[Arm-netbook] Heads up, RISC-V doing a world tour

[David Niklas]

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:59:36 +0000
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net> wrote:

> ---
> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 7:54 PM David Niklas <doark at mail.com> wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > Or at least it looks like that:
> > https://sifivetechsymposium.com/
> >
> > Might be interesting to attend (I can't).
> > Especially to ask what to do about the companies that are already
> > breaking the license of RISC-V.
>
>  that's easy to answer: whilst companies *should* obtain an "official"
> JEDEC designation which should go into the mvendor id field of the
> hardware, as long as they do not claim it is "RISC-V" they are ok
> (Trademark Law).
>
>  in addition, if they make *modifications* to the instruction set,
> that's ok too, as long as, again, they do not claim it is "RISC-V".
>

But, but, it is RISC-V HW... If I don't call the Linux kernel a "Linux
kernel" does that mean I don't have to offer the sources plus my
proprietary extensions to anyone who buys it?


>  this is absolutely fine for say a proprietary secret company
> developing a proprietary secret product where the firmware will never,
> under any circumstances, see the light of day.  examples include
> Trinamic's excellent new Stepper Motor Controller ICs, where the
> firmware is likely to be actually in ROM, on-chip.

That's understandable.

>  where the RISC-V Foundation's half-cocked approach becomes seriously
> problematic is as follows:
>
>  * when a Commercial Project needs to release PUBLIC modifications
> (custom extensions) which *HAVE* to make their way into general
> wide-spread use
>
>  * when a Libre Commercial Project needs to DEVELOP public
> modifications (custom extensions) because the RISC-V Foundation forces
> all and any development of modifications to go through an official
> "ratification process".

Yuck.

> there *is* no room for Libre *COMMERCIAL* products to interact with
> RISC-V Foundation members because all RISC-V Foundation members are
> forced to sign an agreement (for cross-licensing and patent protection
> purposes).
>
> this is clearly violating FRAND terms of Trademark Law, by being
> "Discriminatory" against Libre Commercial products.
>
> it is quite clear that the RISC-V Founders never envisaged a scenario
> where Libre *COMMERCIAL* products would ever be successful.

What? Why no interaction? Does that mean you're currently developing the
GPU in the RSIC-V core without any contact with the RISC-V Foundation?
That's double talk, "We'll open source the core but no one can talk to the
OSS community about it."

I sincerely hope I'm misreading this,
David