9 ms·
Why would software that lets me use hardware that I own, installed in my machine, be subject to a cease and desist?
by beeboobaa 3y ago
Why would software that lets me use hardware that I own, installed in my machine, be subject to a cease and desist?
- varelse 3y ago[dead]
- madsbuch 3y agobecause of the way the software you use, use other software that is licensed. Just like it is not legal to do copyright infringement indifferent to how much you own the hardware you do it on.
- zamalek 3y agoThis is a LD_LIBRARY_PATH emulator. No CUDA installation required.
- chpatrick 3y agoYou probably still want to use things like cublas if you want to run existing CUDA software.
- Const-me 3y agoI would want an equivalent of cublas optimized for my specific GPU model and implementing the same API. AFAIK cublas and other first-party libraries are hand-optimized by nVidia for different generations of their hardware, with dynamic dispatch in runtime for optimal performance. Pretty sure none of these versions would run optimally on AMD GPUs because ideally AMD GPUs run 64 threads / wavefront, nVidia GPUs run 32 threads / wavefront.
- beeboobaa 3y ago> Just like it is not legal to do copyright infringement indifferent to how much you own the hardware you do it on. It is legal for me to make a copy of any copyright protected media using hardware that I own. It is not legal for me to share this copy with others. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuiskopie https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuiskopie
- indrora 3y agoEmulator developers should incorporate in the Netherlands, it seems.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago> Just like it is not legal to do copyright infringement indifferent to how much you own the hardware you do it on. Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7166769136737271634 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=716676913673727... > The object code of a program may be copyrighted as expression, 17 U.S.C. § 102(a), but it also contains ideas and performs functions that are not entitled to copyright protection. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(b). > Object code cannot, however, be read by humans. > The unprotected ideas and functions of the code therefore are frequently undiscoverable in the absence of investigation and translation that may require copying the copyrighted material. > We conclude that, under the facts of this case and our precedent, Connectix's intermediate copying and use of Sony's copyrighted BIOS was a fair use for the purpose of gaining access to the unprotected elements of Sony's software.
- szundi 3y agoWelcome the the US when you can patent protocols and apis. (Afaik) In EU you could have done it but because of US risks they killed it anyway.
- bee_rider 3y agoIf it is totally fine in the EU, why not just host it there? Spain (or whoever) could start up a cottage industry of ignore-local-ip-law-as-a-service. The Uber of IP law.
- croes 3y agoBecause the US enforce their rules on world wide. That's not legal but who's gonna stop them.
- anthk 3y agoNo, the US can't. Also, Wine does the same since forever for DOS binaries. Or NetBSD with compat_* libreries for tons of Unixlike OSes.
- calgoo 3y agoThe US uses trade agreements to enforce the rule in the EU. Spain used to be quite lenient with copyright, but the US threatened to block all sales to Spain of movies and music. Then a minister basically implemented new restrictions a week before their term was up.
- anthk 3y agoIt's still lenient. You can still legally share movies and music without profit.
- croes 3y agoTry selling cuban goods in Europe to another European citizens in Europe and let him pay with PayPal (Europe) S. à r.l. et Cie, S.C.A.