[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Robert N White <robnwhiteii at yahoo dot com>
 To:  Jim Thompson <jim at netgate dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] The future - Supposed "reverse engineered"?
 Date:  Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:06:33 -0800 (PST)

--- Jim Thompson <jim at netgate dot com> wrote:

> If <someone> is me, then yes, I understand Copyright
> law, and Yes, son, 
> I do understand "reverse engineering".
> I also understand that it *DID NOT HAPPEN* in this
> instance.
> >This is complete hogwash described by someone who
> is quite ignorant regarding law. 
> >  
> >
> The responder has no idea what he's talking about,
> and bases his remarks 
> on sources which "assure him" that the HAL is
> "reverse engineered".
> I (and others, including Atheros) have the advantage
> that we can view 
> both sets of source code.
If this is true why doesn't Atheros contact OpenBSD
and make them remove the copyrighted code? If this
doesn't work then take it to court. Or are Atheors
just accepting that OpenBSD uses their copyrighted

Much better would it be if Atheros released their
driver under a open source license.

Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.