|
|
|
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, May 31 2013 @ 08:28 AM EDT |
That's the kind of thing that happens when lawyers insert
themselves into
the middle of a technical discussion among
computer programmers. I've seen it
time and time again.
Thats how we end up with legal concepts like "software
makes
a new machine" out of a general purpose computer.
I am a software
developer, and I resent lawyers
inserting themselves into the discussion. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 31 2013 @ 08:46 AM EDT |
Network card provides write "device drivers", not applications. And it's
applications, not device drivers, that use the BSD sockets API.
I challenge you to show me one network card provider who has
just one driver
that exposes a BSD API and works on 'almost all operating
systems'
So you are basically asking for an example of an orange
that contains lemon pips.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Nearly...... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 31 2013 @ 08:52 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Wol on Friday, May 31 2013 @ 08:47 AM EDT |
Given that your grasp of logic and copyright is pretty shaky, why should we
believe you?
Quoting from the original post we have
"
"Because the BSD sockets API is free of copyright,"
It is not.
The BSD sockets source code and TCP/IP library is opyrighted and licensed under
a BSD license.
"
Please explain to me the link between the first two sentences and the third
(never mind the fact that the first sentence is correct therefore the second
must be wrong).
Hint - an api and source code are two completely different things - a statement
about one cannot be used to reason about the other ...
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
