From: muta...@gmail.com   
      
   On Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC+8, Dan Cross wrote:   
      
   > >Again - copyright covers a work of art. Not an    
   > >architectural concept. Patents could cover the later.    
   > >But 20 years have passed.   
      
   > You should probably take a law course focusing on intellectual    
   > property before assuming that.   
      
   I'm not "assuming" anything. It's my understanding.   
      
   At the end of the day, even a judgement from every judge   
   on the planet is insufficient evidence, because a new   
   judge can appear, or an existing judge can change his mind.   
      
   > >So we have a public domain CPU available. In my    
   > >understanding of the law, the MIPS company can't    
   > >stop me taking that VHDL to a manufacturer and    
   > >getting chips produced, and selling them.   
      
   > You should really take a couple of law courses, or better yet    
   > consult with a qualified attorney, before making assumptions    
   > here, _particularly_ regarding MIPS.   
      
   Or I can save my money and see if you can present the   
   opinion of a qualified attorney and/or court judgements.   
      
   Even if you do do that, that's just one lawyer and judge's   
   opinion.   
      
   I'll look at the specific law they are citing in a specific   
   country to see what they're talking about.   
      
   In addition, I found this:   
      
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson   
      
   In 2007, a deal was reached by MIPS Technologies and ICT. STMicroelectronics   
   bought a MIPS license for Loongson, and thus the processor can be promoted as   
   MIPS-based or MIPS-compatible instead of MIPS-like.   
      
   So it appears that this bridge has already been crossed,   
   and you just need to market as MIPS-like and they can't   
   do anything about it.   
      
   I don't even need to go that far.   
      
   I'm happy to market it as ZZZZYY3Z-like.   
      
   > >That by itself wouldn't avoid patents though.    
   > >    
   > >But the 20 year wait has avoided patents.   
      
   > Invest some time learning about the actual laws here, instead    
   > of naively making assumptions.   
      
   I am doing that right now, and didn't notice any laws   
   supporting any counter-argument, so my understanding   
   remains.   
      
   > >I think you have misunderstood what I asked for.   
      
   > You seem to be acting as if one could simply slap together some    
   > "laptop" components with an FPGA as a processor and have a    
   > laptop, but that's not how those kinds of systems are built.   
      
   No, I didn't assume that at all.   
      
   I just asked for someone to manufacture the laptop I want.   
      
   I don't care if 500 engineers are involved.   
      
   > >I'd prefer to buy an expensive (within reason) laptop.   
      
   > Such a thing doesn't exist. The closest thing is probably the    
   > MNT Reform, which uses an ARM CPU. A system based on this FPGA    
   > soft-core would have to be designed and built by a competent    
   > engineer (and more likely by more than one such engineer).   
      
   Ok, thanks for the reference.   
      
   > >Could you give me say the 3 most difficult things to    
   > >write for the proposed desktop?   
      
   > Probably initializing the memory and cache controllers, then    
   > DRAM training, and then IO topology initialization. Of course,    
   > all of this is after loading an an initial bootstrap and before    
   > the CPU is even out of reset.   
      
   Ok, thanks.   
      
   > >Ok, so the proposed laptop could be built, and cover both    
   > >memory-mapped I/O and "legacy IO".   
      
   > That would be a silly design if your intent is to work with a    
   > CPU that doesn't even have programmed IO instructions, let alone    
   > the sort of external bus cycles required for PIO to work.   
      
   The intent is to allow the user to zap either CPU type   
   onto the FPGA.   
      
   > What you want doesn't exist, and you have to actually have a lot    
   > of real knowledge to build such a thing. Building a laptop    
   > style system around an FPGA is non-trivial; certainly not the    
   > type of thing a hobbyist with no domain knowledge is up to.    
      
   I'm not sure where you got the idea I intended to   
   build it myself. The whole purpose of buying a   
   pre-made laptop is so that I don't have to build   
   it myself.   
      
   I do want to change the CPU though.   
      
   Without opening the case.   
      
   But if it doesn't exist, so be it. I was just saying what I'd   
   like to buy.   
      
   BFN. Paul.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)