On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 04:55:23AM +0100, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote: > That was my plan, though I hoped there is some documentation from > Realtek i could use to avoid looking at Linux driver - I'm afraid Linux > people would react badly if their driver is used even as plain > reference, without any code copying.
Yes, this needs to be done carefully. But it can and has been done. Keep in mind that there is a difference between copy-pasting code and between writing new code based on information obtained by studying another code base. The degree of that difference might vary between legal systems, and involve questions like whether patents are involved. But after all, what you're really using is publicly available *information*, not code. And some parts of driver code, such as register offsets, are facts, rather than a creative work, and thus aren't even copyrightable as such. In this case, I believe you can safely use the Linux driver as a documentation reference, and use the already working urtwn(4) driver as a code base to start with. Personally, and as a matter of principle, I don't think we should let anyone (such as other open source projects, policy makers, or companies) scare us away from writing new interoperable code for our OS and release it under a free licence. "I am not putting up with this bulling shit" While writing rtsx(4) I found that Linux developers employed by Realtek were trying to be very helpful, within limits imposed by NDAs they had signed. They actually reviewed my code and found a show-stopper bug. That's not perfect, because we still don't have docs and depend on insiders to get information. I asked for data sheets several times, and those requests were forwarded internally but it looked like their legal team blocked those requests. But it doesn't hurt to ask. And the more people ask the more attention will be brought to the problem.
