Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Georg Acher
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 12:33:39PM +0200, Clemens Kirchgatterer wrote: because that means they get an stable and well performing OS at zero cost for their embedded designes what makes these chips sell better. So what? Wasn't it idea of free Software to get it without paying for it?

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Georg Acher
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 02:33:21PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote: That doesn't matter. It's still Linux-based and you still need to release the modified sources (I'd say enough to allow the building of a complete filesystem image for the device). To make it clear: This whole argument is *ONLY*

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Darren Salt
I demand that Georg Acher may or may not have written... On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 02:33:21PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote: That doesn't matter. It's still Linux-based and you still need to release the modified sources (I'd say enough to allow the building of a complete filesystem image for the

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Georg Acher
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 03:55:04PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote: I demand that Georg Acher may or may not have written... On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 02:33:21PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote: That doesn't matter. It's still Linux-based and you still need to release the modified sources (I'd say enough

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Clemens Kirchgatterer
Georg Acher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, it's not. Free is free, you can't make differences between hardware vendors using Linux as a basis for their HW and SW vendors using Linux as an OS for their SW. And that's exactly the intention of your wording (zero cost). strange interpretation of

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Matthias Schniedermeyer
On 01.07.2007 19:40, Georg Acher wrote: On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 06:47:18PM +0200, Clemens Kirchgatterer wrote: or better or whatever. cool, no problem. what? you signed a NDA that does not allow you distribute the os in the first place? your bad. Once again, and now in capitals. IT'S

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Georg Acher
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 08:43:04PM +0200, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: If only the hardware vendors where as united as the movie-industry. HDCP was invented by Intel, Silicon Image holds a lot of patents on DVI and HDMI. As long as they can sell chips and licenses, they don't care about the

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Darren Salt
I demand that Georg Acher may or may not have written... [snip] And quite frankly, the dumb consumer doesn't care about HDCP and its implications. Compared to DRM on music, HDCP is invisible to him, he has no visible disadvantage. That's as may be... however, it does seem to be ignoring those

Re: [vdr] OT: issues about binary only code in GPLed programs [WAS] future VDR and Net??eiver OEM from Reelmultimedia

2007-07-01 Thread Matthias Schniedermeyer
On 01.07.2007 21:10, Georg Acher wrote: On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 08:43:04PM +0200, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: If only the hardware vendors where as united as the movie-industry. HDCP was invented by Intel, Silicon Image holds a lot of patents on DVI and HDMI. As long as they can sell