From: Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com>
To: Kernel Newbies <kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org>
Subject: Re: Questions about my idea (for gsoc)
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 16:51:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAO1P-kC4v6FZAJFmUEMnZD+rpFh2Bo_kKL9azSCoEL5oRNcfXw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26523.1554148180@turing-police>
On 4/1/19, Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Apr 2019 18:19:12 +0200, Andrea Laisa said:
>
>> My idea is to write a Linux driver for a proprietary network protocol
>> used by the outdoor Gemtek antennas(which are essentially a LTE modem)
>
> This may be a legal mine field. To create a *usable* Linux driver, you'll
> need
> to have one that's free of licensing restrictions. If Gemtek claims one or
> more patents on the protocol, you may be unable to implement the protocol
> without dealing with the licensing issues.
>
> And I'm reasonably sure that Gemtek won't be too interested in helping you
> write the driver, because its existence would cut into their sales of access
> points.
I was thinking possibly pretty much the same thing. The
hcfmodem/hsfmodem dialup modem family is what comes to mind. I'm
online right this second k/t Puppy Linux. If it wasn't for their old
Wary5.5, I'd probably still be offline fighting trying to get
something working... and that's after YEARS of experience attempting
exactly that. :)
Yes, I know... Maybe Gemtek would say, "SURE, we'll help you (take
money out of our pockets)." If they don't, it could possibly just
evolve into another hsfmodem kind of deal. That has always sounded
like it generated a lot of static from both sides, the users and the
proprietary owners, with the Developers out there in the middle.
Things have FINALLY lightened up these many years later. I assume
that's likely only because there are comparatively few of us on dialup
now, e.g. my local hometown provider occasionally hints that mine
might be *almost* the only dialup account they serve. They once
confessed that "my" server gets completely forgotten while it sits off
in a corner somewhere. :)
In a way, this Gemtek thing sounds like there might be a WHOLE lot
more money at stake than there was with old $10, $20, even $50 dialup
modems. That would certainly amplify any potentially anticipated
opposition in a case like this.
Cindy :)
--
* runs with birdseed *
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-01 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-01 16:19 Questions about my idea (for gsoc) Andrea Laisa
2019-04-01 17:16 ` Greg KH
[not found] ` <4d84791d-c866-da7c-7036-27b217a8062b@studenti.unimi.it>
2019-04-01 18:37 ` Andrea Laisa
2019-04-01 18:53 ` Bharath Vedartham
2019-04-01 19:43 ` Andrea Laisa
2019-04-01 19:49 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-04-01 20:51 ` Cindy-Sue Causey [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAO1P-kC4v6FZAJFmUEMnZD+rpFh2Bo_kKL9azSCoEL5oRNcfXw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=butterflybytes@gmail.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).