If I understand it correctly, you can do that, but you cannot call it "HDMI compliant" or otherwise use the HDMI trademark.
So a different term would be needed (like "WLAN" or "BT" is used by non-members)
https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/5o67z...
Maybe that's what you already meant by "calling it different than".
High Definition Make It Yourself
HDMIY would most probably not fly, HDIY would probably.
not yet a lawyer, though.
edit: I'm also fairly certain that the HDMI forum would fight HDIY tooth and nail, so whoever goes public with that absolutely needs deep pockets.
but it really depends on how much attention you get
gotta keep an eye on the nintendo emulator lawsuit.... the war on general purpose computation carries on
Though even if they didn't they wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on if they sued.
Like any big company, they have guidelines outlining permitted use. Apple’s page (https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelines...) says:
“2. Compatibility: Developers may use Apple, Macintosh, iMac, or any other Apple word mark (but not the Apple Logo or other Apple-owned graphic symbol/logo) in a referential phrase on packaging or promotional/advertising materials to describe that the third party product is compatible with the referenced Apple product or technology, provided they comply with the following requirements.
a. The Apple word mark is not part of the product name.
b. The Apple word mark is used in a referential phrase such as “runs on,” “for use with,” “for,” or “compatible with.”
c. The Apple word mark appears less prominent than the product name.
d. The product is in fact compatible with, or otherwise works with, the referenced Apple product.
e. The reference to Apple does not create a sense of endorsement, sponsorship, or false association with Apple or Apple products or services.
f. The use does not show Apple or its products in a false or derogatory light.”
Going back to the original topic, if somebody is trying to release open source drivers for HDMI (or a protocol compatible with HDMI), obviously trademark infringement is a possibility since both are in the exact same business. So even if you're right (which I don't think so), your argument doesn't apply.
> Select brands and logos are offered license free and intended to be used widely throughout the Wi-Fi ecosystem by Wi-Fi Alliance members, non-members, industry partners, media, and analysts to describe products, technology, network deployments, and operating system support.
It sounds to me like anyone could use the trademark "Wi-Fi", since it's listed in the freely available ones.
Yes, to describe Wi-Fi as defined by the Wi-Fi Alliance, not to describe anything the Alliance does NOT consider compliant.
This poses an interesting question, maybe some of the hobby-lawyers on HN like to chime in and post heir theories :o)
Let's assume they print that Logo on their box, call it HDMI in their Windows drivers, but don't do so in their Linux drivers, while it's still a spec-compliant implementation. Would that pose a potential legal problem, and if so why?
If it's the fact that they have access to the official HDMI 2.1 spec, implemented that, but call it something else, which I could imagine they forbid in some contract, would things change if some random hacker with too much time on their hands reversed the protocol by sniffing it, implementing it for the AMD driver (again without calling it HDMI)?
Too bad the HDMI forum doesn't feature an email address on their home page, I'd have loved to tell them what I think of them.
They actually do at the bottom of [1].
Sincerely, Luke Stanley"
At best a random hacker will reverse engineer the binary driver enough to make something work in some capacity.
Try legal aspects of reverse engineering a binary driver. That's more realistic.
Reverse engineering of binaries is pretty much a solved problem from the legal standpoint.
If you know roughly what you are looking for, you can set triggers to start sampling when the event you care about starts, that's more than enough to be able to reverse engineer even the most intensive of the existing HDMI spec.
Given that a lot of these graphics cards cost substantially more than 300usd, it's not unreasonable to expect a logic analyzer capable of digesting HDMI to be within their price range.
It's not just that, it's about playing nice so they can have access to the next version of the spec if one comes along.
>Video Out port: DVI-D signal in 640х480 px, 60 Hz. The port supports a well-known video standard that we can't name due to copyright limitations The first letter is H, and the last one is I.
https://blog.flipper.net/introducing-video-game-module-power...
Of course, they don't do HDMI 2.1 or anything advanced like that, but I guess the reason for the name not appearing anywhere is the same as you're discussing here.
Not nice. Neither worms, nor HDCP forum.
On a serious note, I don't believe that these technologies prevent a determined person from copying anything. However, I'd rather have all the features on board rather than not being able to use them when required.