This is one of those moments where I almost harmed myself hitting my head on a brick wall. This is a line posted by Nvidia's #BrianBurke . The person has a Twitter account and a listed Nvidia email, but no actual G+ account. Let me just run the quote here in bold:
Demanding source code access to all our cool technology is an attempt to deflect their performance issues. Giving away your IP, your source code, is uncommon for anyone in the industry, including middleware providers and game developers. Most of the time we optimize games based on binary builds, not source code.
There is no way to get around this. Mr. Burke does not actually understand Open-Source licences. Opening up the source code to a compiled application, API, library, utility, or other programmable aspect of a software stack; does not, I repeat DOES NOT, in any way, also constitute the libre-distribution of the Intellectual Property attached to that source code. There are any number of open-source software stacks that are compatible with proprietorially licensed and patent-encumbered technologies.
In the same manner; opening up the source-code for review does not also automatically grant the rights to recompile the source-code and re-distribute. Licenses exist which enable a source-code to be made available while retaining the exclusive rights to commercial or non-commercial uses. Case in point would be the project.
It also is, quite frankly, excessively common in the computing industry to release software under an Open-Source licence.
It is far less common now for vendors to still hide active software behind proprietary licenses.
Mr. Burke's statements now begs the following direct question: Just where exactly did Nvidia's Brian Burke get his information on Open Source licences? At first glance I'd be tempted to drop a one-liner suggesting Mr. Burke used an old Steve Ballmer directed Microsoft "Get the Facts" brochure picked up at a WinHec.
It is quite obvious that Mr. Burke did not talk to anybody at either the #FreeSoftwareFoundation , or the , much less even glance through 's #FreeSoftwareGuidelines which in turn formed the basis for the #OpenSourceDefinition . Nor does it appear that Mr. Burke took anytime to talk to anybody within or #DigiaPLC ; much less #KDE developers or ; all who have experience in managing or dealing with mixed-licensing applications that have proprietary roots with open-sourced code bases.
Given this sheer level of fundamental misunderstanding of how open-source licenses actually work; I am forced to ask the question over whether or Nvidia actually does understand the industries that they are participating in. If the statement from Mr. Burke is taken at face value, the answer is a clear no.
What Mr. Burke claims is uncommon, is not. It is common, if not demanded from all vendors. What Mr. Burke claims Open-Source licenses do, they do not; or more precisely can be written in way so they do not function to those ends.
If Mr. Burke was going out of his way to make Nvidia look like a laughing stock and fully explain exactly why I keep getting left off the journalist briefings... on that end... he did succeed.