This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?
- From: "J.C. Pizarro" <jcpiza at gmail dot com>
- To: "Robert Dewar" <dewar at adacore dot com>, GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:14:38 +0100
- Subject: Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?
- References: <email@example.com> <47D97B99.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 2008/3/13, Robert Dewar <email@example.com> wrote:
> J.C. Pizarro wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:44:29 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >> The engineers currently are not listed in the FSF copyrights
> >> assignment file.
> >> David
> > Why they've to be listed in FSF copyrights assignment file?
> > Intel released original x86 hardware.
> > AMD released original x86-64 hardware.
> > Intel cloned AMD's x86-64 hardware calling it x64.
> > AMD cloned Intel's x86 hardware doing it compatible.
> > The software on hardware needs the hexadecimal specification
> > of the hardware for the working of this pair software-hardware.
> > It's the ASM description of the hardware.
> > Otherwise, this pair won't work without knowledge of the hardware.
> > The problem is when it will start that the hardware company want
> > not to transfer its copyrights of hardware documents to software
> > organization because the hardware company wants to live of the
> > businesses of licenses and copyrightes, and of the lawyers
> > against any software organization who didn't dealed with it.
> > I don't understand how it's made the U.S. law. I'm paranoid in it.
> > I did read IBM suitcases in around 198x about the separation of
> > hardware-software. Wintel cases too.
> > J.C.Pizarro
> This is complete nonsense, I suggest you do a bit
> of homework before sending messages to this list,
> which are entirely off topic anyway.
$ grep -iR "intel\.com" . | sed 's/^[^<]*<\([^>]*\)>.*$/\1/g' | sort -u
Are they listed in FSF copyrights assignment file?