At 02:23 PM 4/16/2007, Frank Brickle wrote: >On 4/16/07, Jim Lux ><<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Either way, it's a little more serious than that. The "component" SDR-5000 > >might be exempt, but the models with embedded controllers are likely to be > >prohibited from using GPL software. > >Because of GPL? or because of Part 15? > > >GPL. Version 3 has what amounts to a counter-DRM provision that >says, basically, if you're distributing GPL software and it's >running on locked hardware, you're obligated to enable either (1) a >method for users to replace the locked-hardware keys with their own >keys, or (2) replace the locked firmware entirely.
And how would this comport with, e.g., a USB to RS232 interface that the software treats as a serial port? I suppose that's not "locked hardware" in the sense you mean? I would assume that the firmware/hardware in the future Flex-Radios would fall in a similar case.. it might implement a IEEE-1394b interface to the DDS which exposes some set of functions, and that's it. I don't see this as being materially different than the USB dongle providing access to a baudrate control register, and only providing some subset of all possible baudrates the hardware might conceivably generate, if you were free to muck around with the digital frequency divisors internally. Or, for that matter, the 1394b interface itself. It incorporates patented aspects which are licensed by the consortium, and I see little difference between a ASIC that implements the interface and a FPGA that implements the interface. Or, would it be your contention that in order to be fully GPL3 compliant, the software would have to have unfettered access to the physical layer bits? >Anyone who's interested in DRM issues should bone up on the >discussions concerning GPL v3. Thanks to the "...or any later >version..." clause in GPL v2, the version now in draft will probably >be the law of the Free Software universe before very long. There is, of course, quite a bit of discussion with respect to GPLV3 (e.g. Linus isn't particularly wild about it). Is it a reasonable assumption that PowerSDR would be released under GPL v3, or GPL v2, or under some other license? What about all the bits and pieces needed to make it work (jack, portaudio, dttsp, pthreads, etc.) Could *anyone* release a GPL v3 visual studio application, considering that such applications are so thoroughly bound up with the microsoft windows guts. I confess I've not been following all the twists and turns of GPL v3, since my work tends to either be closed or totally open (as in "do with it what you will, the taxpayers paid for it"). Jim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070416/96050912/attachment.html _______________________________________________ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
