The poster of the question is a developer. I answered to help get the information he asked for, not have my answer graded on completeness or lack thereof with a curt "Not enough".
I think the "Not enough" was aimed at Intel, not you. But you seemed to have missed the point of the question.
No hardware developer in the consumer space charges developers to access their hardware. Spec owners frequently do charge other companies to implement their specs, though.
Intel has a mixed record on this - some specs - like USB - they have led but have been implementable licence free.
Other things they consider their propriety interfaces and have sued over - see the recent lawsuits between Intel & Nvidia over their memory bus.
So it is very reasonable to wonder if Nvidia and AMD are going to be able to implement this freely, or are they going to have to pay a tax to Intel. As far as I can see your answer doesn't address that question at all.
Yeah, sorry for the confusion. As nl says in the sister-post, that was Intel has released "not enough" info for us to know the full scope of licensing terms.
No hardware developer in the consumer space charges developers to access their hardware. Spec owners frequently do charge other companies to implement their specs, though.
Intel has a mixed record on this - some specs - like USB - they have led but have been implementable licence free.
Other things they consider their propriety interfaces and have sued over - see the recent lawsuits between Intel & Nvidia over their memory bus.
So it is very reasonable to wonder if Nvidia and AMD are going to be able to implement this freely, or are they going to have to pay a tax to Intel. As far as I can see your answer doesn't address that question at all.