Related
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.
*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.
The DK28 software that was distributed to the Version 4 Epics by Samsung & Sprint contains a Linux kernel that is licensed under GPLv2.
According to the GPLv2 license, the source code must be offered & available to hose who received the kernel. Since previous sources have appeared on Samsung's site, I will assume they are assuming the licensing responsibility for distribution.
Since the source for the DK28 Linux kernel is not available, GPLv2 says that Samsung cannot legally distribute the Linux kernel, which makes DK28 warez.
The XDA forum rules say,
Don't post copyrighted materials or do other things that will obviously lead to legal trouble
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since the Linux kernel in DK28 cannot be legally distributed without the source being available, all DK28 kernels need to be removed from the XDA forum due to its status as illegally distributed.
Samsung needs to negotiate with the Linux copyright owners before they can legally distribute the kernel. Posting the sources later does not reinstate the license.
(If Linux used GPLv3, all Samsung would need to do to be legal would be to release the source code.)
See http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html for more information on GPLv2.
prodigyplace == troll?
Troll somewhere else....TROLL!!!
reported
Pretty sure they have 30 days. Also, Samsung did not distribute this at all, it was obtained in a non-approved manner.
I'm lost as to why you would want dk28 roms taken down, in response to what you're saying is a breach on sammys part...? I have much respect for open source, but it seems like the anarchy police make more problems with retentively adhering to the brotherhood of steel codex. Sorry, too much fallout lately. But I'm pretty sure the xda admins have looked over the legalities considering all the press they have gotten. Besides, can the cooks be faulted for tinkering with something THEY never got source on?? Thought I read this debate a while back... anyways, I think the spirit of open source is so that more people develop and we all get better software....?
Sounds like this is typical in linux land... either that or an evo owner...
leatherneck6017 said:
Troll somewhere else....TROLL!!!
reported
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely agree. This is what we refer to at work as "Poking the bear".
Funny ****
Troll be gone!
Sent from my Epic 4G
welp, id better download it fast before they pull it.not.
People calling this guy a troll are fools. You might disagree with him but his argument has reason.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Mushmaster said:
People calling this guy a troll are fools. You might disagree with him but his argument has reason.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes troll would give him more credit than he deserves....
he's an intelligent moron... pm a mod if you think it is illegal, buy a lawyer and sue samsung if you feel your rights have been violated... other than that you're crying on deaf ears
I have a sneaking suspicion this is a previously banned former member, disgruntled, back under a new ID simply trying to stir the chit.
I'm just sayin'...
They would have to release source code if this was a public release since DK28 is an internal beta that got leaked I don't believe that releasing source code applies.
Technically, it's a question of distribution... since they distributed it to owners of .4 hardware, whether testers or not, whether on purpose or not, those receivers of the OTA are legally entitled to the source code. Samsung has a "reasonable" amount of time to comply... and 30 days is generally considered reasonable.
Prodigy I agree with you. Basically the people who disagree with statment. Get some glasses and read the licence yourself. If you want a microsoft world go get a windows phone. From all the posting I see about dk28, there is nothing about who created the kernel. The gpl licence is there to proctect you as a indivdual, so next time you rant or rave about infomation like this. You will only have yourself to blame in the future.
prodigyplace said:
The DK28 software that was distributed to the Version 4 Epics by Samsung & Sprint contains a Linux kernel that is licensed under GPLv2.
According to the GPLv2 license, the source code must be offered & available to hose who received the kernel. Since previous sources have appeared on Samsung's site, I will assume they are assuming the licensing responsibility for distribution.
Since the source for the DK28 Linux kernel is not available, GPLv2 says that Samsung cannot legally distribute the Linux kernel, which makes DK28 warez.
The XDA forum rules say,
Since the Linux kernel in DK28 cannot be legally distributed without the source being available, all DK28 kernels need to be removed from the XDA forum due to its status as illegally distributed.
Samsung needs to negotiate with the Linux copyright owners before they can legally distribute the kernel. Posting the sources later does not reinstate the license.
(If Linux used GPLv3, all Samsung would need to do to be legal would be to release the source code.)
See http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html for more information on GPLv2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Any assumption of an assumption is an endless pool of BS
OP: Thanks for looking out for our welfare.
Mushmaster said:
People calling this guy a troll are fools. You might disagree with him but his argument has reason.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every argument has reason...it just might be the wrong reason.
Just in case it is just a "trolling" attempt, though...
Wow.. you guys consider this a troll? I'd madhouse over here if I didn't frequent the foroum for advice.
If it were me.. I'd be asking you guys when Gingerbread would be released for my iPhone 4.
wow.. really?? Its either people complain about not getting leaks or they complain when a leak is out. smh you cant win..
Don't they have two weeks to release the source?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1083280
Please read and help fight! This guy is a thief and deserves to be shut down. Please help out the smartphone community!
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
I agree this is extremely shady and should be discontinued...
Yes, there's a "but"...
The guy has no links, no information, no purpose for the money other than "it gets you full access". Once full access is achieved, presumably, one can then access the forums.
It seems as though he's charging money to allow access into a message board and not specifically to access ROMs.
Only a fool would purchase access to a forums which contains information freely available anywhere else with a little searching.
othan1 said:
I agree this is extremely shady and should be discontinued...
Yes, there's a "but"...
The guy has no links, no information, no purpose for the money other than "it gets you full access". Once full access is achieved, presumably, one can then access the forums.
It seems as though he's charging money to allow access into a message board and not specifically to access ROMs.
Only a fool would purchase access to a forums which contains information freely available anywhere else with a little searching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. It makes me really pissed because he has einherjar roms/mods/themes behind his donation wall. All of us at EDT put way too much hard work and countless hours into our work. And to have some punk ***** steal it, charge people for it, and claim its his own work by editing the build prop, really gets under my skin.This goes for all devs/teams. I speak for all of them.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
I support your cause, what this guy is doing is wrong. If he posts ANYTHING related to donation requirements on XDA then notify a senior mod and have his ass escorted to the door. Both promoting outside sites that are designed to compete directly with XDA and requiring donations is strictly against the rules. He's treading in waist high water here...
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Dan_Brutal said:
Agreed. It makes me really pissed because he has einherjar roms/mods/themes behind his donation wall. All of us at EDT put way too much hard work and countless hours into our work. And to have some punk ***** steal it, charge people for it, and claim its his own work by editing the build prop, really gets under my skin.This goes for all devs/teams. I speak for all of them.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And you have every right to deny anyone distribution rights to your product. So I'm behind you on this and will spread the word as I can.
Is there anything in the licensing for open source (GPL?) that can be done to send this person a C&D letter prior to lawsuits?
Why this guy?? When you have things like Appl**et pirating every Android app, hes small time.
Why this guy?? When you have things like Appl**et pirating every Android app, hes small time.
**Sorry about the double post, cant delete a post i guess.
Don't know if anyone knows this but he's also using fake users to post positive comments on his YouTube site. I researched this. For example, the user 'sfanua42' was used to post the following comment 4 weeks ago,
"THIS GUY RIGHT HERE IS THE BEST YOUTUBER/ CUSTOMER SERVICE GUY EVER! I RATE ***** ."
Clicking on this user brings up a profile that was created 4 weeks ago and hasn't been used in 4 weeks. It's also devoid of any user information whatsoever. He's a scam artist right down to the dotted line. I'm truly disgusted by this and hope something can be done about it and I feel for the original developers involved in the works available on his site.
Who thinks its wrong for websites to charge for free services of other people knowledge and hard work? I know this website that is charging people for the developers roms on here rooting etc. In my opinion its wrong especially when its free knowledge on here. I gurantee the members of the website are not programmers and using your roms and knowledge for their website.
I would find out which ROMs specifically, and pm their respective developers. Or post the name of the website so the devs can join and say that the ROM is theirs and that whoever is posting should stop trying to make money off other people's hard work and dedication
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
That's pretty outrageous, it's a shame people take advantage of the great part of xda being a free community for devs to provide their work.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
I would also notify the administrators of XDA, unsure if we have a legal team, but that website can be taken down, if there is a legal team, they can be taken to court for damages.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
Shinydude100 said:
I would also notify the administrators of XDA, unsure if we have a legal team, but that website can be taken down, if there is a legal team, they can be taken to court for damages.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The lawyer fees would be more than XDA would gain. Also, since they do not have the rights to our ROMs, I don't believe that they could (nor would they want to) have the grounds to sue people based on them. It is unfortunate that this happens, but people should know better. They need to know that this is free. I am disappointed that people stoop this low, but if they need the money badly enough that they have to charge for a free service, then there are other avenues that they need to explore. I don't believe it is plagiarism, nor is it within anyone's rights to stop them from doing this. It is not against the law. It is immoral, but not illegal.
xboxfanj said:
The lawyer fees would be more than XDA would gain. Also, since they do not have the rights to our ROMs, I don't believe that they could (nor would they want to) have the grounds to sue people based on them. It is unfortunate that this happens, but people should know better. They need to know that this is free. I am disappointed that people stoop this low, but if they need the money badly enough that they have to charge for a free service, then there are other avenues that they need to explore. I don't believe it is plagiarism, nor is it within anyone's rights to stop them from doing this. It is not against the law. It is immoral, but not illegal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said! Unethical and illegal are two seperate things... while it is wrong, the only ones that would have the rights to sue are the actual developers of the roms... xda holds no rights to the roms that devs build... so while it is unfortunate and IMO wrong, there is nothing illegal about it...