USB or PCIe bridge chip to an AR9280 or AR9287.Ok, what are those NICs?
The AR7010 is a USB/PCIe SoC with onboard RAM, ROM and flash.
It comes with an external wireless chip connected via PCIe - typically
an AR9280 or AR9287.
The AR9271 is a USB/Wifi SoC with onboad RAM, ROM, flash and the
actual wireless chip. The wireless core is an off-shoot of the AR9285.
It is a single-chip solution.
In the case of the AR9271, it's most likly all those on a single die, so not that special I think. Maybe a stripped AR7010 (who needs internal USB connectivity etc).
Last edited by oliver; 03-13-2013 at 03:40 AM.
Given the uncertainty, and the potential requirement to release their source code if the judgement goes against them (which would open all their internal, proprietary work up to their competitors), I think companies that avoid the GPL are just playing it safe.