Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 | From | Tim Post <> | Date | Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:51:19 +0800 |
| |
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 23:21 -0400, Daniel Drake wrote: > Let's take a certain class of medical devices into account: ones that > are absolutely definitely for medical treatment, but are not life > threatening if they fail. > > Say, a dental treatment device -- if the device produces a crown or > bridge that doesn't fit properly, the dentist says "nope" and throws it > away. No harm done.
I've done quite a bit of research, I'm not nearly done.
These regulations (from what I can tell) seemed to follow suit with the National Electric Code (NEC) [latest] when dealing with mandatory isolated ground devices and special cabling methods when it comes into a device touching a patient. If that remains consistent, this won't be so bad.
If the patient never comes in contact with it, its not regulated as much and (from what I've seen) has no requirement for tamper proofing. I point out again, I am not _nearly_ done with my research.
I think of nothing else, anyone with an interest should closely monitor how these devices are being regulated by the FDA as more of them begin to look like penguins.
I won't argue one way or another as to the presence of benevolent intent in those laws-to-come, I'm simply pointing out the questionable technical competency of those who will be writing them and their need for guidance when doing so.
Best, --Tim
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |