Related
(Note posting in this topic as to dev category for obvious reasons)
This whole incident has taken me by surprise with the actions of Google against Cyanogen. Now the actions from my understanding so far are likely the result of the early release of the Market app with his new Donut based releases. There is a valid argument for Google in which it is their own proprietary code in which they want to release on their terms I would assume, however I prefer to take the side of the community. The community around XDA has supported and nurtured the development of the Android OS and the devices based upon it, with the developers pushing the limits on what they can do and implementing smarter and better solutions. We the community in a sense become beta testers for the latest and greatest Android has to offer, how many applications do you think have already added support for 1.6 due to Cyanogen's mods and our feedback?
In summary, I believe while Google does have a valid argument against, but it would better serve them to not continue with this course of action. I invite you all to write and use all social networks available to you to spread the world, submit to every news site, raise awareness of the problem. Don't waste your time with petitions, just spread the word, go viral with it.
Digg search for cyanogen:
http://digg.com/search?s=cyanogen
Original article:
http://androidandme.com/2009/09/hacks/cyanogenmod-in-trouble/
Facebook group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=144634407186&ref=nf
Send tweets to @google also, flood the information stream.
Email the people at Engadget, Slashdot, Gizmodo, all the major blogs just to keep focus upon it.
Someone should put it up on reddit too, get some visibility on wired.com!
Listen, this situation is really cut and dry. Cyanogen had NO LICENSE to distribute the CLOSED SOURCE APPS. The rest of it is perfectly fine.
The solution:
Develop the roms, DELETE the closed source apps, sign, publish. When someone installs the roms, let them install the closed source apps themselves -- i.e., *somebody* (who won't be linked back to cyanogen) will likely post a simple "closed-source-google-apps-for-cyanogenmod-4.xx.xx.xx.zip" which can be installed from recovery mode.
Problem solved.
wont that person then be "under-fire"?
gospeed.racer said:
wont that person then be "under-fire"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only if the person gets caught.
tool to extract non free files and create a update image
If the binary files in a existing ROM can be used by cyanogenMod, what we need is a tool to reuse them in cyanogenMod. Am I wrong?
Or is it rebuild from source code ?
lbcoder said:
Listen, this situation is really cut and dry. Cyanogen had NO LICENSE to distribute the CLOSED SOURCE APPS. The rest of it is perfectly fine.
The solution:
Develop the roms, DELETE the closed source apps, sign, publish. When someone installs the roms, let them install the closed source apps themselves -- i.e., *somebody* (who won't be linked back to cyanogen) will likely post a simple "closed-source-google-apps-for-cyanogenmod-4.xx.xx.xx.zip" which can be installed from recovery mode.
Problem solved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you a lawyer? no. So don't give your interpretation of what Cyanogen's license was and wasn't. You already started a thread about it and you're spamming the hell out of another. Don't mess with legal guesses, it's a bad bad idea. As I am someone who is studying law (and also a programmer/generally tech-smart), I am doing and suggesting to stay the hell away from that part when possible. Law -> politics -> flamewars -> ad hominem/bad posts. This is not tvtropes.
Meanwhile, can you even get past the start/initialization page without having the closed source apps, as they are market/gmail? This question is to actual modders.
Google has made a mess of thus, if they stop him from distributing with the apps it's only going to get *waaaay* messier.
You, are an IDIOT.
What happens when you *assume*? I'm sure that if you are, in fact, a law student (as you imply yourself to be, though you really only call yourself a "student" of the law, which could mean that you simply watch CNN from time to time), that this would have been answered on the first day of your first class.
Cyanogen's license *IS EXACTLY* the same as the license granted to *ALL OTHER USERS*. You want to read it? Its in your phone under About Phone --> Legal Information --> Google legal. Until you have read and understand *it all*, you should immediately cease offering your suggestions.
Edit: I just noticed your post count... 3.
Amazing, the audacity of some people. Whenever things start to get beyond the understanding of the average, all the chicken-littles come out from the woodwork and start crying about how evil the big company is. It is a direct function of a lack of understanding of the issues.
My advise: FORGET ABOUT IT. This has nothing to do with you and most likely won't have any (significant) impact on your life. At worst, you will have to add ONE SMALL STEP to the process of flashing the latest modrom.
Let me repeat: THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL! IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER! Your phone is NOT about to catch on fire or start spying on you.
Oh, and for you information: regarding how I know what Cyanogen's license was....
1) the fact that it is included with the phone.
2) the fact that he received a c&d order (which they wouldn't send if he was licensed, or if they had, it would be the simplest matter to resolve).
3) the fact that he said so himself.
designerfx said:
Are you a lawyer? no. So don't give your interpretation of what Cyanogen's license was and wasn't. You already started a thread about it and you're spamming the hell out of another. Don't mess with legal guesses, it's a bad bad idea. As I am someone who is studying law (and also a programmer/generally tech-smart), I am doing and suggesting to stay the hell away from that part when possible. Law -> politics -> flamewars -> ad hominem/bad posts. This is not tvtropes.
Meanwhile, can you even get past the start/initialization page without having the closed source apps, as they are market/gmail? This question is to actual modders.
Google has made a mess of thus, if they stop him from distributing with the apps it's only going to get *waaaay* messier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
gospeed.racer said:
wont that person then be "under-fire"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At this point we're talking warez, and though I won't advocate warez, when was the last time you saw Ahmed Ahmed Ahmed from Iran get persecuted for distributing warez?
Remember that the US government can't even find Bin Laden....
Or the apps can be pulled by the users from *legitimate* images, like ADP1. This, at least, is legal for owners of ADP1's for use on ADP1's.
Frankly, adding a step to complicate the process would probably go at least a little way in getting the super-noobs out of the game. They get *really* annoying.
Oh FYI: I got that board you sent me more-or-less cleaned up now, going to start mapping it out soon.
setupr said:
If the binary files in a existing ROM can be used by cyanogenMod, what we need is a tool to reuse them in cyanogenMod. Am I wrong?
Or is it rebuild from source code ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. It is incredibly simple.
unzip (official-update.zip) /path/to/file1toextract /path/to/file2toextract ... /path/to/filentoextract
zip -g (mod-rom-update.zip) /path/to/file1extract /path/to/file2extract ... /path/to/filenextract
java -jar testsign.jar (mod-rom-update.zip)
Then just copy file to /sdcard/, recovery, flash, done.
Yeah, I know that us modders will continue to be doing the same thing and continue on, I know they aren't going after the entire community. It was for distributing the new Market app before its release as I understand currently. Hell, all I would do I an adb pull from a rom and push it into a new release. Just like I will be doing with the Market app if he can't put it in another release haha.
However the point of this thread was not to see if Google had the right to do that, they did. It is that simple. It is their proprietary code that was released early, by cyanogen, but I think it is unnecessary. The point of it was to support cyanogen for more ideological reasons, this community pushes the development at a rapid pace. My Dream would have been a nightmare without the likes of JF, haykuro, cyanogen, Dude, etc. With cyanogen releasing Donut in his builds, our community has been pushing developers to up their support to it and fix bugs relating to 1.6 before it is pushed as an update. The same thing with the Market app applies, how many of those apps have screenshots already? Why alienate the true heart of the device, we are basically beta testers for those of us running experimental roms. I understand the Google position, I just wish they would see that no harm, no foul.
And don't equate the amount someone posts to the boards to their understanding of a situation. There are quite a few people that just get the ROMs, run them and can use a search button if they have problems.
holy cow batman, flame much? Some people lurk for a long time before registering such as I.
I agree it's a small issue, and cyanogen is probably already working on it at least based off of his twitter. However, it doesn't matter what you or I feels about the licensing, nor even what the courts would interpret were it to get to that point.
It however, is very inappropriate to be ad hominem and/or bar threatening to people over this issue, basically getting worked up yourself. Honestly, playing seniority and insulting my schooling? I was not trying to be threatning to you, simply pointing out that you are not a spokesperson for interpreting a software license. Really, it's like you went into an emotional rage the minute cyanogen got the C&D.
Cyanogen in trouble
I can't believe Google is pulling this crap. I can only hope that Google is smart enough to work something out with Cyanogen so he may continue to share his awesome developments. I would expect some restrictions, but they need to work with him and let him do his thing. Otherwise, where's the incentive for anyone else following in his footsteps to make programs better for Google?
setupr said:
If the binary files in a existing ROM can be used by cyanogenMod, what we need is a tool to reuse them in cyanogenMod. Am I wrong?
Or is it rebuild from source code ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe this is the answer?
cyanogen : And regarding the keep-proprietary-apps-on-device-for-custom-rom install, with all the odexing and resource id mismatches... Ugh.http://twitter.com/cyanogen/status/4384352484
so after posting an excerpt of my letter to Dan Morrill, the author of the absolutely idiotic statement regarding what they're doing, i received several PMs asking me to post the whole thing. It's so long it wont fit in a single post, so read it all. if you dont want to read a wall of text, stop here and go to a new thread.
Mr. Morrill,
First, I would like to bid you a good day, as I'm sure this letter is going to effect it. Yes, that is a bold statement to make at the onset, but writings such as these have a way of eating their way into your psyche and leaving a lasting impression that could very well sour your appetite at lunch time.
Perhaps I should introduce myself. My name is XXXXXXXXXXXXX, and I am an amateur developer on the Android platform. I am also a user of many of the custom Android builds that have come out since the release of the source development kit, including the build made by Steve "Cyanogen" Kondik. Ah, yes, now you see what this letter is going to be about.
So lets start with the basics. Google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that released a supposedly open-source platform onto the mobile device market. Now, I say mobile device as opposed to mobile phone, simply because there are products being released, such as the Zii EGG, which do not support telecommuniations, yet are still running on the Android platform. Now, in any reasonable programmers mind, the reason for making a platform open source, regardless of what the Public Relations people spin it as, is to alleviate some of the burden on the actual in-house development teams. The source code created by thousands of bright minds is doubtless going to yield a much stonger end result than that of a small development squad. Its simple mathematics. Well, that point alongside the fact that the original linux developers made no secret of their intentions by open-sourcing their operating system, which paved the way for Android many many years later.
In addition to that, all of the applications included in the "stock", or unmodified and officially released Android, builds are free. Any user with internet access can use any of these functions through the internet, with the blessings of your employer, free of charge. Yet, somehow, this has caused a sort of hiccup between your supposed idea of free development and that of the general public. Now, before you warp your mind into "this guy doesnt know what he's talking about" mode, think about the principles that your company was founded upon. You wanted to beat out the corporate giants and look out for the little guy. Oh yes, I've done my homework on Google over the years. The benevolent company trying to provide free services for the masses that the "evil-empire" corporations would deny free access to. Ironically enough, this letter is being written to you on Google Docs, another of your free services. Quite troublesome, it would seem.
And now, lest I digress further, I'll shift to the meat of the topic. In your statement regarding the cease and desist letter to Mr. Kondik, you claim that the sales of your free software to be used on mobile platforms being provided to the end user by custom developers for free would hurt the bottom line. Perhaps you should re-examine your own words. Free software being given to the masses by developers whom you claim to encourage is huring your profit share because you cannot sell the use of it to large corporations. Pardon me if I fail to understand the rationale behind such a contradictory and obviously ridiculous statement. But just so that you can understand my position on the matter, lets look at a related position. Google produces an internet browser, Chrome. Mozilla, a competing franchise, produces Firefox, their own browser. Developers for firefox have created applications which borrow on Google's proprietary code to access the functionality of the various features and programs. Are these developers charged for being able to include such features? No. Are these developers caused to halt their activities through threats of legal action for providing end users access to the capabilities that Google readily offers for free? No. So where is the disparity between allowing a competitor to do such things and tying the hands of developers of YOUR open source platform from doing the same?
Before I go further, let me give you a little background on myself to illuminate things. I used to work for XXXXXXXXXXXXXX. I worked in one of their call centers with well over a thousand people, almost a quarter of whom purchased the G1. More than 50% of those users had custom builds running on their phones. How would I know this? I personally installed it on over 300 and gave instructions to many more who wanted to do it themselves. This was one call center. But your apparent attitude on the situation makes it apparent that providing these people with custom software that includes the Google-based programs that were ORIGINALLY ON THE DEVICE AT PURCHASE, is illegal. I'm sorry sir, but that notion is preposterous. All of the Android-based mobile platforms on the market today include the software that caused you to send Mr. Kondik a cease and desist letter. This means that every single end user who purchased one of the devices paid that bottom line you spoke of. Any other rationale is impossible. Non-supporting devices will not run Android, and as such, the only way to use the device is to have purchased one. This brings us to the logical conclusion that those applications, such as GMail and Google Talk are PAID FOR. The situation is equitable to this situation: Joe purchases a computer from a major distributor, say Dell. Dell gives Joe a complimentary piece of free software (available on the Dell website) which updates his drivers on the Dell website, included with his purchase. Joe decides he doesnt particularly like the operating system on the computer, and installs an operating system more to his liking, that also happens to include the Dell software. But lo-and-behold, that free software shouldnt be free to Joe, even though he paid Dell's bottom line through his original computer purchase.
Your flaw is that you are obviously trying to "spin" the situation. Unfortunately, its a thin disguise and everyone can see through it, clear as crystal. These people that I speak of? Developers. The developers whom you claim to encourage. This brings me to my next point. Developers are essentially software hackers. They take the code from a program, rip it apart, improve on it, and then put it back out on the market for other developers to toy with. Perhaps, in your travels as a computer programmer, you have come across a copy of the much fabled "hacker's manifesto". Free access to data. That is what it was about at its core philosophy. You claimed to provide developers with that free access through Android, and then punish the people whom you claim to support.
Have you ever seen "The Devil's Advocate", Mr. Morrill? Al Pacino has an excellent line in which he is describing the way God imbued man with instinct, saying "Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow." Is this not what you've done here? You've given us, the developers, what you claim to be an open-source platform, written for mobile platforms that contain previously installed versions of the software, and also containing applications that each and every possible user would have purchased through buying the device on which they run. Then you tell us that it is illegal for us to modify any portion of that software which you see fit at any given point in time. Perhaps you should have just kept it closed-source, so that anything innovative wouldnt stir controvversy, as it would have truly been illegal. You give us a gift and then set the rules in opposition as it suits you.
Now, if I havent struck a nerve yet, perhaps I will in my own belief on the subject. You FEAR us. The android development team put out an initial platform. The developers, using the source code given to us, have turned out platforms on several different versions that utilize more functionality with greater performance, more flexibility and a wider range of features than ANYTHING that the official releases have even come close to. Mr. Kondik's releases are a prime example of this. He has created a version of the platform which utilizes every aspect of the platform infinitely better than the official releases. He has also included functionality from FUTURE releases, constantly and consistently improving on such, in a timeframe that should have your development team in absolute hysterics. That, sir, is what I believe this is about. Fear and shame. Never did you imagine that the Android development community would be able to surpass the Godly heights of the original development team, but we have and continually do so. It's his popularity that earned him the letter. He posed the biggest threat to your team by sharing a creative vision with anyone willing to install it that your team couldn't possibly compete with. But what about all of the other major developers? As of right now, I can count over a hundred different custom builds that include much of the same functionality and applications that Mr. Kondik's software includes. Are you going to attempt to stop them too?
(continued in post #2)
I assume you have been on the internet before. I assume you know that it spans the globe and has absolutely no limits or boundaries. It is freedom at its peak. Anyone, anywhere can express anything they want. The beautiful thing is that it enables people to communicate, and thereby collaborate in real-time. An internet community with thirty thousand people doesnt have to find a meeting room with enough chairs. This is the problem you're facing. You have attempted to cut the head off of a snake that you created. Unfortunately, on the internet, when you cut off the head of a snake, the body doesnt die. A thousand more heads spawn in its place, angrier, defiant and more intent on their purpose. Perhaps that should be a wake up call.
Mr. Morrill, I hope that in reading this letter, you have come to realize the gravity of your position. You have not only hurt yourselves, but angered an entire community, consisting of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people. These are the people who write the applications that are sold on the Android Market. These are the people who have the time to spare to ensure that you still have a job by creating works of digital art, using the code that you claim to be "open source". Are you so obtuse as to believe that these people are going to slip silently into the night when their creativity is stifled by the whims of a multibillion dollar corporation? I think not, sir.
You simply cannot give freedom to the masses and then attempt to bind their hands, as you are attempting to do in this case. This has ended in cataclysmic failure for every culture and every authority that has attempted to do so in history. We live in a global society of ingenuity. People WILL find a way. The creative power of the developers of the android community will inevitably break you. History has shown ample evidence that a creative mind cannot be beaten down. No army of lawyers, no amount of cease and desist letters will stop the tide of creativity.
It's like a bear. The choice you had was to embrace this creativity and nurture it or to poke at it with a stick. Mr. Morrill, are you aware of the consequences of poking a bear with a stick? Some thought on that will bring you to an obvious, and quite unpleasant, conclusion.
Had you simply left well enough alone, the damage might have been minimal, but at this point you could be looking at a 2009 reenactment of the Boston Tea Party, with the Android platform playing the part of the British tea. The damage to your "bottom line" was so infinitesimally small as to equate to a mouse burping on a rush hour subway car in New York City. As stated previously, it is simply my belief that your development team was offended by the fact that amateur developers would put them to shame. Does Android come with a complimentary set of swim trunks? Perhaps you might invest. I hear Boston Harbor gets cold in the winter.
In closing, perhaps you should let the immortal words of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto echo through your mind as you contemplate the statements made in this letter:
"I fear that all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve".
Mr. Morrill, the giant is awake now, and his resolve is beyond your wildest dreams. I truly hope you are prepared to reap the consequences of what you have put in motion.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
amazing. your right they do fear us and they have woken a sleeping giant. what i dont get is the fact that these roms are making this phone better. as you said you gave over 300 people instructions how to do this at the call center. if anything these devs are helping google make sales, and google doesnt even have to make a better product. they make they same thing tht has been out since 0ct.22.2008 and the devs make it better. you sir are a god among men.
Wow, great letter, really looking forward to hearing the response to this - If you'd post it that is ;-)
You misspelt "purchased" in the eighth paragraph btw
yeah, this was the pre-spell-checked rough draft. the copy that i sent him was clean as a whistle.
Interesting letter. Not to mock you or anything, but it reminds me a lot of Keith Olbermann.
I am a RSA for TMO, and one of the major selling points was that Android was (is?) Open Source. That was a big deal to many customers.
I don't think the folks over a Google realize how tech savvy even the dumbest tech user is.
Had probably a 60 year old man come in the other day and he had put Hero on his G1 by himself.
(No offense to any oldsters.)
The world is changing, and Google just jumped in front of that subway train you mentioned.
this was truly a great letter. i would love to see the response (if you even get one) to this. i feel inspired to go do something now...
Android users, this is your call to arms.
Before you go and write long winded threatening letters to someone, maybe you should look into what you are writing about first. The person you are writing the letter to is an employee of a company that tells him what to do. I doubt after all of the help he has given developers and "hackers" in the Android irc channel, that he was just planning on striking everything down. My guess, and that of many others who know of him (havent chatted a lot, but he is social with us) would be that he was told to write that post. I dont want cyanogen roms to go away either, but I think you are going at it the wrong way. Hate the company, not the developers.
And after re-reading the post, you mention installing this on devices that already have it. The exact same arguement I used but you must also realize that an HTC hero does not get these Google Apps. It is an HTC branded phone and instead gets HTC branded apps. The "With Google" phones are the only ones that come with these apps pre-installed. Even then, apparently (I just found this out today) that your license to these apps does not allow you to copy them OFF of the device they came on. So that cut down another idea we had: copy the apps from the rom to SD, flash image, copy apps back.
Once again, I do not disagree with you or your anger, I just disagree with who you are directing it at.
irrelevant. "i was just doing what i was told" is never an excuse. it doesnt work in the justice system, and it doesnt work here. i could elaborate more, but i really dont want to invoke Godwin's Law this early in the conversation. he opened his mouth. he made himself the target. everyone is a nice and helpful person until they show their true colors.
perhaps its just me, but i'm one of those people that actually hold to my ideals. if i'm fighting for something and my boss tells me to do otherwise, i'm going to tell him to pack sand. if I get fired, i can always find a new job, but I can do so with my integrity intact. he had a choice. everyone always has a choice.
also, to your second post, the HTC branded phones arent the subject of controversy. the apps are "free". i quote free because it isnt true in this case. how is distributing the official Gmail app for free any different than accessing the same capabilities through another means? if I were to delete the official GMail app off of my phone entirely and instead access my gmail account through a browser, wouldnt that have the same effect on Google's "bottom line"? I'm still using the same service and not paying for it. Similarly, with the hero, if you have access to GMail through any email application or browser, are you not violating the same concept? You're still using the core of google's intellectual property for free. Their only real solution is to make the Google apps paid applications that everyone has access to if they want to shell out the cash, or simply drop the whole thing.
Are they going to stop people from creating custom GMail apps too? Cause if so, they've got a big fish to fry, cause they'd have to go after everyone who wrote a gmail plugin for firefox as well. any way you look at it, they're not going to stop the development community from going on, its simply too big.
If Dell gives you a "free" copy of vista on your laptop, and then you buy a compaq with linux installed on it. Does that mean you have the right to install your "free" vista on the compaq also? It was free! How about you write a new windows shell and you bundle your free windows vista with it. And you also throw in your free copy of Office that came with it.
I understand their point and I realize these examples are not EXACT enough to matter, but the point does. They give you the apps for A SPECIFIC device and they give them to you with rules. Rules that we do not like.
I feel that they instead of C&D'ing him, should have had a little sit down with him. Said "hey, we realize you are doing a lot of good for us by promoting our product and giving those who want more what they ask for when we cannot, but we have some rules for you. A, you must make every attempt you can to make sure the roms you distribute go on authorized "With Google" devices. B, not release stuff you do not have permission to release." This would allow google to control what he releases enough to fit within the rules (keeps carriers from saying "hey, he can release your apps without paying, why cant we?"). They would also benefit from the many thousands of users who flock to these custom roms but realize they are unusable in their bare forms.
And so you do not have to, I will be the first to pull the term nazi out of my hat in this one
I agree completely. As i said in the letter, they could have nurtured creativity (i.e. having a sit down with him and saying "hey look, we know that this is going to non-google devices and we cant have that, so make an attempt to not let it happen") or poke it with a stick. They chose the stick, and now they get to reap the backlash.
I also understand your initial examples, and while they do hold true for the circumstance, windows isnt lauded as being an open-source platform. In addition, i havent heard of microsoft going after people who create custom shells that utilize windows information, so long as they put a disclaimer on it saying that you're only allowed to use them if you're running an authorized copy of the OS. The same should have been done here, as you suggested.
Also, microsoft has specific anti-piracy safeguards in place to keep you from installing that software on your compaq that didnt come with it. Can you get around it? sure. Piracy happens, but its also illegal. But google has no such safeguards on the apps. Is it because they lacked the foresight to see this coming? Absolutely. If they didnt want the apps installed on non-branded/non-approved devices, then perhaps they should have made it impossible to do so. Sure, people would eventually find a way around it, but then they'd have a legitimate piracy gripe. As it is now, they dont. You dont hand a kid a cookie, let him eat half and then snatch it away because he shared the chocolate chips. You keep him away from the cookies from the get-go.
It really is a sad state of affiars. If something is going to be free, such as GMail, then Google shouldnt care how the users access it. How big of a chunk of their profits do you think its really going to hurt if people with the hero get a free copy of the gmail app? I bet their legal team made for handling this "issue" than it would cost them in ten years. If the apps in question were paid apps, then I would completely understand. People shouldnt get something free that they should have to pay for, which is one of the reasons that XDA has such a strict "warez" policy. But thats not the case.
The simplest solution would have been to realize that "oops, we did tell them it was open source, maybe we should clarify a bit and see if we can come to a reasonable understanding". But alas...
Also, to your point that the apps came with a specific device, what about those that purchased a device with those apps? We have a right to be using them as we see fit. When I bought my phone, I never signed anything that said that I couldnt theme the application if I wanted to. Google never made me sign a contract. And they couldnt, it would be ridiculous. What about people that purchased them on ebay or craigslist without a contract? They still bought the device and are the owner, and they certainly didnt have to agree not to modify any content. Is google going to go after every developer and every themer now too? Are they going to go after every end user who modified their content? It's just as illegal as making a rom that allows it to happen in the eyes of the law. Apple is attempting to do the same sort of crap with people jailbreaking the iphone. They're saying that even though you bought it, apple technically still owns it, so anything you do to it is illegal. Theres a huge legal debate going on over it right now and apple looks like theyre probably going to lose.
The safeguard they have in place is lack of root access. If you have root access yo have exploited a bug and are acting out of the designed use of the phone. You would not be able to backup or otherwise access these app files. Also, you would not be able to flash the new rom without root, which you gained by exploiting a bug.
Absolutely. But at the same time, the whole "exploiting a bug" argument is similarly null. If the bug never existed, two things would be true:
1. There would be no custom roms for end users, which Mr. Morrill says he supports and looks forward to seeing more of. This would be true since the idea of creating custom software would be idiotic as nobody would be able to install it. The only people utilizing the open-source framework would be major development houses, such as what creative is doing with the plazma stem-cell android that they're putting on the EGG. Application development has nothing to do with open source. The iPhone is not open source, but you can still develop apps for it.
2. The claim that they have about the free distribution of their intellectual property would hold merit, as it would be legitimate software piracy, instead of an unintended side effect of faulty design.
The first point is what makes this a farce. We, as developers, found a way to get custom software onto our devices, something which we were never intended to do. One of two things should have happened at that point: they should have let us continue to do it, which they did (closing the loophole could have been done, they could have found a way to prevent downgrading, seeing as there are no other OS options for the device) or they could have stopped it there and said that exploiting the bug is illegal. Its been a year since the device came out. This has been going on for a YEAR. You mean to tell me that this is an issue NOW and wasnt a year ago when it first started? Its only an issue because they're not the only game in town anymore. Ridiculous. Someone got their feathers ruffled and wanted to take out the little guy.
Ok, I am not going to keep replying to your endless wandering rebuttals. I feel you are wrong in who you are aiming your hate mail at and that is the end of the story.
Thats fine, and I do apologize for being excessively adamant about it. But I still feel I'm right. You only paint a target on yourself if you're prepared for people to shoot at you. Thats all I can say about it.
Darkrift said:
If Dell gives you a "free" copy of vista on your laptop, and then you buy a compaq with linux installed on it. Does that mean you have the right to install your "free" vista on the compaq also? It was free! How about you write a new windows shell and you bundle your free windows vista with it. And you also throw in your free copy of Office that came with it.
I understand their point and I realize these examples are not EXACT enough to matter, but the point does. They give you the apps for A SPECIFIC device and they give them to you with rules. Rules that we do not like.
I feel that they instead of C&D'ing him, should have had a little sit down with him. Said "hey, we realize you are doing a lot of good for us by promoting our product and giving those who want more what they ask for when we cannot, but we have some rules for you. A, you must make every attempt you can to make sure the roms you distribute go on authorized "With Google" devices. B, not release stuff you do not have permission to release." This would allow google to control what he releases enough to fit within the rules (keeps carriers from saying "hey, he can release your apps without paying, why cant we?"). They would also benefit from the many thousands of users who flock to these custom roms but realize they are unusable in their bare forms.
And so you do not have to, I will be the first to pull the term nazi out of my hat in this one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
About your dell giving you a "free" copy of vista. As long as that CD key is only used on one computer, you can use that CD key on ANY computer. Read their TOS. Your are wrong about a lot, but right about some. Changing the integrity of the windows shell is illegal, because that is microsoft property and NOT open source, but anytime you purchase an OS, or computer, you OWN that cd key of the software, all apps that come included as well. Could you try another example?
nice letter.
not so sure about the whole HTC (not "with google") phone thing- my magic is a HTC magic (32A) and it came will every single google app preinstalled on it.... not sure about hero though...
MontAlbert said:
nice letter.
not so sure about the whole HTC (not "with google") phone thing- my magic is a HTC magic (32A) and it came will every single google app preinstalled on it.... not sure about hero though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hero did too.
Regards,
Dave
Android is open. That's why I have my Samsung Galaxy S, my Nexus One and my Sapphire.
I have these phones because the open community can do better than the professionals, and I am proud to be a member of a community that has recently hacked Froyo onto the G1, Android2HD2 (and other Winmo devices), created great skins and themes, rooted almost every droid to date, hacked google navigation to work in other countries etc etc etc.
There is amazing work being done is this community.
Kingklick was able to put out a lot of ROMs which satisfied a lot of people. Contributors to Cyanogenmod (disclaimer. notably not Cyanogen himself) and others (fans and friends - disclaimer. note lack of word fanboys - of cyanogenmod, disclaimer. plus some others too) have flamed and flamed away about Kangklick (notably via twitter - I have stopped following any of those jerks that clogged up my feeds with what could've - screw that - should've been settled MUCH more privately..I followed you guys for dev news or the occasional interesting insight into your real life, not your petty bickering, but you have every right to post what you like...hence why I stopped following you all, I didn't flame you...note 'bigger man').
Rule 12 of XDArules clearly states that using the work of others must be done with permission, independent of whether it is open source or not. If this is not upheld then the post will be bought down, it does not say the user will be banned. I would understand the formality of taking the post down and requesting Kingklick reposts the ROM with due credit, but I believe - note believe...implies opinion - that moderators may have been influenced by pressure from other (high ranking, public eye) members and thus did not adhere to normal or just (I do not know if not giving creds is normally treated in this way, but you will discover I believe it shouldn't be) protacol. Kingklick broke the rules of XDA, but then again I see his banning as the least contentious issue here.
I believe that members of the XDA community in the public eye (ie with large Twitter follower base) due to their work via XDA (no matter what you say, cyanogenmod may be based at its own domain, but it still posts at XDA to maintain its public profile and feed of the massive XDA userbase, and is hence in part bound by this) have a responsibility to follow the rules of XDA on XDA rules and disputes. I do not think this is something which can be policed ('I'm banning you Wes for Trolling Kingklick...on Twitter'... not gonna work) but I think it is a moral obligation (anyone that thinks the internet is not bound by morality should take a reality check...the reason why we have open source is essentially ethics).
Do we give credit to Linus Torvalds every time we distribute linux kernels or work to do with linux? Do we give credit to those that helped him create this base? Do we give credit to Google for creating Android? HTC? Our carriers? Martin Cooper for inventing the mobile phone and cell networks? Time Berners-Lee for inventing the internet, giving rise to this forum, Google and thus the Phones/Devices we love and use? The fact is we don't give credit where due (although you may say its obscure to thank these people, they DO deserve our thanks). None of the ROM chefs/coders give all credit where due, but a lot do in part, with those directly involved. But who still thanks the original rooters?
Kingklick has been declared a copier by the jury...I haven't delved through the evidence to confirm this...but shouldn't we be much more relaxed about copying in general? All users should be open about their work with Android, but they are not. If kingklick based a build off Cyanongenmod, and gave due credit for that, he would be called unoriginal, despite his attempts to make improvements. I also believe that there should be transparency, a log of all complaints of interest and the community told in a statement from the mods why someone was banned...at least in part (keeping gory details to themselves thank you very much).
Donations are generally given by 'end-users'...noobs who can flash and maybe do some work on the builds but their contributions are limited. End users generally want user experience, and reward devs with commendation and donations. If kingklick does work on a build which satisfies more users and he hence gets donations, is that stealing donations? No. The original dev works on an open source project knowing that their work is open, but the end user can reward as he/she likes. Perhaps kingklick developed his following due to his branding...he did always use words like FAST and STABLE and SMOOTH, but Apple do the same and they're not banned from trading despite the hyperbole.
I do not doubt that a lot of devs thanks fellow devs with donations. Cyanogen is well known for donating, as is kingklick, however a lot of donations come from end users, and if kingklick replaces a few files using winrar (something which I generally contest, I believe kingklick does a lot of great work) and that satisfies more end users by being fast and stable and smooth (or perceived as being so thanks to branding) then he can get donations for that, they are a gesture of satisfaction and goodwill.
Kingklick was immoral by not giving true credit, however I believe that he could have been warned and asked to give credit once he got back from his night out (whether that excuse, or what ever his actual excuse was, was true).
I also laugh at the accusation that kingklick does not fill a niche within the 'open'/'free' community. This should not result in grudges and flame wars, whether it is true or not. Kingklick did fill a niche in my opinion: reviewers (and consumers) see vanilla android as being sterile. Hell it is sterile, and it's never going to be as successful as others if it doesn't sort this out. Cyanogenmod and other big names are based off this sterile form of Android, but they don't delve into Sense UI and other alternative skins, mainly due to preferences or copyright problems etc, not that that stops them with other things. Kingklick did work with these and he filled his niche by delivering great, fast, usable roms of these whilst others sneered at them for being inefficient coding or whatever...geeky snobbery.
Kingklick also delivered various fixes and things which other groups did not. I won't list all of these and I am sure representatives of Cyanogenmob et al will say 'we were gonna fix these issues anyways' or 'that's redundant' or 'that was patchy code', but kingklick has contributed. Obviously we have to hold ethics above output, we can not say that 'his holiness' (inteneded to mock those who believe cyanogen alone is a god, not cyanogen himself) Cyanogen's contributions to android exempt him from following conduct, but we do a great job of driving away good developers with flaming and telling tales. Perhaps you'll say kingklick was not a good developer, Drizzy, even Haykuro etc etc, but I only flashed Cyanogenmod on my Nexus once and I didn't like it for various reasons (personal preference yada yada) but I kept going back for more kingklick...whether that's perceived speed and branding etc or just satisfaction.
King's desire roms are great, but we never mobbed, trolled and banned the poor guy for not giving creds to HTC. Surely the morality of our community using software like Rosie on the Nexus is more ethically questionable than a fellow member of XDA's work, since HTC is a firm which employs people. I bought a Nexus over the Desire because I knew I could still have Sense and a bigger dev community, however the cost included in the Desire which goes to the developers of Sense is hence forgone (perhaps indeirectly, I don;t know HTC internal funding); therefore I have - and anyone who has ever flashed a Sense ROM or devved with Sense - indirectly caused loss of welfare for people who rely of developing as their source of income, tehir families, communities and economies. Surely that is less ethical than not saying thank you, but XDA has no problem with that. Perhaps it is too small to notice, but it will have an indirect impact nonetheless.
Yes kingklick should've said his please and thank you, but I think it's community hyped double standards, pretensical courtesy (not that I wouldn't give creds, it's just that pleases and thank yous are nice, but not actually useful). A wise man once said 'there is no threshold for immorality', just because kingklick did a larger 'crime' than the rest of the community in not giving his thanks out, that does not exempt the other rule breakers (ie everyone), it just means their punishment should be less severe...we choose to ignore it because it's less direct or forgotten about.
In conclusion, I think we should start a 'contributors to Android' part of XDA, added to by mods or specifically appointed members of the community (like the portal). This could be informative and could mean that forgotten about contributors could not be forgotten, but their contributions immortalised in the open community of Android. Even if the contributions become redundant, they are the foundations for the next chapter in the Android story.
Finally. www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html is a very good read..and think about what AOSP stands for (I'll give you a clue...Android Open Source Project!). Can you steal what is open? What right have others to dictate what can and cannot be distributed in the open aspects of Android code (ie the underlying OS and vanilla UI...I'm not confused with Apps). Perhaps kingklick was guilty of plagiarism? But so is anyone that claims they worked really hard in that kernel without crediting Linus and leaving a donation link to his family or favourite charitable causes. Anyone that says I've reworked the UI without giving credits to The Astonishing Tribe for the original Android concepts which all UIs are based off...
Android is closed, that's why I question this 'community'.
I am not proud to be a member of this 'community'...right now.
Ps. Cyanogenmob was originally a typo (using words like mobbed in my piece...Freudian slip on the keyboard rather than fat finger syndrome)...but I kept it in as I thought it was funny...the Cyogenmob should replace team douche IMHO!
Pps. Originally posted in Android Dev general but moved here as its Nexus dev themed!
im proud of myself for actually completing this reading haha. interesting read though.
cheddie said:
im proud of myself for actually completing this reading haha. interesting read though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im more proud of you for successfully quoting the entire thing...I might submit it for my dissertation next year
HazzBazz said:
Im more proud of you for successfully quoting the entire thing...I might submit it for my dissertation next year
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahah thanks for bringing that to my attention. had to edit it lol
To be fair I posted the god darn epic rant/essay/post...my bad !
HazzBazz said:
To be fair I posted the god darn epic rant/essay/post...my bad !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I posted it! I worked long and hard last week to write it out. I am accepting donations to cover my time spent though.
All this happens because altruism is evil in the sense that it is a lie. Altruists demand payment too, in the form of recognition, appreciation, respect, reputation, and all these similar thirst for prestige.
In NOT giving recognition to comrades In arms who share a common need for prestige, it is theft among kin, robbing prestige.
Prestige is indeed a rotten currency.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Touche...topical. Doesn't really do anything against my points, I am saying kingklick is guilty among many but they are appeased because they haven't got flames burning them. I do believe that kingklick should always give credit where due.
caysman said:
All this happens because altruism is evil in the sense that it is a lie. Altruists demand payment too, in the form of recognition, appreciation, respect, reputation, and all these similar thirst for prestige.
In NOT giving recognition to comrades In arms who share a common need for prestige, it is theft among kin, robbing prestige.
Prestige is indeed a rotten currency.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point...the fact is cyanogenmod wouldn't be as big with as many great ethusiastic devs without the praise it got...but is that a fair compromise for contributions...
I really think that the issue is the same as black droid. The Problem isn't that king copied the rom and redistributed it. The problem is that he did so claiming that it was his work based off of CM. When in reality he downloaded a a finished copy of CM, compiled by the CM team, and then changed a few lines the build.prop, renamed it and asked for donations. I personally can't see how that is helping the community at all. I really don't care about King one way or the other but I do think that the people who do the work should get credit for it. They spend countless hours writing code for us to have for FREE. Code you yourself says is better than what google puts out. They do this in their spare time and ask for nothing but recognition. You think that is wrong? I am amazed by this. Really I am.
HazzBazz said:
Good point...the fact is cyanogenmod wouldn't be as big with as many great ethusiastic devs without the praise it got...but is that a fair compromise for contributions...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't misunderstand me. Payment is due, for sure, and payment makes our world go round, but I do wish it were not in the form of mousy prestige, rotten evil currency that it is. Money is a much better choice, but prestige seekers pretend to loathe $ probably because $ is less ambiguous.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
They do this in their spare time and ask for nothing but recognition. You think that is wrong? I am amazed by this. Really I am.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But they do not explicitly ask for recognition do they? Even the great cyanogen does not do that, because once they impose recognition expressly as a mode of payment you would recognize that their asking for your adulation and love would seen a more demanding payment than asking for cash.
And also the inconvenience of the prestige seekers being more easily mistaken for all the money grabbing corporations which they demonize.
I'd make it clear that I have not wanted anything other than cyanogen's roms during my g1 days, and adulation I'd gladly pay, plus I have donated in money.
These guys made android exciting and formed PART of the inspiration for the paid android developers. It is unfortunate that the society's misconception of altruism as ' good' destroyed a lot of the language required to denounce it as the evil it actually is.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Gr8gorilla said:
I really think that the issue is the same as black droid. The Problem isn't that king copied the rom and redistributed it. The problem is that he did so claiming that it was his work based off of CM. When in reality he downloaded a a finished copy of CM, compiled by the CM team, and then changed a few lines the build.prop, renamed it and asked for donations. I personally can't see how that is helping the community at all. I really don't care about King one way or the other but I do think that the people who do the work should get credit for it. They spend countless hours writing code for us to have for FREE. Code you yourself says is better than what google puts out. They do this in their spare time and ask for nothing but recognition. You think that is wrong? I am amazed by this. Really I am.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it was actually jubehs rom he did that with.....
@OP, Omitting credit and stealing are completely different things. kk downloaded jubehs rom and changed 5-10 files and claimed it as his own. when confronted with this, kk said he compiled it himself even though the evidence overwhelmingly pointed at the other direction. He claimed to have built it from asop, when all he did was take someones rom and change a few files. if he said he "cooked" the rom from another (even without saying who) he would have been ok. But he continued to lie after he was caught which is probably why the ban hammer was dropped.
Most of this plus the damning evidence is located in the g1 section.
Also, android does not follow the GNU licensing, it follows apache, and by default, the devs who release their material here are also released under apache. Apache allows people to see the source so they can better understand it to develop, but people who use the source to develop something from it are not required to open source their works. they are also allow to put their own terms which would include giving proper credit.
AFAIK xda mods actually work together to decide on what to do with offenders. i know thats what they did for the wrecking crew (though some mods were less fair than others -_- )
PS: i havent used cyanogen mod since like 3.6.8 before the C&D lol
The sad fact is, it takes money to live in the world today. A lot of these programmers make good money 9-5 at their day jobs. The average computer engineer spends about 100,000 dollars going to college then makes about 60-70k per year after. This is working on a salary basis probably putting 40-60 hours per week. After that they spend another 20+ writing code for us because they like to. I can completely understand the devs wanting someone who copied and renamed their work to be banned.
That would be like you taking Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire, Calling it Circle of Fire and trying to sell it as your own. You would get sued, etc. Come on people how can you defend this guy, come on really?
Tl,dr the OP.
flybyme said:
Omitting credit and stealing are completely different things. kk downloaded jubehs rom and changed 5-10 files and claimed it as his own. when confronted with this, kk said he compiled it himself even though the evidence overwhelmingly pointed at the other direction. He claimed to have built it from asop, when all he did was take someones rom and change a few files. if he said he "cooked" the rom from another (even without saying who) he would have been ok. But he continued to lie after he was caught which is probably why the ban hammer was dropped.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this is true, he got what he deserved. I had a similar thing happen when I wrote a script for the iphone which gets about 75-100 downloads a day. Someone from a forum put their name on it, posted it saying they were up all night writing it and put a donation link at the bottom of their post.
When confronted, they lied and said it didn't work so they rewrote it, but a simple comparison showed the only changes made was to echo commands which displayed the author's name and some text about how to run it. They also had no clue how it worked and gave bad advice about how to use it, and there were a lot of people on that forum using it, having problems and asking questions.
I didn't really care, and I never got a penny for my work, but it forced me to think about it, and what I came up with was: what use is there in having that kind of thing around? They aren't contributing or advancing ideas, they're confusing them and possibly screwing things up.
The douche that stole my script went from "moderator" to "supermoderator" at that site. If that was your site, why would you even want to keep him around? I'm not a banhammer kinda guy, but there's no upside to allowing things like that to continue.
Im no developer, but i do see both sides of the story. But I mean this is no way to act.
[email protected] please tell your teamdouche to grow up. We all know it was someone in it that just made that name
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kingklick92
whoever made that account with MY name haha ur f****g retarded, Ill see you in court. You distribuuted MY name
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kingklick92
whether you were in the right or not.
I think credit should just be given when you use someones work just like you would want the same for your work.
Delete if not acceptable.
Oh for ****'s sake.
OP, you're being a white-knighting ninny. KK got what he deserved: "open-source" doesn't mean an eradication of common courtesy--and crediting is common courtesy. You're trying to weasel around "blah blah why don't we credit HTC and Google" which is sheer, utter, retarded straw man. We know who developed Android by implication unless you live under a rock. Not so with specific individual community contributions.
Besides, what did KK even do? All I saw in the N1 development section from him was ROMs based off other people's work slightly modified, or rubbish that never worked like his attempt to port Blur. I say good riddance. The fact that he managed to scam donations off people hardly helps his case. I'd sooner donate to the source/original contributors, not such a juvenile, plagiarizing, useless waste of oxygen.
RANT ON:
While happily chugging along on some of the stuff that I hope to release to you all, I've made a very disturbing discovery, which makes me feel almost like the Big Man turning green. Angry. Pissed. Greatly disappointed!
First some background.
Everyone worth their 'droid knows about the Cease & Desist letter sent to Cyanogen.
Many of us know the same happened to Conflipper from Shipped ROMs.
Rumor has it the same happened to samsung-firmwares.com
Yet it appears there are still people around who like poking at the beehive (yes, killer bees!) that is the phone industry and their armies of lawyers. Things that are GUARANTEED to piss them off BigTime.
I'm not going to drop list of names here, I hope their conscience will speak to them on a quiet night or something.
The morale?
STOP CHARGING MONEY FOR THINGS THAT AREN'T YOURS TO SELL!
HELP PEOPLE GET WHAT THEY CAN ALREADY GET FOR FREE!
Besides being against the rules of most mod/tweak/hack forums out there, charging for someone else's stuff is probably the biggest reason for lawyers to go after websites hosting 'official', 'unofficial', 'leaked' etc. ROMs: lawyers merely have to google for "premium membership", "costs", "donations" etcetera.
Please people, stop doing this, or there will be a time when Samsung, Sony, HTC, LG, Motorola, Nokia and whoever else will simply pull the plug on online firmware updates and start telling people to take their phones to the shop for updating, eFuse and all. Needless to say, the vibe of the modding community will suffer with it.
I was the first (as far as I can tell) to post about Kies test mode, I'm willing to put time and effort in making a tool to allow people to update to and backup ANY firmware using just Kies (no need even for a registry hack), maybe even use Kies update module on non-Windows OSes (well, those that support Wine), help with developing Heimdall, fixing the FM radio, etcetera. Please allow others and me to go on doing this.
So:
- Don't steal others' work only to lock it up and start charging money for using it.
- Be honest and open about your discoveries.
- Be respectful of the services you use, don't hammer them needlessly.
...and the list goes on.
RANT OFF
What's this all about? No need to pay for firmware update requests, use Kies and one or two simple, free tools (coming soon) to get them. Less noise in the forums about the inner workings, which could attract angry lawyers from far away.
That's all.
Well said mista, lets hope some take note.
i mean really?
I thought samsung-firmwares.com got a cease and desist because of having Samsung in the name and make people assume they own and are responsible for the site...thats why Samsung-firmwares made a new site with a different name..
Hmm, why mention Cyanogen's cease and desist letter in a post that has nothing to do with him whatsoever? It's not like Cyanogen was asking money for anything and the reason behind his C&D was entirely different.
As for Samsung-firmwares.com, they had it coming and got what they deserved (and obviously didn't get it at all, looking at their current activities...)
Case_ said:
Hmm, why mention Cyanogen's cease and desist letter in a post that has nothing to do with him whatsoever? It's not like Cyanogen was asking money for anything and the reason behind his C&D was entirely different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, he wasn't asking money. I added him to show that lawyers can be set off barking at anyone involved in hosting OR selling someone elses intellectual property. I should have been more clear about that.
As much as I think that IP is just imaginary property, I cherish the modding community and their great work too much. I'd hate to see the same happening to us.
Hah! Just seen the new Samsung firmwares temporary page. This is just priceless. For those who don't understand Czech, they say there that everyone from Czech republic is blocked from the site and can't even register for their "premium services", because, apparently, "Czech people were spreading our firmwares illegally".
Edit: Sorry. As it was just explained to me by the owner of Samsung firmwares, the site on that URL has nothing to do with them anymore and apparently is someone's idea of a great joke...
The April Fools "prank" was immature, unprofessional, intrusive, invasive, and overall in poor taste.
I've completely removed LOS from all of my devices and have moved back to stock or alternative ROMs and refuse to support LOS from now on.
I believe the team must issue a formal apology to their long-time supports who make them who they are. This "prank" was completely foolish and unnecessary.
I initially thought you were trying to trick me into installing a crypto miner on my device.... and now I don't trust you one bit.
I'm done with LOS... but you still owe us an apology.
I can not say that I disagree with you. On a scale from 1 to 10 of smart moves, this one scored about -15 on my card. But, usually the sort of heartfelt and genuinely sincere apology you seek travels along with a remote possibility, no matter HOW remote, of redemption at some point in the future. One does not have to forget in order to forgive. An apology to the scorched earth? What would be the point? It also appears that you have been with CM since older times, so did you feel the same sense of rage at THEIR 01 April pranks? And yes, we might be comparing apples and oranges in terms of the severity of the "dumbness" involved, but if I knew someone was blowing me off for all time I would be less inclined to worry about issuing an apology to them. If they want people to support them going forward (and with close to 2,000,000 active installs, any one of us is probably worth about as much as snail turd on the ocean floor) maybe it is time for the LOS user base to say "enough is enough." And who , knows, maybe they will just go away and leave all of us alone, but I hope not.
Can we still trust in the concept of open source? The prank code has been reviewed in a public visible process. Why hasn't there been a warning in forums and social media?
Monthly payment https://www.paypal.me/LineageOS removed.
In a word, yes we can .....
kurtn said:
Can we still trust in the concept of open source? The prank code has been reviewed in a public visible process. Why hasn't there been a warning in forums and social media?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like many others viewing and posting here, I found the Lineage 01 April "joke" to be, at best, sub-optimal. But let us not "throw the baby out with the bath water." Please consider the following: ALL of the individuals who have viewed the XDA forum postings about this constitute well less than 1% of the installed base of active builds of LOS. Apparently, the other 99% is either blissfully unaware of what some of us perceive as a world threatening problem or they just don't give a rip. Any one individual, no matter how prestigious within this circle, isn't worth 2,000,000 users with respect to the weight of their opinion. If the LOS 01 April build "joke" had simply gone through the display of some dumb messages, informed the user it was a joke, then politely self-destructed, we would all be applauding the LOS Team for being so clever. So what we really have here is a coding error accompanied by (hopefully, and I believe this to be the case) no malicious intent. I can not and would not DARE to speak for everyone else looking at this, but God knows I have made my share of coding errors over the past few decades. If we tar and feather every programmer who makes a mistake, or does something we disapprove of, we will shortly run out of programmers, since ALL of us have failed at some point along the way if we are willing to be HONEST with ourselves. NOW, should the Lineage OS user base politely suggest that "enough is enough" with respect to April fools' jokes? Perhaps so. I politely suggest to the LOS Team that they post a survey for interested parties to respond to, and consider the responses accordingly.
Also, it doesn't matter if the code was publicly reviewable, since you can't necessarily trust or inspect every part of the rom or OTA infrastructure (might have been a hijacked download etc.).
This was in extremely poor taste. For me to remove the message, I have to root my device and install a terminal emulator or editor with access to the root file system.
Imagine I installed LineageOS on a friend's phone (perfect example: my mother). How freaked out would she be and ever trust her phone again? How would you expect her to fix this? This wasn't funny, especially in a time like this, where there is security breaches, malicious crypo miners and other problems all over the place.
I don't see how a formal apology would benefit anybody, but since the original thread was closed, I want to point out that this should never be repeated and people's privacy should be respected.
Absolutely Correct
eViLsTieFel said:
Also, it doesn't matter if the code was publicly reviewable, since you can't necessarily trust or inspect every part of the rom or OTA infrastructure (might have been a hijacked download etc.).
This was in extremely poor taste. For me to remove the message, I have to root my device and install a terminal emulator or editor with access to the root file system.
Imagine I installed LineageOS on a friend's phone (perfect example: my mother). How freaked out would she be and ever trust her phone again? How would you expect her to fix this? This wasn't funny, especially in a time like this, where there is security breaches, malicious crypo miners and other problems all over the place.
I don't see how a formal apology would benefit anybody, but since the original thread was closed, I want to point out that this should never be repeated and people's privacy should be respected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is precisely why the collective expression of dissatisfaction from this community (and others) must be significant and coordinated. Lots of people - self included - are not at all pleased with this whole scenario, but if all that is done is for a few people, regardless of their relative prominence, to rant it shall not make any difference. There is also that old adage that one catches more files with honey than with vinegar, so a firm but civilized expression of our collective dissatisfaction is likely to be more effective than calling for people's heads to roll.
Here it is
https://lineageos.org/An-April-Apology/
kurtn said:
Here it is
https://lineageos.org/An-April-Apology/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And of course we shall now probably have the inevitable follow up ranting from those who find the apology insufficient
For MY money, I think they realized they went a bit over the line and will try to make sure that history doesn't repeat itself next year. Forget ? NO. Forgive ? YES. Fun is fun, as long as everyone understands that it is supposed to be fun, and THAT is often difficult to do. A really artistic April fools' joke would deliver the content, make itself known as such, and then gracefully self-destruct, leaving no traces and not requiring the next update to un-do it. It requires more programming talent to do it that way, but when oohs and aahs replace frowns and rants, hopefully it would be seen as worth the effort.
Back to WORK ..... :crying:
I'm happy to see an apology but this was beyond dumb. I'm surprised that much effort was made and no one realized it. I hope to see better taste from the team in the future.
RBMacGregor said:
I'm happy to see an apology but this was beyond dumb. I'm surprised that much effort was made and no one realized it. I hope to see better taste from the team in the future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly did it really harm anyone? No so y not just appreciate all the work that they do for the community and so what its one day a year y not celebrate it with something worth doing I mean so what it took effort to get rid of it they said Sry to please all those that feel wronged by a harmless prank so let it go
Sent from my XT1766 using XDA Labs
Yes, that prank was in extremely bad taste, but now it's time we all moved on. I'm not going to abandon LineageOS, as I will be hurting myself a lot more than anyone else.
I do not understand the complaints of you, guys. LOS team is working hard on a great free operating system for our phones and tablets and we do not have to pay a penny for it. We should appreciate their work and not to complain about this innocent joke. LineageOS is far the best open system for Android devices and I will support it like before.
wizzardsk said:
I do not understand the complaints of you, guys. LOS team is working hard on a great free operating system for our phones and tablets and we do not have to pay a penny for it. We should appreciate their work and not to complain about this innocent joke. LineageOS is far the best open system for Android devices and I will support it like before.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree and most custom ROMs are based off their hard work they do for us
Sent from my XT1766 using XDA Labs
skullkid383 said:
Honestly did it really harm anyone? No so y not just appreciate all the work that they do for the community and so what its one day a year y not celebrate it with something worth doing I mean so what it took effort to get rid of it they said Sry to please all those that feel wronged by a harmless prank so let it go
Sent from my XT1766 using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Jupp, it harmed me. Maybe I am a paranoid fool, but as soon as I saw the mining-message I googled for it, didn't find anything and wiped my phone. Though I have backups it took me about eight hours to get everything up and running again, as I don't rely on the google cloud...
I do not click on any messages if there is the smallest suspect of my phone beeing hacked. So I had no chance to find out, that this was ment as an April Fools trick.
My fault was, that I did not read the changelog. But to be honest: I don't want to have to do this weekly for my phone!
Anyway, I am really thankful for the good work of the developers of lineageos, so let's get back to party and do better next time.
Am I we only one who finds that April fools are not really funny at all? I am always happy then the day is over.
jho55 said:
Am I we only one who finds that April fools are not really funny at all? I am always happy then the day is over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My local newspaper has had funny jokes. And the date is next to the joke and the next day there is a report on what was a joke and who was fooled to go to some fake event. That's OK.
It's not OK to get pranked on April 6th for a whole week.
I just figured out it was a Joke because I am behind on my updates. So I google the Joke Warning as Real or Fake? lol I'm relieved it was a joke. I don't need an apology, just a how to remove the persistent Warning. Should I connect the phone to my pc to access a terminal? I'm not particularly Tech Savvy, sorry. I run LOS and appreciate their hard work. So no complaints are justified. Thank you
Maybe @xanthrax or @SacredDeviL666 can take a look at this thread to determine if it's still needed to be open.
I believe that after the formal apology from the Lineage Team and the time since then makes for a lesson learned and time to move on to bigger and better things. :thumbup:
Thank you very much for your understanding...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I DO NOT provide support via PM unless asked/requested by myself. PLEASE keep it in the threads where everyone can share.
Thank you all.
Let's all get got some coffee and donuts now that the team has said and accepted.
Who wants americano ? see you all there at the coffee counter :highfive: