3 ms·

I can understand patents (though i thought it'd be 17-20 years, not 30) but why would they need to worry about copyright to make new implementation of the x86 i

I can understand patents (though i thought it'd be 17-20 years, not 30) but why would they need to worry about copyright to make new implementation of the x86 instruction set?

R0b0t1 5y ago
Using AMD as an example you shouldn't? But the oracle ruling calls that into question. An instruction set is an interface. But, that ruling is extremely whack as it means nobody but the ISA originator can make an assembler, for example.
- monocasa 5y ago
  The final oracle ruling is that it was fair use. That being said, back in the day there was concern about all of that, hence why a Z80 is binary compatible with an 8080, but has different mnemonics. It's all LD this ST that, as opposed to the 8080's MOV.
  - rwmj 5y ago
    Just a note that Z80 mnemonics use "ld" for all loads and stores. (https://worldofspectrum.org/z88forever/dn327/z80instr.htm#ld8 https://worldofspectrum.org/z88forever/dn327/z80instr.htm#ld...)
    - monocasa 5y ago
      Blergh, you're totally right; I've been in RISC land for too long.