From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 7 03:11:27 2010 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 195FD1065670 for ; Thu, 7 Oct 2010 03:11:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3AE48FC15 for ; Thu, 7 Oct 2010 03:11:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P3gtB-0005aZ-Ip for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 05:11:25 +0200 Received: from pool-173-79-85-36.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([173.79.85.36]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 05:11:25 +0200 Received: from nightrecon by pool-173-79-85-36.washdc.fios.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 05:11:25 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: Michael Powell Followup-To: gmane.os.freebsd.questions Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:15:52 -0400 Lines: 14 Message-ID: References: <86fwwjyurd.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <20101006215345.1a57c45c@gumby.homeunix.com> <86pqvnxbre.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <20101006174309.407e4216@scorpio> <86d3rnxadh.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-173-79-85-36.washdc.fios.verizon.net Subject: Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core 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: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 03:11:27 -0000 Michael Powell wrote: [snip] export restrictions have to do with acpi? Is > acpi a copyrighted, patented, or trademark otherwise owned by some entity? > Quite possibly so as it is in contrib. I just have no idea who might "own" > it. Or how it would fall afoul of crypto export restrictions. > > Looking forward to enlightenment. :-) > Oh - I see now, it is "owned" by Intel. -Mike