SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Nvidia's updated license for NVIDIA GeForce Software bans most usage of gaming-oriented GPUs in data centers, except for the purpose of "blockchain processing":
Nvidia has banned the use of its GeForce and Titan gaming graphics cards in data centers – forcing organizations to fork out for more expensive gear, like its latest Tesla V100 chips. The chip-design giant updated its GeForce and Titan software licensing in the past few days, adding a new clause that reads: "No Datacenter Deployment. The SOFTWARE is not licensed for datacenter deployment, except that blockchain processing in a datacenter is permitted."
In other words, if you wanted to bung a bunch of GeForce GPUs into a server box and use them to accelerate math-heavy software – such as machine learning, simulations and analytics – then, well, you can't without breaking your licensing agreement with Nvidia. Unless you're doing trendy blockchain stuff.
A copy of the license in the Google cache, dated December 31, 2017, shows no mention of the data center ban. Open the page today, and, oh look, data center use is verboten. To be precise, the controversial end-user license agreement (EULA) terms cover the drivers for Nvidia's GeForce GTX and Titan graphics cards. However, without Nvidia's proprietary drivers, you can't unlock the full potential of the hardware, so Nv has you over a barrel.
It's not just a blow for people building their own servers and data centers, it's a blow for any computer manufacturer – such as HPE or Dell – that hoped to flog GPU-accelerated servers, using GTX or Titan hardware, much cheaper than Nvidia charges for, say, its expensive DGX family of GPU-accelerated servers. A DGX-1 with Tesla V100 chips costs about $150,000 from Nvidia. A GeForce or Titan-powered box would cost much less albeit with much less processing power.
NVIDIA's DGX-1 product page.
Also at DataCenter Knowledge.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Friday January 05 2018, @10:34AM (3 children)
Are you drawing a distinction between copying a program and actually running it? Or are you just expressing your dislike for copyright law?
(Score: 4, Informative) by TheRaven on Friday January 05 2018, @12:58PM (1 child)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 06 2018, @01:31PM
What fun, that means that books can now also be covered by EULA's since the process of reading them involves making a copy of the current page on your retina!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Arik on Friday January 05 2018, @02:39PM
Indeed. See theRavens post.
Also note that you similarly could be argued to copy books into memory when you read them, yet you don't need any license to read a book you bought. As many times as you want, in any location, for any purpose. This is true of all copyrighted media. Licenses are required to exercise rights that law reserves to the copyright holder - like distributing derivative works for instance - but not needed for normal use of the media (reading books, playing back recordings.)
Then we got some big companies with big pockets that managed to bum-rush the law and simply *seize* our rights by confusing the courts.
It's ridiculous and clearly contrary to law. Sheer corruption.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?