anaerin at gmail.com
Thu Apr 7 20:24:56 UTC 2005
On Apr 7, 2005 2:17 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 01:17:03PM -0600, Robert Johnston wrote:
> > On Apr 7, 2005 1:13 PM, Gabe Rubin <gaberubin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > As others have said, it is not just the money that is an issue. They
> > > have no desire to issue a license to open source projects as this
> > > would compromise the very encryption (whether it would or not is
> > > debatable, but they certainly would believe it would).
> > >
> > > Even if $100,000 were a drop in the bucket (and I wish I was in that
> > > position), that is not the major stumbling block. They WILL NOT issue
> > > a license to myth type projects.
> > Care to define a "Myth-Type Product"?
> Yes, let's please clarify what we're discussing.
> What *I* am discussing, and want to see either Hauppauge or Plextor
> build, is a tuner card similar to the ones we see now, but which can
> tune QAM digital cable, and using a CableCard plugged into it, decrpyt
> the incoming video, and pass it on digitally to the PC, the way the
> AirPC cards and the like do.
> It wouldn't by any means be a "MythTV" product, or an open source
> product, or anything else. It would merely be a product which *we*
> *could* make use of, without having to be Microsoft, and sell
> closed-source software which would enforce all kinds of
> fair-use-denying garbage we're not interested in.
> But make no mistake: it would be a normal commercial product, just like
> current-day tuners are: it would will pretty much exactly the same role.
Amen, brother! Vivé la résistance!
More information about the mythtv-users