From 4b25b84863fae8409388ec99d3bc2a7b3e41be10 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:24:23 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] separate section for meeting --- updates/022_2020feb14_openpower_eula_released.mdwn | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/updates/022_2020feb14_openpower_eula_released.mdwn b/updates/022_2020feb14_openpower_eula_released.mdwn index b70cc96..eb57168 100644 --- a/updates/022_2020feb14_openpower_eula_released.mdwn +++ b/updates/022_2020feb14_openpower_eula_released.mdwn @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ funding quite a lot of RISC-V projects, and none of them had any issues. I asked him a very simple question: "how many of those projects are simply *implementing* existing RISC-V Standards?", and he replied, "all of them". I then asked, "how many of those projects are *innovating*, -developing alternative extensions to RISC-V?" That was the point at which +developing alternative extensions to what is dictated by the RISC-V +Foundation?" With the answer being "none", *that* was the point at which he understood the extent of the problem, and how the RISC-V Foundation - and its members - are at risk of violating EU anti-trust legislation. -- 2.30.2