Database Users

null

sorry , i'm really apologize

what is it ?

yeah, I have seen it the whole day now, but I will not touch it until I now what it is and what it does
Scary stuff :wink:

It's Novosec Smartfilter 1.1, cracked, and it should not be here. Mods, could you take this off?

For anybody interested in testing this software and is unsure of the operator code for their service provider, which is needed to make this work, go to this link where you will find a list of provider codes.
http://www.techbitz.co.uk/mobile/secrets/servicecodes.htm
This is an interesting piece of software, it comes with little information but once it is working it does what it says. I tested it by putting my home number on block, tried ringing my xda from my (blocked) home number and got the response, "it has not been possible to connect your call, please try later", if my answer service was enabled it would have switched over to that. You can have lots of different profiles with diferent numbers blocked or allowed, you can also block unknown numbers, witheld numbers etc.

Its a great post and a great software i suggest keeping it plz. We need such posts...
thanks

Compleet list of Operator codes
If you try it on my phone it activates the the ignor button is that correct?
Looking for the compleet list look here:
http://www.funsms.net/service_provider_code_list.htm
:wink:
Greatings and keep up the good work 8)

Hey all...
this program looks like just wut I need (some old lady won't stop calling me)
Im in the US...and all i seen on the Service Provider List were PCS....I have Tmobile...is there a way for me to utilize this prog?
ThanX

Hi all,
It's nice s/w ... However there are 2 missing features:
1. How can you add a number not in your contact list ?
2. There is no context menu either in contact list or calls history like"Add to Smart Filter" .... CallerFirewall has this one.
one minor comment ... Magic Button actually close the application instead of only keep it in the back ground. I think the author should have developed it to use system thread instead of normal application thread.
The display of a blocked call as a missed call is great idea ... I thought I won't be informed in any way but found it useful ... at least to apologize later when I 'm reachable

Yeah does anyone have it working on TMobile US?

Actually got mine to work....just put in 1 in country code and left provider blank.

COPYRIGHT INFRIGEMENT
COPYRIGHT INFRIGEMENT
Dear webmasters of xda-developers.com,
:arrow: REMOVE THE FILE ABOVE IMMEDIATELY.
You haven't responded to any of our emails. This is your last chance. In case this file is not removed within the next 24 hours we have to report an offence to the police in order to close your site.
If you are going to provide any of our software (which is under copyright) in future we will proceed this necessary step without any further notice.
It is not our problem, that your users can upload anything. You have to ensure that your site will not infringe our copyrights.
In addition to this we will proceed against the user who uploaded this file.
Maik Stohn
NOVOSEC
[email protected]

Re: COPYRIGHT INFRIGEMENT
stohn said:
COPYRIGHT INFRIGEMENT
Dear webmasters of xda-developers.com,
:arrow: REMOVE THE FILE ABOVE IMMEDIATELY.
You haven't responded to any of our emails. This is your last chance. In case this file is not removed within the next 24 hours we have to report an offence to the police in order to close your site.
If you are going to provide any of our software (which is under copyright) in future we will proceed this necessary step without any further notice.
It is not our problem, that your users can upload anything. You have to ensure that your site will not infringe our copyrights.
In addition to this we will proceed against the user who uploaded this file.
Maik Stohn
NOVOSEC
[email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL!
Here is free speech forum!
If you don't like the forum, please go away! Or filing legal action again the India guy who posted the software!
Who cares your copyright!
Copyright means everybody has Right to Copy!

Hello,
FREE SPEECH, hopefully not a WAREZ SITE!
Maik Stohn
NOVOSEC

Maik - A PR genius
Message e-mailed to the brainiac:
Maik,
You aren't the brightest, obviously. Somebody posted your software to a site that has very targeted very significant traffic... of all people that carry an expensive device and are interested in software enhancements, incidentally the market you are trying to pursue.
Oh so let's see what your PR genuis does... (PR = public relations, an entirely foreign concept to you, no doubt):
So you go on there and post threatening messages. Instead of turning the challenge into an opportunity (ie. implementing better copy protection, releasing a new version, getting user feedback, etc) your minimal amount of cranial content came up with just posting threats. I had looked at your site and entertained the possibility of trying out your product but after reading that abnoxious post I decided otherwise.
I advocate against funding beligerent dimwits who go put threats on a community board that's supported by a bunch of guys at no cost and in their spare time. Again, in case the general tone of my message didn't convey my personal sentiments... I think you are a complete moron.
Good Day.

you tell him wayandrs :twisted:

The more we speak about it, the more it will be downloaded, any proper feedback on this software - any bugs :lol:

I'm very sorry about it, but now I'm realy sure.
The main intention of this board is to tell developers to kick the XDA/MDA platform.
I wonder what NAH6.com will say about hosting
XDA-(WAREZ)-DEVELOPERS.COM
Maik
to wayandrs:
You are right. I'm not the brightest. I should be glad that my software is here for free. It doesn't matter if I can't pay my bills. But I have to be glad that you take my work and use it. How can I use this scheme to build a house? Please teach me.

Stohn, believe it or not, it can be a good idea to have a program out that has no restrictions so that a potential user can fully evaluate it and discover its usefulness, if it is found to be useful I know many people that will then buy the full retail version because they can be sure that the software fits the purpose. Crippled and time limited software prevents this evaluation process. I know that some people will never pay for something they can get for free, that is a fact of life but there are also many that will pay because they are thankful that their tasks are made easier by the programmer/author of the software.

cruisin-thru said:
Stohn, believe it or not, it can be a good idea to have a program out that has no restrictions so that a potential user can fully evaluate it and discover its usefulness, if it is found to be useful I know many people that will then buy the full retail version because they can be sure that the software fits the purpose. Crippled and time limited software prevents this evaluation process. I know that some people will never pay for something they can get for free, that is a fact of life but there are also many that will pay because they are thankful that their tasks are made easier by the programmer/author of the software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stohn,
I agree with, and respect your right to protect your intellectual property. My own livelihood depends upon it, as I develop web-based applications which are in use by thousands of people. However, the way you have publically handled this scenario is, IMHO, not the best way to have done it. Similar incidences that have occured in the past have taught me that privately contacting the parties concerned meets with positive results.
just take a look at PocketZenPhone to see what we mean by free software http://forum.xda-developers.com/viewtopic.php?t=6162 - this is free and being developed/ improved daily (even hourly) by the developer (Zendrui) from the feedback the users are providing to him; of which, I am one (very happy one, as well)... I have little doubt that Zendrui will come to a point where he will provide features in a Pro version that we would gladly pay money for.
Perhaps providing a lite version would be a way of collecting useful feedback about your product, which can then be built into a Pro version. This has been done for years, and has likely been done so because it works; for the users and developer alike.
To use a collective term such as Warez, or even hint that we all are interested in this line of illegal activity is very dangerous for you, and opens you up to legal proceedings for slander. Sure, we are hackers, but not crackers, warez junkies or any other descriptive for which your comment was intended.
We meet here because we like the technology, we like to see how it works, what makes it tick, and to see how much further we can utilise the technology that we hold in our hands.

HTC Threatens hackers with legal action for distributing ROMs.

http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/06...kers-with-legal-action-for-distributing-roms/
Leaks happen — especially in the mobile world. There are just too many people involved in the process of creating a mobile device to keep things under wraps. Take any given new phone’s OS installation package (known as its “ROM”), for example; when something is as easily copied and distributed as any other piece of software, it’s bound to find its way out eventually.
When these ROMs pop up on developer/hacker forums, it’s generally no big deal — in most cases, the manufacturer doesn’t notice or, if they do, don’t bother to do anything about it. Once someone makes an effort to gather up all these ROMs and distribute them from one unified outlet, however, things get hairy. Such is the case for the popular HTC ROM distribution site Shipped-ROMs, who allegedly just received a Cease & Desist order straight from the desk of HTC’s Legal Counsel.
According to HTC, Shipped-ROMs is stepping out of line by “illegal copying … HTC¡¦s original art work.” Do they use “art work” literally (as in the visuals)? Or are they ambiguously using the term to classify all of their code and other work as art? Who knows. One way or another, HTC is pissed.
If nothing else, you’ve got to praise HTC for their speed: the site, operated by the increasingly well-known hardware hacker Conflipper, is only about a month old. More impressive than HTC’s speed, however, is the site’s: in that month, they’ve managed to accumulate ROMs for just about every HTC handset imaginable, from antiques like the MDA Compact to the just-friggin’-lanched HTC Aria.
So, who does one root for? On one hand, these ROMs allow the hacking community to “cook” up their own custom installs for the hardcore crowd, often unlocking or adding in features that the manufacturer didn’t — and rarely, if ever, do these leaks result in anything malicious trickling down to the end user. On the other, these ROMs are jam-packed with HTC’s intellectual property, which they’ve got some duty to protect.
In the end, I’ll always be rooting for the little guy. My time with a number of HTC devices has been vastly improved by the efforts of the faceless geniuses in the hacking community. If HTC decides to make a misguided effort to stop the hacking community that satiates their poweruser’s thirsts, so be it — but this is the wrong way to go about it. C&D’ing one site won’t do a damn thing; these ROMs will be up on another site (or a torrent tracker, or any one of a bajillion other distribution methods) in the blink of an eye. It’s the classic Napster problem; in making a fuss about these ROMs, you’ve just alerted a bunch of people to their existence. Oh well.
The full text of the C&D can be read at Shipped-Roms. Conflipper says he’ll “do what he can” to keep the site online, but things aren’t looking too good.

so its illegal to fix HTC's blunders. that is great news!

It makes sense. Those miscrient hackers are doing something illegal and harming HTC by re-distributing copyrighted material (htc sense). The hackers should be caught and brought to justice for what they have done.
Obv I am joking =P

Look at the bright side though maybe will see more AOSP only ROM's
Sent from my EVO via Tapatalk

HTC we have bigger issues on our hands right now! Once again you're late to the party. Maybe you should focus on getting out that firmware update to fix this 30fps cap! Or... at least go buy some more glue...

If they used their efforts in trying to sue people towards fixing their phone, we wouldn't have the 30fps problem.

MrX8503 said:
If they used their efforts in trying to sue people towards fixing their phone, we wouldn't have the 30fps problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Soo true ... instead of fixing their Issues they are busy sueing ppls who are making good things

HTCs not after those making modifications to rom - hackers , sites etc
They want to do away with those hosting official ROMs on unofficial servers.

You know what would be a good idea? Just issue licenses to various developers so that ROMs can be worked on and distributed legally. I mean, it's obvious that devs aren't charging for their work, no one is making money off of doing this, and I don't believe they ever have. The only reason ROMs exist is because the ones we're given stock are absolute garbage 98% of the time. So HTC doesn't have any ground to stand on in that sense. A minimal fee simply to acknowledge that, yes, this person has permission to work on this software, would be an easy fix.
Though I do want to point out that I'm extremely tired at the moment, so I might not be thinking clearly XD

Well, that's what happens when you try to fix other people's work :?

jigglywiggly said:
Well, that's what happens when you try to fix other people's work :?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hack away HTC doesn't care about that.
What they do care about is those hosting official ROMs on unofficial servers <--- Its a no go they will shut them down fast

If more sites are hosting their official roms wouldnt that make them happy? I mean, wouldnt it put less strain on HTC's servers? Im just say'in.

Response I got from my message. Seems to end nicely anyway:
=========================
I understand your enthusiasm for customizing your HTC phone. Any HTC phone branded to a carrier is shipped with such software and features as the carrier requests - this is our mandate as the manufacturer. It's always been my belief that, having purchased a consumer product, it is your prerogative to do with it what you wish. But in technical support, we're in the position of only being able to certify, support, and warranty the functionality of the hardware and software on the network which uses the provided, up-to-date ROM. We cannot even broach the subject of custom ROMs, flashing, rooting, registry edits, etc. for liability reasons. An HTC phone user who, unlike yourself, may be less comfortable in this area or is perhaps less cautious, may render their phone entirely inoperable, and we would be entirely powerless to assist. Without being familiar with the particulars of the cease & desist letter you're speaking of, I can tell you a C&D letter is most commonly an obligatory procedural step in pursuit of copyright protection, as a request to stop distribution of possibly copyright-protected material (for example the device firmware or licensed operating system code embedded in a custom ROM image) before any further actions are taken. This need not be interpreted as a threat to any well-meaning online community forum of HTC phone enthusiasts.
To send a reply to this message or let me know I have successfully answered your question log in to our ContactUs site using your email address and your ticket number XXXXXXXXXXXX.
Sincerely,

sablesurfer said:
Response I got from my message. Seems to end nicely anyway:
=========================
This need not be interpreted as a threat to any well-meaning online community forum of HTC phone enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
translation: "we wouldn't dare go after XDA-developers.org"
lol

I haven't been able to root yet but all I know is thank you DEVS, not HTC. Because of the devs people are able to use the phone to its full potential. Maybe HTC can actually learn something from the devs here. Thank you.
Sent from my PC36100 usingnr XDA Apps

Keep in mind that HTC likely receives pressure from carriers when things like "WiFi Tethering" become unbillable and available to rooted devices. The carrier-branded devices we receive are built-to-spec and neutered by the carriers.

EVOmaniac07 said:
Maybe HTC can actually learn something from the devs here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has been pretty obvious over the years that HTC does learn a lot from XDA.
I like that response. It confirms what we have all been thinking.

Why are people always so hard on Sprint and HTC? I mean, they are companies doing their jobs! They can't possibly cater everyone. They have to go by a standard. How else is Sprint going to become the best network if they don't charge people for their services...and they are still cheaper than others! HTC has to comply with Sprint standards so they can keep making Sprint phones. Now if HTC was a "custom" phone maker (there's an idea), then that's a different story. I truly love this community and understand some of the hate comments on here...but come on. We are all grown ups here and is common sense. Sorry for sounding harsh, I just get tired of all the childish hate comments.
sent from HTC Evo through Tapatalk

MrX8503 said:
If they used their efforts in trying to sue people towards fixing their phone, we wouldn't have the 30fps problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, they'll get their legal department right on those coding fixes for ya

[Q] close xda

*LOL*
You can close every single 1.5 and 2.1 SENSE release here on xda, when you ban Feeyo for that point 6 and point 9.
Or has ANY dev the permission of htc using THEIR sense or office-suite?
Come on, close xda-android except the real aosps:
6. Do not post warez.
If a piece of software requires you to pay to use it, either pay or find your cracks and serials somewhere else. We do not accept warez nor do we permit any member to promote or describe ways in which Warez, cracks, serial codes or other means of avoiding payment, can be obtained.
9. Don't get us in trouble.
Don't post copyrighted materials or do other things that will obviously lead to legal trouble. If you wouldn't do it on your own homepage, you probably don't want to do it here either. This does not mean we agree with everything the software piracy lobby try to impose on us, it simply means you cannot break any laws here, since we'll end up dealing with legal hassle caused by you. Please use common sense: respect the forum, its users, and those that write great code.

I can't believe someone would post a thread like this after what has happened... Facepalm...

dont know said:
*LOL*
You can close every single 1.5 and 2.1 SENSE release here on xda, when you ban Feeyo for that point 6 and point 9.
Or has ANY dev the permission of htc using THEIR sense or office-suite?
Come on, close xda-android except the real aosps:
6. Do not post warez.
If a piece of software requires you to pay to use it, either pay or find your cracks and serials somewhere else. We do not accept warez nor do we permit any member to promote or describe ways in which Warez, cracks, serial codes or other means of avoiding payment, can be obtained.
9. Don't get us in trouble.
Don't post copyrighted materials or do other things that will obviously lead to legal trouble. If you wouldn't do it on your own homepage, you probably don't want to do it here either. This does not mean we agree with everything the software piracy lobby try to impose on us, it simply means you cannot break any laws here, since we'll end up dealing with legal hassle caused by you. Please use common sense: respect the forum, its users, and those that write great code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice try except Sense isn't warez. Anyone using a phone made by HTC has a license to use Sense. The -only- dubious ROMs are ROMs for phones that contain sense when the phones never had sense released on them by HTC, such as the Nexus One. In which case you raise a good point and instead of attempting to incite -another- flame war in regards to Feeyo, you should report those rom posts to the moderators.
I'm personally surprised and pleased XDA have started to take a harder stance on adherence to licenses. You have to look at it from their perspective too, XDA is a popular site and they don't need various license owners breathing down their necks from a legal standpoint, with XDA being a large distribution node for software.
Feeyo could have easily avoided all this. I actually thought the staff had closed the issue with a slapped wrist. All he had to do, was uphold agreements he made in regards to licensing when he chose to use software under the GPL. He didn't and thus only has himself to blame. I understand you being somewhat blinded by your fanboy spectacles, but try and see it in a bigger picture. If ever developer took Feeyo's attitude to redistributing GPL source code back into the community, we'd all still be sat on some crappy HTC ROM with an ancient and buggy kernel. Cyanogenmod project certainly wouldn't exist and projects like Feeyo's would never have gotten off the ground in the first place.
He was happy to take the benefits of the GPL. He should have been happy to give back as a result of taking those benefits. He wasn't, he didn't now he's banned.
He has been a walking GPL violation since day one. Not -once- has he offered or posted sources to GPL code that he uses. Not -once- has he even bothered to mention the GPL license to any of his users, which he is also required to do, so that they're aware that they're protected by the GPL. Look at the page/wiki for his Linux distribution. Not a single mention of the GPL and not a single link to the source code despite practically every package being protected under the GPL.
If you cannot understand why it is imperative for the GPL to be adhered to in order for it to work and for EVERYONE to benefit from it, if your vision stops at "me have awesome ROM on phone" and goes no further, well then you shouldn't really be posting on the subject in the first place.
Feeyo was so abusive of the community aspect to Android development, he even used a shadow account to ask questions of other developers, before releasing his "wonderful and all his own work" as Feeyo and not once did he credit anyone who helped him out.
Regardless of his development talent, he was still a bad seed and ultimately bad for the community.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=716916

Hi, don't know thank you for posting in the wrong section.
If we get complaints from HTC about those, you better believe that we will. I guess you must have missed the meaning of General Public License there, you must have spotted the word public in there, which means we have to take complaints serious. We did, this will ultimately create a healthier development environment, but I guess you'd rather have a new build then one thats fair. Feeyo is welcome to post his ROMs once more 30 days from now, if he would share the sources as required by GPL.

XDA operates a non-invasive policy with regard to such matters. To quote from HTC
"While HTC tries to take a hands off [approach] about the modder / ROM chef community, this site's sole purpose [is] to make HTC's content available for download from a source other than HTC. That content is not just the open source parts and kernels of Android but all of the software that HTC itself has developed. This is a clear violation of our copyrights and HTC needs to defend itself in these cases."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This was in response to ShippedROMs being asked to stop hosting RUUs of unreleased ROMs.
It is XDA policy to act swiftly in response to any take-down or C&D request directed to the site from a company such as HTC. As HTC make good money out of selling their phones, they are not bothered about a few people making ROMs for each other to use, as it drives up sales of phones.
Moved out of development as irrelevant. No more random threads like this please guys, this is a warning as I'm not going to spend the day moving posts about.

Damn! Don't even know what to believe now... I wish I had been following this from the start...
Maybe someone can send a PM to me with a short resume even I can understand? xD

C0mpu13rFr34k said:
Damn! Don't even know what to believe now... I wish I had been following this from the start...
Maybe someone can send a PM to me with a short resume even I can understand? xD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think any PM is needed here. Read the info posted by stericson, as that is a full explanation of what's happened.

pulser_g2 said:
I don't think any PM is needed here. Read the info posted by stericson, as that is a full explanation of what's happened.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's just that that post is very hard for me to understand I get really confused reading it...

Guys, why even bother?
A decision made is a decision made.. and only the involved people should take steps to work it out.
Peace,
Bryanarby

C0mpu13rFr34k said:
It's just that that post is very hard for me to understand I get really confused reading it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then don't worry about it. Feeyo did a bad thing and continued to do a bad thing. Bad thing thoroughly investigated and now rectified, Feeyo given vacation for his trouble.

Hacre said:
Then don't worry about it. Feeyo did a bad thing and continued to do a bad thing. Bad thing thoroughly investigated and now rectified, Feeyo given vacation for his trouble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not saying I'm agreeing with you but I guess I'm going to start using both your ROMs Your both great developers

pulser_g2 said:
It is XDA policy to act swiftly in response to any take-down or C&D request directed to the site from a company such as HTC. As HTC make good money out of selling their phones, they are not bothered about a few people making ROMs for each other to use, as it drives up sales of phones.
Moved out of development as irrelevant. No more random threads like this please guys, this is a warning as I'm not going to spend the day moving posts about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for choosing dev and not general
hmm - Froyd119 does have an office-view integrated...
passionqickoffice.apk was never delivered with htc hero.
OK, EVERYONE at xda does cook ROMS out of others...
But it's ridiculous to ban feeyo out from these two points.
GPL - OK (discussion when someone has to publish the code - immediatly, or after 2 weeks) , but not quote THIS points when banning a dev, cause ALL devs has to be banned - which is death to xda

dont know said:
Sorry for choosing dev and not general
hmm - Froyd119 does have an office-view integrated...
passionqickoffice.apk was never delivered with htc hero.
OK, EVERYONE at xda does cook ROMS out of others...
But it's ridiculous to ban feeyo out from these two points.
GPL - OK (discussion when someone has to publish the code - immediatly, or after 2 weeks) , but not quote THIS points when banning a dev, cause ALL devs has to be banned - which is death to xda
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know what Hero you're using but I had Quick Office on my phone when it came from Orange.
EDIT: In fact, from the official HTC 1.5 RUU:
Code:
[email protected] ~/downloads/apps/phone/roms/official/RUU/app $ ls | grep -i quickoffice
Quickoffice_HTC_1.0.1.apk
This would be Quickoffice, themed to match HTC Sense. In Android 1.5. This file was never deleted in the subsequent OTAs:
Code:
[email protected] ~/downloads/apps/phone/roms/official $ find . -iname *office*
./evo/system/app/Quickoffice.apk
./RUU/system/app/Quickoffice_HTC_1.0.1.apk
./RUU/app/Quickoffice_HTC_1.0.1.apk
./postpatch/system/app/Quickoffice.apk
QuickOffice is a licensed Google application. HTC have a google app license. Therefore people using HTC phones have a Google app license to use Google apps on their phones. QED.
Google's Cease and Desist against Cyanogenmod fell down on these very grounds.
You're becoming more ridiculous by the post.

It IS interesting how we only get to see the "bad" side of Feeyo.
It's just.. I know Feeyo's side aswell, so it looks really weird to have (all) people saying he didn't release it.
I'm not familiar with the GPL so correct me if I am wrong.
I would say that the coder has the freedom to atleast clean his code pre-releasing?
Don't get me wrong.. the code should be released and was in a way.
Declining that the code was released..
The essential parts are there?
btw, Warez?
6. Do not post warez.
If a piece of software requires you to pay to use it,-> nope
either pay or find your cracks-> nope
and serials somewhere else.-> nope
We do not accept warez nor do we permit any member to promote or describe ways in which Warez, -> nope
cracks, -> nope
serial codes -> nope
or other means of avoiding payment, -> nope
can be obtained.
So, unless this rule is bigger then that.. I do not agree with the Warez branding.

Bryanarby said:
It IS interesting how we only get to see the "bad" side of Feeyo.
It's just.. I know Feeyo's side aswell, so it looks really weird to have (all) people saying he didn't release it.
I'm not familiar with the GPL so correct me if I am wrong.
I would say that the coder has the freedom to atleast clean his code pre-releasing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Incorrect. If you provide me with software licensed by the GPL I am entitled to the EXACT SOURCE CODE USED to compile that piece of software. It's why the GPL has made so many in roads in the security community because the code can be vetted upon request. Once the code is "cleaned up" then it isn't the same code as used to provide the binary release and therefore, a breach in GPL.
Bryanarby said:
Don't get me wrong.. the code should be released and was in a way.
Declining that the code was released..
The essential parts are there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it wasn't and no they aren't. Every "source code" release Feeyo ever provided either didn't work or wasn't the source code that was asked for. You don't do partial releases of source code, or "here's most of it, work the rest out for yourself". That only works if you provide a complete diff patch of the original source to the source used which in essence will provide the original source code used. Feeyo didn't do this either.
Bryanarby said:
btw, Warez?
6. Do not post warez.
If a piece of software requires you to pay to use it,-> nope
either pay or find your cracks-> nope
and serials somewhere else.-> nope
We do not accept warez nor do we permit any member to promote or describe ways in which Warez, -> nope
cracks, -> nope
serial codes -> nope
or other means of avoiding payment, -> nope
can be obtained.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes warez. In the broader sense, Warez is the distribution/use of software for which you do not have a valid license. In most cases, yes, this is because it's paid software being distributed for free, however it boils down to the same legal issue, no valid license.
So warez applies to Feeyo's kernels. He does not have a valid license to distribute them because he does not have a valid GPL license, because he refuses to provide:
A copy of the GPL with his releases or an easily accessible copy of the GPL at distribution point. There's a reason I keep a link to my kernel source in my signature, you're only a click away from your copy of the GPL as well as a click away from your copy of the source code, including easy to read, detailed, changelogs.
AND
A written offer to provide the source code upon request
OR an archive of the source code used to build the binary release at the point of distribution
OR an archive of the source provided upon request.
Failure to match this criteria breaches GPL and once you have breached GPL you no longer have a license to distribute the GPL software in question.
No license + distribution = illegal distribution = Warez.
Bryanarby said:
So, unless this rule is bigger then that.. I do not agree with the Warez branding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well then I hope I've cleared that up for you.
Furthermore, looking at the Cronos Linux distribution, which Feeyo advertises in his forum signature, that's an even bigger GPL breach than his ROMs are. It's a walking, talking, urination all over the GPL. Not a single mention of the GPL on the site or in the wiki, not a single link to the source code anywhere that I can find.

Ok, I agree, Feeyo should abide by the GPL..
Although the aggressive level of demanding was rediculously high, leading to the defensive stance against releasing.
It is/was still not finished and the issues that it brought could not be fixed, as such the rollback.

Bryanarby said:
Ok, I agree, Feeyo should abide by the GPL..
Although the aggressive level of demanding was rediculously high, leading to the defensive stance against releasing.
It is/was still not finished and the issues that it brought could not be fixed, as such the rollback.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My initial request was very polite. The aggressiveness came when he refused.
It was finished enough to include in a ROM release. You don't seem to understand how the GPL and open source development works. Once he released that "2.6.32" kernel to the wild, he was obligated to provide the source code he used to build it. Not when he felt like it, not after he'd changed it again, but as it was when that kernel was built.
Myself and others are working on a 2.6.34 port for the Hero. The source code we are working on doesn't work properly as yet, however the source code is STILL PUBLICLY AVAILABLE so that other developers can contribute to it and improve upon it and who knows, even help us get it finished faster.
I wasn't going to do this, however given that Feeyo has outright lied again here to his OWN COMMUNITY, I'm going to.
Feeyo didn't port 2.6.32 to the Hero. Feeyo changed the version string in the Makefile. Do I have proof of this? Not a jot but I'd bet my house on it. There's some incredibly talented devs working on the 2.6.3x port for the Hero and there's more than one of them. Feeyo got it working in under a week or so he claims. He refused to release the source and pulled the distribution because he was rumbled and he knows it.
Either you're in on it with him, or he's got you completely fooled as well. Or you and he are the same person. After all the deceit from the Cronos group, stemming from way back when he claimed to have goldfish sources for the hero and ended up posting a git snapshot that had nothing at all to do with the Hero up until recently, who the hell knows what's going on.
But I draw the line at GPL breach and lying to a community which Feeyo has done on numerous occasions. Thankfully, XDA seem to agree with me, which at the end of the day, is the opinion that counts.
His actions were contemptuous and the attempted defense/excusing of his actions by the likes of you and your ilk are equally contemptuous.

Hacre said:
QuickOffice is a licensed Google application. HTC have a google app license. Therefore people using HTC phones have a Google app license to use Google apps on their phones. QED.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's an interpretation of a "law" - OK (we all use the passion.apk)
but accuse feeyo of warez because not IMMIDIATLY public the code is also an interpration of a "law"
http://www.cronosproject.org/kernelSources.tar.bz2
Hacre said:
You're becoming more ridiculous by the post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
perhaps
But for me the whole war is so ridiculous that my posts are peanuts

Hacre said:
I wasn't going to do this, however given that Feeyo has outright lied again here to his OWN COMMUNITY, I'm going to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, as you started there aswell.. let's keep it at one place or it would get too chaotic to follow for anyone. As Feeyo can atleast speak on the other forum, I will halt following this topic.
Hacre said:
Either you're in on it with him, or he's got you completely fooled as well. Or you and he are the same person.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I only hear bits and pieces of both sides, that's why I changed standing point after gathering more info.
I, myself(not Feeyo), have no access to any sources.
Really, really, really not imposing on anyone:
Is this how issues should be solved? Handing one side free speech and silencing the other side?
God, how I hated that about my ex (good thing she doesn't know my internet identity/doesn't look for it.)

I get the impression that a lot of people are really looking at the GPL the wrong way, not really able to shake off a capitalist mindset from it. The fact of the matter is, if someone develops something and releases it under GPL it means it's free to distribute and edit all you like ON THE CONDITION THAT THE GPL REMAINS. You *CANNOT* take some code, edit it and then claim "welllllll, it's really my code so I'll release it when I'm good and ready". No, that's not the GPL - go and write something from scratch if you want to do that.
The ethos behind the GPL is to promote development, holding sources back until you're happy with them is fine, but then you can't release the ROM. That's far too much like wanting some limelight for yourself before you allow others to carry on. Again - Feeyo did not own the code that he was withholding, he did not author it from scratch and as such he was OBLIGED to make the source available the nanosecond he made a compiled ROM available. I think it's absolutely fair and just that he gets banned for this breach as it's such a fundamental "f**k you" to the GPL, hopefully he'll see what he was doing wrong and remedy it. After all, the more developers working on an open source project the better.
Bryanarby said:
I only hear bits and pieces of both sides, that's why I changed standing point after gathering more info.
I, myself(not Feeyo), have no access to any sources.
Really, really, really not imposing on anyone:
Is this how issues should be solved? Handing one side free speech and silencing the other side?
God, how I hated that about my ex (good thing she doesn't know my internet identity/doesn't look for it.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I'm concerned, there are no *sides* on this. I'm not a huge follower of XDA, so I'm not involved in all the politics but I have a reasonable understanding of the GPL after living with a total Linux nerd/open source zealot at Uni. The facts are that Feeyo did not make the proper sources available as soon as he released a compiled ROM - that's not how the GPL works. It seems he persistently resisted and as such, was banned. Totally fair enough.

lets get the kernel source

Htc must release the source in a timely matter, not just for us, but all devices out, and future ones coming. The best way to do this imo is not to start a big fire and smoke them out per say, but to go though proper channels. Obviously emailing them is having no effect, 120 days is not timely, I mean in 120 days this device will be outdated technically.
Imo this is the proper channel: http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
Go there, read their page and then email them. Here is the letter I sent to the. Subject, "htc again, this time the vision" :
"I just wanted to bring to your attention that htc is in violation of the gpl again. As I'm sure your aware from other devices they released, ie desire, they are not releasing kernel source codes in a timely manner. In the case of the desire it has been over 3 months and to my knowledge is still not released, however my complaint today is about the htc vision, known in the usa as the G2. This product was offically released on oct. 6 2010, with no source code available. When contacted about it, they said it will be 90-120 days before its available. Maybe I'm wrong, but as my interpertations of the gpl this is unacceptable. Since the product is commerically available, then surely the source code is, and just being held back purposely.
Thank you for your help!
Keep open source open!"
edit: 4:45 pm est 10-09-10
here is their response:
"We heard you. In fact, we got the message seven times
We have already been in contact with HTC and they have heard the message
loud and clear. I have no idea when it will be fixed though
armijn"

fastludeh22 said:
Htc must release the source in a timely matter, not just for us, but all devices out, and future ones coming. The best way to do this imo is not to start a big fire and smoke them out per say, but to go though proper channels. Obviously emailing them is having no effect, 120 days is not timely, I mean in 120 days this device will be outdated technically.
Imo this is the proper channel: http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
Go there, read their page and then email them. Here is the letter I sent to the. Subject, "htc again, this time the vision" :
"I just wanted to bring to your attention that htc is in violation of the gpl again. As I'm sure your aware from other devices they released, ie desire, they are not releasing kernel source codes in a timely manner. In the case of the desire it has been over 3 months and to my knowledge is still not released, however my complaint today is about the htc vision, known in the usa as the G2. This product was offically released on oct. 6 2010, with no source code available. When contacted about it, they said it will be 90-120 days before its available. Maybe I'm wrong, but as my interpertations of the gpl this is unacceptable. Since the product is commerically available, then surely the source code is, and just being held back purposely.
Thank you for your help!
Keep open source open!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offense, but perhaps you should have someone proofread your letter first. There are a number of grammatical errors in there. If you're posting in the boards, people just don't care, but YOU should care if you're sending a letter that is supposed to be accepted as intelligent and factual.
I can't stress this enough. I know a guy that does AMAZING web-design, but never gets hired(without me as an intermediary anyways) because his grammar and spelling is horrible. He miss-spells every other word, uses many words out of context, and rarely uses proper punctuation and capitalization.
This is not a rant and rave, but if you'd like a regulatory entity to take you seriously, it's in your best interest to put your best foot forward and proofread.
Sorry if this comes off as 'complainy', but if you're going to represent a community as a whole, i.e. xda or developers entirely, just do so gracefully.

InGeNeTiCs said:
No offense, but perhaps you should have someone proofread your letter first. There are a number of grammatical errors in there. If you're posting in the boards, people just don't care, but YOU should care if you're sending a letter that is supposed to be accepted as intelligent and factual.
I can't stress this enough. I know a guy that does AMAZING web-design, but never gets hired(without me as an intermediary anyways) because his grammar and spelling is horrible. He miss-spells every other word, uses many words out of context, and rarely uses proper punctuation and capitalization.
This is not a rant and rave, but if you'd like a regulatory entity to take you seriously, it's in your best interest to put your best foot forward and proofread.
Sorry if this comes off as 'complainy', but if you're going to represent a community as a whole, i.e. xda or developers entirely, just do so gracefully.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, you are right. maybe i shouldnt have done it lying in bed from my phone. so do US a favor and send a better one...
when re-reading it, i noticed 1 run on sentence. could you point out the other errors for me so i can improve my writing skills...

Mistakes marked as bold, corrections in parentheses. Also, some word changes made to make it sound like an adult wrote it
I just wanted to bring to your attention that htc is in violation of the gpl again. Formal letters to companies should begin "To Whom It May Concern: As I'm sure your (you're) aware from other devices they have released, ie (i.e.) desire (the Desire), they are not releasing (htc has not been releasing) kernel source codes in a timely manner. In the case of the desire (Desire,) it has been over 3 months (since the device was released) and to my knowledge is still not released, (and, to my knowledge, the kernel remains unreleased.) however my complaint today (However, my complaint today) is about (in regards to) the htc vision (Vision), known in the usa (USA) as the G2. This product was offically (officially) released on oct. 6 2010 (Oct. 6, 2010), with no source code available. When contacted about it (contacted regarding this), they (htc) said (that) it will (would) be 90-120 days before its (the code [or source code] is made) available. Maybe (perhaps) I'm wrong (mistaken), but(,) as my interpertations of the gpl according to my interpretation of GPL,) this is unacceptable. Since the product is commerically available, then surely the source code is, and just being held back purposely. (Horrible closing sentence and "commercially" is misspelled and I believe you meant "purposefully")
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

damn, i guess thats why i was always better at math, lol. i should have re-read it before sending it half asleep, but enough with the excuses. i see your point and that does sound better, HOWEVER, guess it was good enough for them, here is their response...
*also thanks to whoever else has sent, or will be sending emails to the proper channels
"We heard you. In fact, we got the message seven times
We have already been in contact with HTC and they have heard the message
loud and clear. I have no idea when it will be fixed though
armijn"

great idea -- sent this (edited and worded in my way, dont give a **** if its grammertikally inkorrect) from 6 gmails 3 yahoos 1 hotmail, one rocketmail, an earthlink, a comcast and a tmo.mail. and my law firm email, and just for hell, I faxed off a few to HTC Tmobile and to Apache on law firm letterhead (basic courtesy of notification) that how pissed i am -- this phone should have been delivered to us with first option after initial boot
"Hello dear customer, would you like to void your warranty right now and proceed to data wipe of our clunky bloaty bull****!!!!"
arrrgh

{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
i'm sorry,i just had to

Wow...
That's all I really have to say about this thread...
Sent from my HTC Vision

"To whom it may pertain to...
Just purchased a HTC T-mobile G2 aka HTC Vision and have been a avid HTC supporter for quite sometime. Ever since I owned my first HTC device the codenamed blueangel. The fact that HTC would work with the developer community pulled me toward your devices. I can't believe you guys (HTC) would lock down the successor to the device that helped you start the "open" revolution. I know it was most probably T-mobile that made you do it but that is besides the point. Especially since they have blamed you in the press. You have spit it the face of the developer community and shame on you and T-mobile. This protection will be broken I have no doubt of that but the fact that HTC put it there at all is what is in question. Please don't make this a race of protection...hack...protection...hack. OPEN means we should work together not against each other. So please do the right thing and help us either root these devices or give us the kernel source to help us along. Or even better do both of the above and show you respect the dev community like we all thought you did. Below I have included the first post of a stream that will become a torrent against HTC from the XDA devs.
Thanks for your cooperation."
Message I just sent HTC with a copy of the first post here. Don't care about grammar and neither will they if they receive enough complaints. We get enough people involved in this and it gets engadget or another blogs attention then maybe they will listen. This might be our only option considering the thinktank threads have gotten kinda quiet.

We cannot comment on whether or not HTC has blocked any customer from rooting or hacking their phone.
Rooting the phone may open the phone up to virus attacks and other un-secure activities, as well as introduce intended functionality, and as such is very difficult for us to support.
We cannot comment on whether or not HTC, Google, or T-Mobile has blocked any customer from rooting or hacking their phone.
All three companies work very closely to bring you the best experience on the phone possible.
I do understand how important it is to be able to use your device to the best of its capabilities.
We are not withholding the kernel; we are currently working through the legal channels that we must go through to make the kernel available to you. Each product is individually under review.
When the kernel is available, you will be able to find it on developer.htc.com. I apologize for any inconvenience you may have experienced, and thank you for your patience in this matter.
You can contact HTC Technical Support via telephone by calling 866.449.8658 between 6AM – 1AM EST, seven days a week.
To send a reply to this message or let me know I have successfully answered your question log in to our ContactUs site using your email address and your ticket number 10USCW42ENA000115.
Sincerely,
Sarah
HTC
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was a quick generic response. boo...hiss...

My reply to HTC
I understand the position of HTC to not comment on the situation at hand even though it has already been outed in the press by T-mobile that HTC did indeed lock the phone. So either you are saying that the T-mobile press release was a hoax and HTC did nothing with write protection or HTC just want's the problem to go away. As far as not wanting us to root because of unsafe activities.... Well I don't even know where to start with that comment. We are all big boys and girls and can handle the effect of our actions. It's like saying Toyota installed a system in my car that will only let a certified technician open the hood because I may insert washer fluid into the engine instead of oil. Most companies would love it if you would void your warranty. Does it not lead to less operating cost for HTC in the long run to not support it's products because the warranties are void? You don't want me to void my warranty then do as the GPS companies do and make a disclaimer that I have to read and agree to before I go any further. Also on the subject of voiding warranties did HTC not say that G2 had 4gb's of internal storage? Yet only 1.2gb are available for use because of this lock? Back to the car analogies. If Ford says your car has 200 horse power in the brochure and (AFTER!!!!) you buy it you learn that only 50 horse power is unlocked you might be a little angry. No? I understand the position of all big companies is to play dumb until something either is forgotten or legal channels make them play smart but I do have to say that I did not expect this out of HTC. This post isn't directed at you Sarah but merely my G2 and thousands of others crippled devices. If you could pass this and my prior message to someone higher up that might at least read it and think it over it would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Cyanogen Hijacked?!

I read online that Cyanogen got hijacked, went to check it out.. And apparently it's true!
Some idiot they trusted held the site for ransom and now they're moving to cyanogen.org
This is taken from http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/psa-transition-to-cyanogenmod-org
We at CM are very trusting of our members, showed by both respect and permissions granted to those people we consider part of the team. Last month, this trust was violated in a substantial way. In the spirit of openness, here is what happened.
CM’s history is well established, with Cyanogen releasing his original ROM for the G1 on XDA forums. Back then, there was no “CyanogenMod” in terms of the organization and structure that we have today. The builds were hosted on Steve’s personal machine, the original server was a donation of spare kit from Phaseburn. And due to the small size (and lack of funds), the CyanogenMod.com domain was bought by a third-party back in 2009 and donated to CM, when CM was a much smaller project and had no online presence besides XDA.
Fast-forward 3 years, we have 3 extremely powerful build boxes donated by the community and an army of developers, contributors, and supported devices. But, a little over a week ago, things took a bad turn. The person owning the CyanogenMod.com domain was caught impersonating Steve to make referral deals with community sites. When confronted and asked to hand over control of the domain amicably, he decided he wanted 10K USD for it, which we won’t (and can’t) pay.
We contacted those he had established deals with, only to discover that the person tasked with maintaining our web presence was setting up deals under the CM name, and impersonating Cyanogen himself. Plenty of satisfying evidence was provided by those sites / entities to make us certain that this wasn’t a misunderstanding or one-time thing.
This leaves us at a critical impasse. Being trusted with CM’s web presence means this member had control over the CM social network accounts (Twitter/FB) as well as domains (cyanogenmod.com). We have changed ownership of the social media accounts. When asked again to make the transition nicely, he responded with the following
“Hi, so you think by removing all my access across the infrastructure was going to be a great idea? We had a chat yesterday, you’ve decided to end this bitter. How about I just change the DNS entries right now. CM will practically go down.”
Refusing to be extorted for funds, and then being threatened is “ending it bitter”? Today, it happened: all of our records were deleted, and cyanogenmod.com is slowly expiring out of the Internet and being replaced by blank pages and non-existing sites. @cyanogenmod.com e-mail is now being directed to a mailserver completely out of our control, too.
We have begun the dispute process with ICANN to reclaim our domain. In the meantime, please utilize CyanogenMod.org and all applicable subdomains.
As mentioned, this member also managed our Google Apps for Business account, and therefore our @cyanogenmod.com email addresses. These addresses should be considered discontinued until further notice. We will be contacting the Google team to reclaim rights to the apps account. In the meantime, please contact [email protected] for any devrel questions or other issues. A mailserver is being established to transition devrel and other support email addresses. We will provide those when they are finalized, and they will utilize the .org domain.
We don’t like how this played out, and we are deeply hurt. Likewise, we are deeply saddened at the confusion this may have caused the community. We will continue to be open about the what, when, how, but unfortunately, we may never know the ‘why’ – though greed comes to mind. The team itself has not made a profit off of CM and that is not our goal. But to have one of our own betray the community like this is beyond our comprehension. We will update you all as things progress.
Know that we are pursuing every available legal means to regain control over our domain.
Please note, all donations that were given directly to Cyanogen (aka [email protected]) did indeed reach their destination and are not affected.
If you are a company out there that believes they have also entered into agreements with “CM” by this person impersonating Steve, please contact [email protected]. We’d like to get a handle on how widespread this was before we file charges.
-The CyanogenMod Team
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Ah.. Nvm.. Got sorted apparently.. See below xD
http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/domain-situation-has-been-resolved
Domain situation has been resolved
November 15th, 2012
Cyanogen
82
(ciwrl wrote this, I’m just posting on his behalf so this is resolved)
So earlier today we put up a post on what prompted us to transition to our new CyanogenMod.org domain. We refrained from identifying the ex-member out of respect for his privacy and career outside of CM. Suffice it to say you guys aren’t slouches, and figured it out on your own.
With that said, the ex-member in question contacted us and has agreed to hand over control of the CyanogenMod.com domain. This was done as amicably as these things can be, and CM did not pay the fee he requested.
We will still be using CyanogenMod.org as our primary domain, and the .com address will simply redirect to this new domain. Ironically enough, ‘.org’ is better than ‘.com’ as we are not a commercial entity, and is far more in line with how CyanogenMod is structured.
We received a common question, that we’d like to take a moment to answer. Some of you contacted us mentioning that you had previously donated to a different address. When the forum began, up until about 3 months ago, the forum utilized this other address as the mechanism for forum donations and establishment of the ‘Donator’ badge. Donations made to this address prior to three months ago were used for the CyanogenMod forum IPB licence and forum related costs and were not misappropriated.
On a side note, we have also gone through internal restructuring to make sure that this sort of thing doesn’t happen again. Nobody has control over everything, and there is no longer such a large single-point of failure. Our lessons have been learned.
We ask that you please not perform any vigilante actions, we do not condone any such thing; just let this fade.
We want to move on, get you the builds you expect from us, and not mess around with distractions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Wow. Some people...