←back to thread

Remotely Compromising Android and iOS via a bug in Broadcom's WI-FI Chipsets

(blog.exodusintel.com)
387 points pedro84 | 1 comments | 26 Jul 17 19:51 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
thomastjeffery ◴[26 Jul 17 23:00 UTC] No.14861166[source]▶
Why does Broadcom insist on proprietary drivers?

How could it possibly be detrimental for Broadcom to have free software drivers?

This article is a poignant example that it is detrimental for them to continue to keep their drivers proprietary.

replies(6): >>14861174 #>>14861519 #>>14862058 #>>14863796 #>>14867469 #>>14871284 #
Scramblejams ◴[27 Jul 17 00:02 UTC] No.14861519[source]▶
One theory I've seen bandied about related to GPU drivers is that it's harder for your competitors to notice you're infringing on their patents if you don't ship your source code.
replies(1): >>14861779 #
tedunangst ◴[27 Jul 17 00:58 UTC] No.14861779[source]▶
This seems unlikely. (Or maybe that's the reason given, but it seems implausible to be true.) Competitors have more than enough know how to determine if you're infringing a patent, source or no source.
replies(3): >>14861968 #>>14862322 #>>14863651 #
1. kurthr ◴[27 Jul 17 02:52 UTC] No.14862322[source]▶
The US legal system has discovery for patent cases. You can sue and then subpoena their code base to confirm whether they are in violation before going to court (and really racking up the fees). Since these are US companies I think that it's more likely fear that others would see the horrible hacks or clever trade secrets.

In other countries (most of Asia), where there is no discivery, it's almost impossible to prove hardware or software patent violations so your case is kicked out of court immediately, even if your patent claims are valid and their product reads into your claims. That's why most patent suits end up in the US or Europe (or in the even faster ITC import injunction).