This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/baseband-devel@lists.osmocom.org/.
Mh mhtajik at gmail.comTI or Qualcomm will not sell "you" their IP , no matter what . there is a very complicated "legal" process behind these kinds of deals , specifically a regulation process done outside the vendor , that is usually a government organization . you would however be able to purchase protected DSP style working components and NDAed dox with 6-figure deals . there is a different type of business you can look into though , take a look at Lyrtech's stuff for example . you can buy at least as good as HDL crystal clear IP from them licensed and hassle free with support and dox and all , but they target specially built systems , usually huge expensive SDRs . the alleged TI's leaks , mo matter what the circumstance , are not to my experiences of much practical importance . if you got the engineering resources and enough money to put such stuff into use , you may as well code it all from scratch , since most specs are already public . the Patents usually prevent people from certifying , therefore , prevent selling big time for serious profit and limiting the market . its not like they are Nuclear missile code secrets . difference between engineering and reverse engineering in Software ecosystem and Telecom ecosystem is exactly in the time/resource/profit formulation . kids code a virus or crack a code over a couple of nights using ollydbg , although they need to learn a lot of math and electric shit before doing baseband scale maneuver . they almost never do , or Apple offer them Jobs ;) M. On چهارشنبه, مهر ۱۲, ۱۳۹۱ at ۲۱:۲۲, John Case wrote: > > Paul, > > On Mon, 1 Oct 2012, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Sylvain Munaut wrote: > > > > > But, do you have links to the datasheet, programmers manual and source > > > code of the baseband ? > > > > We were discussing this on IRC and Peter pointed out this: > > > > http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1483053 > k > > I am looking at the list of devices covered by this xda-dev posting - most > interesting is the Samsung Galaxy Nexus - again, this is a reference > handset, something that in the past was in the hands of developers only, > but now many people around the world are using. > > So that's very interesting, which was the point of my OP - the google > nexus phones represent a particularly ripe avenue for osmocom since they > are reference handsets, and presumably the "warez" that you need are in > many more hands than previous chipset docs and code. Perhaps there is a > flaw in my assumption ? > > The bad news is that the list of devices from the xda-dev posting does NOT > include the Galaxy S II GT-i9100, which was mentioned earlier in this > thread. > > I wonder: > > - how did the calypso docs leak in the first place ? Was it indeed a real > breach of intellectual property, or did they just get published by TI > since they were uninteresting in some way ? How nefarious is the story > there ? > > - What would it actually cost to get the documentation and code needed for > either of these two items we are discussing above ? If I go to Qualcomm > and sign up as a developer (under a corp name, etc.) .... is it $10k ? > $100k ? Or are the docs you need not available at any price ? > > I would like to think that the "warez" needed for one of these targets are > so widely distributed (because of the android ecosystem and the aggressive > push there) that simply putting out a loud and wide "call for leaks" would > yield some results...