- cross-posted to:
- linux_gaming@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- linux_gaming@lemmy.ml
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/12544593
Alex Deucher:
The HDMI Forum has rejected our proposal unfortunately. At this time an open source HDMI 2.1 implementation is not possible without running afoul of the HDMI Forum requirements.
They don’t need to RE it; they have access to the full spec and everything for their Windows drivers anyways. They’d open themselves up for litigation if they implemented this behind the forum’s back though and that’s something AMD (understandably) simply won’t do.
They could hire dedicated teams that don’t have access to the full spec to RE it and it should be above board, as long as it’s done right ofc.
No, they can’t. AMD is a member of the HDMI forum, which means they’re contractually obligated to follow the forum’s rules. In exchange, they get voting rights on decisions like this one, the right to propose changes to the HDMI standards, technical details that are protected by NDAs, etc. They wouldn’t throw that all away and open themselves up to a lawsuit just for their OSS drivers.
Is there a specific contractual obligation stating that they can’t hire teams whom have no access to NDA protected specs to RE HDMI products through the usual legal means? If not, then they should be well within their legal rights, tho it’d be worth consulting a lawyer first. Now, would it damage their relationship with the HDMI people? maybe, likely.
Their contacts are most likely protected by NDAs, but they’re also written by lawyers who know how to close loopholes. There’s no way a SIG like the HDMI forum would allow members to release compatible products without following the rules.
Even if it isn’t covered by the contract, the other members could hold a vote to remove AMD from the forum.