GPL RTG driver information available

[grond]

Problem is: This doesn't change a thing concerning the requirement to license the P96 API. You're confusing the copyright on the code with the legal constraint to license the API for new drivers.

Bull%&$#?@!%&$#?@!%&$#?@!%&$#?@!. You can't protect an API. What kind of intellectual property right should that be? Copyright, patent, utility model, trademark? None apply. Don't start your stuff about morals again.

Writing picasso drivers without license and DDK is perfectly legal and another thousand comments of yours stating the opposite won't change the facts.

[grond]

Linde, cloning an entire API is a case of anti competitive behaviour. There is no competition here and no API has been cloned. A driver was written making use of an undocumented API, that's all. Clearly unrelated.

[grond]

I think the idea that somebody may have disassembled his older Picasso-to-become-CGFX for creating the picasso we know is interesting, too. It was already indicated that the latter  is not free from other people's "contributions"...

[grond]

I didn't say anything was proven, was I? But the idea is interesting and should be checked before any rights are transferred or tried to be enforced.

[grond]

OlafS3: it's interesting because it is another coffin nail for the attempt to monopolise an important part of the RTG market. I wouldn't spend any money for some dubious rights in some software that was hacked together from various sources.

[grond]

there was a hefty discussion on a1k, which result may be that the community will be offered to open source p96 for a certain price

As you, I wouldn't put my hopes on it and certainly not stop a project because of it. Right now there is some momentum which should be used before it's lost.