From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 4 02:12:50 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B251065673 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 02:12:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com) Received: from mail.r-bonomi.com (mx-out.r-bonomi.com [204.87.227.120]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5BA8FC16 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 02:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from bonomi@localhost) by mail.r-bonomi.com (8.14.4/rdb1) id q042FnSX013823 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:15:49 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:15:49 -0600 (CST) From: Robert Bonomi Message-Id: <201201040215.q042FnSX013823@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Realtek RTL8191SEvB Linux driver? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 02:12:50 -0000 Daniel Feenberg wrote: > > Don't ndis(4) ndiscvt and ndisgen(8) essentially accomplish what the OP > is requesting? See the handbook section 12.8.1.1: > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/config-network-setup.html > > or the man page for ndiscvt: > > http://www.gsp.com/cgi-bin/man.cgi?section=8&topic=ndiscvt > > > While doing the conversion looks a bit beyond what we would expect of an > end-user, it does seem to offer a path for using hardware whose > manufacturer does not support FreeBSD. Is there anything beyond licensing > issues preventing such drivers from being included in the distribution, or > made downloadable in FreeBSD form? Yeah, there _is_, unfortunately. There is this 'insignficant' matter known as "copyright law". Vendor-created device-drivers for Windows _are_ copyrighted works. the terms of the license give permission for redisribution of those works, in *UNMODIFIED* form. Unfortunately, when you have something that digs into that work, extracts the logic, and wraps it in an interface for a different system, that is what is called "creating a derivative work". If you have been granted the right to redistribute the 'original', that right does -not- extend to a 'derivative work'. You have to have *separate* permission from the copyright owner for a derivative work. Distributing a 'tool' that takes the 'original' and automatically creates the 'derivative work' for someone is *also* proscribed, because the primary use of that tool is to create infringing works. A 'manual' tool is a subtly, but importantly, different thing. It requires the operator to initiat the overt acts. thus, as as long as there are reasonable legitimate uses, the sfoftware itself is safe.