Re: Winmodem support, some performance tradeoff estimates

Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH (allbery@kf8nh.apk.net)
Sun, 16 Aug 1998 18:20:07 -0300


In message <199808162107.OAA30723@adam.yggdrasil.com>, "Adam J. Richter"
writes
:
+-----
| Alan Cox wrote:
| >The real issue though appears to be entirely patents and chip documentation.
|
| I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. However, I believe
| that in the United States, the Uniform Commercial Code, as adopted
| by all 50 states, requires all products sold to include all of the
| necessary include patent permissions to use the product for its
| advertised purpose unless otherwise stated.
+--->8

Sure --- in the license for the driver software that comes weith it. If you
don't use that, though, you're on your own.

BTW, in re: cycles needed for the winmodem drivers --- somehow, the term
"real-time" keeps occurring to me. Certainly it can be done, but will we
end up slowing down the rest of the system?

(And again: I haven't seen a winmodem that it supported by NT.)

As for whether the patents are valid: can we afford to fight them in court?
That's how it works in the U.S.

-- 
brandon s. allbery	[os/2][linux][solaris][japh]	 allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator	     [WAY too many hats]	   allbery@ece.cmu.edu
electrical and computer engineering
carnegie mellon university			   (bsa@kf8nh is still valid.)

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html