From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:18:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:18:52 -0500 Received: from 5-116.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.163.116]:56960 "EHLO 5-116.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:18:51 -0500 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 20:27:07 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Richard Stallman cc: mark@mark.mielke.cc, "" , "" , "" , "" Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20030102013736.GA2708@gnuppy.monkey.org> <20030102055859.GA3991@gnuppy.monkey.org> <20030102061430.GA23276@mark.mielke.cc> X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Richard Stallman wrote: > If "have faith in freedom" means to assume it will take care of > itself, that is always bad advice. Agreed. > One way we can defend our freedom is by refusing to buy the hardware > that needs non-free drivers. To make this pressure effective, Absolutely agreed, this way we might even give nvidia an actual reason to open up their driver. Infinitely better than whining about nvidia doing something they have all right to do... regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://guru.conectiva.com/ Current spamtrap: october@surriel.com