From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Dec 19 14: 5:13 2000 From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 19 14:05:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from guardian.sftw.com (guardian.sftw.com [209.157.37.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9210937B400 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:05:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from yoda.sftw.com (yoda.sftw.com [209.157.37.211]) by guardian.sftw.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBJM58q29709; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:05:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nsayer@sftw.com) Received: from sftw.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yoda.sftw.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBJM56l26377; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:05:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nsayer@sftw.com) Sender: nsayer@sftw.com Message-ID: <3A3FDB92.1D3CB177@sftw.com> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:05:06 -0800 From: Nick Sayer Reply-To: nsayer@kfu.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Dillon Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Open Hardware Initiative (was Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT) References: <000101c069fc$c0e3bf00$f43084ce@max.home.org> <200012192136.eBJLa9j59657@earth.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matt Dillon wrote: > > Yes, it's a pretty sad state of affairs. What annoys me the most is > that companies actually believe they are protecting something when > they don't make their device driver source or hardware documentation > available. It has been well proven for years that the most withholding > accomplishes for the vast majority of these device drivers is a slight > delay--- perhaps a week or two, before competitors figure out what > they've done. Pirates don't care... they want the binaries anyway, > they aren't programmers. And the open-source community has always > strictly adhered to copyright and license restrictions. So all these > companies are doing is making life harder for themselves and for > their products. Unnecessarily. The XFree folks have some godaweful > stories about the crap they've had to wade through to get video > manufacturers on-board. Some video manufacturers have figured it out, > a lot haven't. > [...] I think the time is right to reward companies that "get it". I propose that the way to do this is to create an "open hardware" trademark that can be used for marketing by companies that sell hardware for which they either provide sufficient documentation that a fully featured device driver can be written without reverse engineering, or for which they provide at least one open-source driver. The idea is to do for friendly hardware vendors what the "OSI certified" mark (www.opensource.org) does for open-source software. I wrote ESR about this, since it's something that would have fit in well with OSI's mission, but he declined to take it up, as OSI was fully committed. He did mention, however, that an OSI board member had tried this in the past, but suggested that perhaps now the time is right. I invite discussion on what the OHI (Open Hardware Initiative) requirements should be and how best to proceed. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message