| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers?Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers?Posted Sep 6, 2007 15:35 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104)In reply to: Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers? by shapr Parent article: RF hacking with GNU Radio I don't know what card you have, but chances are it was certified as a Part 15 device, not as an SDR. In any case, legality of selling something, legality of purchasing something and legality of using something are different things. And the copyright issue is completely separate from the FCC licensing.
(Log in to post comments)
Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers? Posted Sep 6, 2007 16:58 UTC (Thu) by shapr (subscriber, #9077) [Link] So, if vendors selling wifi cards licensed them as SDR, then they could be used for both wifi, SDR, and could have open source drivers?
Why don't they do that?
Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers? Posted Sep 6, 2007 18:59 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] I believe SDR certification takes more time and money. As for the open source drivers, I think chipset vendors just being too risk averse, and SDR certification won't change that.
Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers? Posted Sep 7, 2007 22:49 UTC (Fri) by shapr (subscriber, #9077) [Link] What's the risk?
Why is the USRP FCC-legal, but wifi cards have closed source drivers? Posted Sep 8, 2007 14:30 UTC (Sat) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] The risk is that FCC or another regulatory agency would consider the device non-compliant if there are drivers that make it easy to use the device beyond the allowed frequencies and power limits, especially if the device maker contributed any code or documentation to the driver.
|
|
||||||||||||