On 05 May 2005 19:08:18 -0400
"Nathan J. Williams" <nathanw@wasabisystems.com> wrote:

> So if one has ever looked at GPL'd software, one must be forever
> forbidden from working on non-GPL software?

At no point have I stated the above, nor inferred it.  I stated clearly
that if drivers in NetBSD have been based on Linux drivers, than those
drivers are GPL not BSD.

> > In other words, you have no way of obtaining the knowledge for that
> > hardware without looking at the Darwin code.
> 
> Knowledge about the hardware is simply not copyrightable. The
> expression of that knowledge is, so I can't copy the comments out of
> Apple's code that explain it, or the PDF that describes some other
> part of their hardware, but having read the code or otherwise legally
> figured it out, I may freely use it to write my own code.

It is rather disingenuous for someone as smart as you are to argue that
code is not an expression of knowledge.  I doubt you actually stop to
read comments in code. 

Knowledge about hardware is categorized as "trade secrets" and is
protected under the DMCA.  This allows Apple to release information
about the hardware while protecting the licensing under which that
knowledge is distributed.  The same DMCA prohibits"clean room" reverse
engineering, although I'm not sure if this clause has been challenged in
court yet.  Usually the threat is sufficient enough to dry up resources.

You're advocating a position that you are not offering legal
means to defend.  Ask Wasabi Systems' legal department if they
are comfortable with your position and how you obtain information that
you then incorporate into a product they offer in competition with Red
Hat, and also whether they are willing to go to court with your
position.

Then ask one of your clients' legal department the same thing.

tim