Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 179 posts

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#91

Post by j1elo »

marklar423 wrote: post #20
SomeHacker44 wrote: post #9

IANAL, but I don't see how this can be enforced (in the US) given the legal history of emulation. This is effectively just emulation. c.f., https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Licensing

I think they're trying to do the trick where they don't ban the emulation per se, but they make it a violation of the license to disassemble the code to understand how it works. Then they go after emulating projects for copyright infringement, since they must have violated copyright to get a compatible version running. It's a dirty trick IMO, but it has seen some mixed success.

I wonder how it's not a trivial workaround to have a separate, anonymous project with the sole scope of disassembling the code (and thus violating the license), while acting as knowledge source for emulators.

This way, emulators wouldn't be violating any license, just using technical details learned from third party sources. The anonymous project itself would be attacked by Nvidia, and in case this succeeded, replicas of the repo would probably pop up quickly and easily. But good luck having a chinese Gitee repo closed for american copyright infringement!

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#92

Post by Zetobal »

mvdtnz wrote: post #68
dotnet00 wrote: post #34

This just seems to be a poorly researched knee-jerk article written based on a single off-hand tweet from 2 weeks ago, citing a clause that has been around for years, and thus obviously is not in response to something talked about 3 weeks ago. As an example, the license here has the exact phrase, on a file last changed 2 years ago: https://github.com/NVIDIA/spark-rapids-container/blob/dev/NO... The EULA here, listed…

I think you're focused too much on when this clause was added. Most of us are not so concerned with the chronology.

[flagged]

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#93

Post by nottorp »

vidarh wrote: post #86
nottorp wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh interesting. The last piece of news I read was probably the decision before that, that ruled in Oracle's favour. Blame Covid. So is it final, or they can still drag it on? From wikipedia: "Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion. Breyer's opinion began with the assumption that the APIs may be copyrightable , and thus proceeded with a review of the four factors that contributed to fair use:" That doesn't…

It's fairly typical that the court wanted to make the narrowest decision possible. By conclusion that *even under the assumption they _may_ copyrightable, Google didn't violate copyright they saved themselves the hassle of deciding on the copyright issue.

IANAL. So basically the assumption language means there is no rule either that APIs are copyrightable or not, yet...

Could have been worse i guess.

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#94

Post by [deleted] »

byteknight wrote: post #72
dotnet00 wrote: post #34

This just seems to be a poorly researched knee-jerk article written based on a single off-hand tweet from 2 weeks ago, citing a clause that has been around for years, and thus obviously is not in response to something talked about 3 weeks ago. As an example, the license here has the exact phrase, on a file last changed 2 years ago: https://github.com/NVIDIA/spark-rapids-container/blob/dev/NO... The EULA here, listed…

Agreed that that may be deceptive, but the underlying issue remains. It is prohibited.

[deleted]

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#95

Post by JonChesterfield »

Translating machine code between architectures is a dubious proposal in the first place. Taking compiled cuda shaders, disassembling them and recreating shaders for some other architecture from the pieces really should be more effort than compiling the source directly to that other architecture.

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#96

Post by dontupvoteme »

marklar423 wrote: post #20
SomeHacker44 wrote: post #9

IANAL, but I don't see how this can be enforced (in the US) given the legal history of emulation. This is effectively just emulation. c.f., https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Licensing

I think they're trying to do the trick where they don't ban the emulation per se, but they make it a violation of the license to disassemble the code to understand how it works. Then they go after emulating projects for copyright infringement, since they must have violated copyright to get a compatible version running. It's a dirty trick IMO, but it has seen some mixed success.

So what happens when someone in e.g. China or Russia releases something who they can't practically prosecute, can everyone else then use it?

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#97

Post by brookst »

ActionHank wrote: post #38
marklar423 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're trying to do the trick where they don't ban the emulation per se, but they make it a violation of the license to disassemble the code to understand how it works. Then they go after emulating projects for copyright infringement, since they must have violated copyright to get a compatible version running. It's a dirty trick IMO, but it has seen some mixed success.

So they just put up their hand and said they also want to give the EU money?

At this point with the level of demand they have, it might be easier and cheaper to just not do business in the EU.

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#98

Post by salawat »

Zetobal wrote: post #92
mvdtnz wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're focused too much on when this clause was added. Most of us are not so concerned with the chronology.

[flagged]

More like " I refuse to be held hostage by your delusional business model" more like.

I bought two GTX 970's, and a GTX 1030.

Then I did the research on how they actually worked and the nefarious things the company got up to in order to spoliate open source drivers. The minute they switched to secritful Falcon units, is when any pretense of good faith was thrown out the door. They cheated me out of 3 graphics cards worth of functionality.

I can accept "not yet implemented". I will not accept "predatory board forces you to do business with me forever". No mad conception of IP justifies that.

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#99

Post by amelius »

hagbard_c wrote: post #14

Nvidia can go bite my shiny metal ass as far as I'm concerned. Hey, European Commission, once you're done taking 0.5% of the fruit factory's yearly income for their gate keeping tendencies here's another juicy company for you to investigate.

It would be great if nVidia would charge Apple 30% of their revenue for the use of CUDA.

Re: Nvidia bans using translation layers for CUDA software to run on other chips

#100

Post by salawat »

samus wrote: post #40
marklar423 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're trying to do the trick where they don't ban the emulation per se, but they make it a violation of the license to disassemble the code to understand how it works. Then they go after emulating projects for copyright infringement, since they must have violated copyright to get a compatible version running. It's a dirty trick IMO, but it has seen some mixed success.

Clean-room reverse engineering is specifically not forbidden, and has been successfully done in the past to develop the Nouveau driver. Disassembling Nvidia's binaries is plausibly forbidden, but it would be very surprising if they could extend that ban on binaries produced by their compiler. However, the trademark could be used to attack statements about the emulation layer. I see parallels to Google vs. Oracle

Note Nouveau is dead in the water due to DMCA 1201, plus Nvidia's use of secrutful FALCON units to cryptographically verify firmware signatures.
Post reply on HN