Database Users

An open letter to Google re: their C&D

I had originally posted this in Development which was the wrong place and understandably it has been removed.
Considering Cyanogen's recent tweets that he has started working on a new rom that won't violate Google's licenses, I wasn't sure I would post the letter but I have received a request. So here it is:
Google Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043
U.S.A
26 September 2009
Attn: Android Development
To Whom it May Concern:
Re: Cease & Desist Letter against Steve Kondik aka Cyanogen
I've recently read with considerable chagrin about recent events concerning your actions against Steve Kondik, otherwise known as Cyanogen.
First off, I understand that legally Google has every right to take the actions it has thus far. However, as I am sure you are beginning to see, your actions are bound to have a very negative effect even for yourselves. No one denies that Mr. Kondik overstepped the line when he included applications in his customised ROM that he was not licensed to distribute. Could not your response though have been a little more constructive?
Perhaps a dialog with Mr. Kondik, explaining your concerns and perhaps coming to a settlement that saves face for both privately might have been better? Instead, this ham-handed move by your legal team has effectively stopped the Android mod community dead in its tracks and turned a fan base that was quickly beginning to grow like a yeast culture against you.
I hold some small hope that some compromise can be reached but in all truth I believe Pandora's box is now open and a trust has been broken on both sides.
Will I ride out my contract with my cell phone carrier? Yes, I hold Rogers Canada blameless in all this. Will I "protest" by buying a different phone? Unlikely since it proves nothing other than I have money to throw away. Will I ever buy another Android device? I really don't know at this stage. I feel hurt by this turn of events and can't honestly say I trust Google not to pull some other legal manoeuvre out of their bag of tricks that further cripples my "Google Experience".
You have likely lost someone who evangelised your product, perhaps a great many evangelists.
Sincerely,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Guys Cyanogen just said in IRC that he is backing down and wont be any part of a fight with Google. This cant stop us. even if @Cyanogen is backing down we the community can still pressure Google to change the policy's that stopped cyanogen. We cant give up this soon. please work with me to pressure Google.

i think these threads need to stop being posted. it create a lot of clutter. who care if cyanogen or whoever may not include google exp apps...
cyanogen is developing an app to help reinstall these apps as long as the user has them backed up. this is technically legal.

ahronzombi said:
Guys Cyanogen just said in IRC that he is backing down and wont be any part of a fight with Google. This cant stop us. even if @Cyanogen is backing down we the community can still pressure Google to change the policy's that stopped cyanogen. We cant give up this soon. please work with me to pressure Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
then give google your home address and a copy of a rom you made that contains their closed apps, especially the new market (that ticked them off so much), and see if they do not doing anything to you.
I wish i could quote exactly what steve told you, but here we go to paraphrase
"what movement? start writing code or shut the [email protected]#$ up."
some where in there is a word that means copulation

its fkd up wat google did n all....but come on...its not the end of the fkn world
id hate to be at google though gettin loads n loads of emails from geeks n nerds....and normal ppl too....hahaha..... ppl saying how their feelings are hurt n they feel betrayed hahahaha
leeeeeeeeaaaavvvvvveeeee gooooooggggglllllleeeeee alllllooooonnnneeee hahahaha

Kinds sucks google did that, but yeah, just another bump in the road. Give it time.
Letter looks like fun tho. Maybe I'll change a few things and send them a copy lol, if you dont mind me stealing your words lol.

david1171 said:
then give google your home address and a copy of a rom you made that contains their closed apps, especially the new market (that ticked them off so much), and see if they do not doing anything to you.
I have only had my phone rooted for the last 5 weeks i think,in fact david1171 helped me i think and its the best thing i did with it and have only had
Cyanogen's Roms on it and am delighted because of him and others i know alot more about what my G1 can do and i have also learnt alot more in general
so i am thankful to Cyanogen for his hard work,but as the quote above puts it best. For him it might have to be over for now
so instead of all the posts saying fight google how about a few just saying "Thanks" for what he did do eh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

[A THOUGHT] Copying in an Open Community

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.

Can Someone please clarify some rules for me

Rule 8: donations up front are not allowed
to quote the mod "asking for donations up-front"
The phrase "if you donate you can have this rom" was never said Someone asked the dev what the public release date would be and he stated 3-4 days. I guess they always have to keep a secret when the releases are.
Seems pretty straight forward. However I fail to see how "established developer with lengthy public release list and contibutions to the scene, rewards the people who, with no pre-knowledege that something might come of it or with any purpose except to say thanks for the work you have already done it is great, helped him with donations so he layed out a beta release for them a few days early."
Maybe we need to change the official XDA rules or make an amendment or something that says. "If at any point ever you release something that does not leave every person with an equal opportunity to download it, barring complications due to persons being on differing Internet Providers, any threads pertaining to this download or the children of this download will be closed and will be looked into to determine if banning is necessary.
That way if any developer feels especially close to his biggest fans and wants to throw them a bonus to really show his appreciation he wont even think of doing any kind or pre release.
Edit: Can someone please post what rule the dev broke? Someone has already posted that he is well with the GPL and I am saying he is well within rule 8
EDIT2: I WOULD LOVE A MOD TO COME HERE AND TRY TO CLARIFY/JUSTIFY THEIR ACTIONS

damn that thread was closed ima wait to install it till its reopened
do not bar this awesome rom

lately i see that the xda team are coming down hard on epic developers. i wonder if there is something else going on...oops, i hope that no one banes me
BRING EPIC EXPERIENCE BACK

ericizzy1 said:
lately i see that the xda team are coming down hard on epic developers. i wonder if there is something else going on...oops, i hope that no one banes me
BRING EPIC EXPERIENCE BACK
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think it is the only one. I thought I remember reading that if Hero's backedsnack had a public releases the thread would be opened here however there is definitely a great 1.3 public release, Rom and Kernel with many things other roms don't have and the thread here is definitely not open.

Wow. I almost mentioned this to him yesterday but figured it must've been within the rules. I know there are lots of different apps/roms on here that go out early to donators, so what's the difference? I assume it's based on him stating publicly that it will go out early to donators?
Glad I got my donation in and download link in my mailbox! Epic Experience is really the only ROM worth running on the Epic right now.

Funny how when I was in the Hero forum this was common practice, and even exposed to the staff here and nothing was done.
If you did not donate, you did not get the ROM until the public release was announced. I don't see why this is a big problem? People develop and take time from their busy lives to make roms, why not ask for donations, and give the people who donate special perks?

Because it's not a donation if you have to pay for it to get it.
Let's say you go to one of those car washes...you know, with the 16 year old girls in skimpy bathing suits with the sign, Donations Only. Now, you pull up there and expect a car wash, but they tell you that you have to pay before they'll even start anything. Not knowing how good a job they'll do, you have no idea how much you'd want to pay them so, because you don't want to pay until it's done, they send you to the back of the line until they make enough money to open it to everyone.
Say one guy pays $15 to that donation and, although the view of their supple, tight breasts smashed against his windshield is highly stimulating, they do little to the car but smear mud all over and leave streaks on the window. They're done now. Great show, but that's not why he came to the car wash. He regrets giving that money now because he drives away with blue balls and a dirty car. Not worth the "donation".
Donations are something given for products/services received up front, otherwise, it's called a charge.

Now take that car wash, ask for a $5 donation up front to have your cash washed now, or wait a week and have to deal with the lines (low bandwith) of being able to have your car washed for free.
Same concept. Its not a charge, its a donation. Because you don't HAVE to donate to be able to download it. The public will be able to download it, just a few days down the road.

I am not to familiar with whats going on as I don't use that rom..but from my understanding he does make the rom publicly available...the only advantage donators get are support and early access to the beta.
I do not see an issue with that in itself...as you can try the rom and everyone has access to it..but with "betas" its up to the author how to handle distribution of it...
THE GPL states
"When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things."
Aka he has the right to charge for distribution according to the GPL..but once obtained a person is free to share the beta to everyone else if they choose.
I personally do not see a problem in that respect..of course if its a violation os a different rule thats another story.

scriz said:
Now take that car wash, ask for a $5 donation up front to have your cash washed now, or wait a week and have to deal with the lines (low bandwith) of being able to have your car washed for free.
Same concept. Its not a charge, its a donation. Because you don't HAVE to donate to be able to download it. The public will be able to download it, just a few days down the road.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again. It's not a donation, you're saying "This car wash costs $5."
We have a vending machine at work. It costs 60 cents for a candy bar. But if we wait a month or so, they'll be placed on the kitchen table for free. Is that 60 cents a donation or a cost?
Just because it will be free later does not mean it's not a cost now.
This is okay with me: "Hey, I'm charging whatever you want to pay to get my ROM before anyone else! After I release it to the general public, they can feel free to donate what they feel it's worth."
That is apparently not okay with XDA which is the whole point of the thread. I didn't want to get too far off topic with semantics and my personal feelings.

Grow up xda
Want my advice, of course not but I will post it anyway cause I am waiting for a 30 minute rip file and dont need to read on the can.
Slap him on the wrist, remind him of the rule and move the hell on. This is a DEV doing good things. I dont agree with your rule, all he did was post a day or two early for his supporters, its not like a public release was not coming at all. But I do agree that if you have a rule you then need to enforce it or think about changing the stupid thing.
Seems to me like XDA is becoming a little too militant. Thats all right, these forum sites come and go with change.

Last thing.
I hate criticizing or supporting rules without exposing loopholes (Lawful Neutral with evil tendencies). Here's what I would do as the dev.
1. Follow the friggin' rules.
2. Make a post such as "Having troubles with the newest Beta for XXX ROM"
3. Ardent followers will recognize that ROM and ask why they don't have it
4. The OP (secondary account for the dev or a friend) will explain it's a paid beta (or "required donation" beta if you prefer) of XXXX user's ROM and can contact him here: [email protected] or however you guys do it.
5. "BUT I DON'T WANNA PAY!!!" Well, I think the dev mentioned it will be open to all on XX/XX/XXXX and he'll make a post when it's freely available as per the rules.
Ta-da. Totally within the rules to ask for assistance on ROMs even when others may or may not have them.
And don't lie. Ever. There is never a reason to lie. Dev, put a small, easily noticed and easily fixed bug in your ROM so it's a legitimate post.
People willing to buy an early beta are happy. XDA is happy. Moderators are happy.

othan1 said:
Again. It's not a donation, you're saying "This car wash costs $5."
We have a vending machine at work. It costs 60 cents for a candy bar. But if we wait a month or so, they'll be placed on the kitchen table for free. Is that 60 cents a donation or a cost?
Just because it will be free later does not mean it's not a cost now.
This is okay with me: "Hey, I'm charging whatever you want to pay to get my ROM before anyone else! After I release it to the general public, they can feel free to donate what they feel it's worth."
That is apparently not okay with XDA which is the whole point of the thread. I didn't want to get too far off topic with semantics and my personal feelings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi will i normally agree with you and take a pretty strict stance on the line between donation and cost. In this rom situation I do not agree. First off yes you are paying for that candy bar. However most car washes like that call it a donation because the driver picks the amount. So the only important thing we can take from that example is that for it to be a donation the donator has to have full control over the amount he wants to give.
Also the car wash is a pretty poor analogy with way to many holes to be meaningful. That car wash doesn't have a previous track record of being free but just for this one superwash you get it a little early. In addition, the car wash doesn't have a set release schedule for a stated timetable. Also another reason for the carwash it is called a donation is becuase you are directly giving money to some "charity" whether it be a real charity or a made up one like giving money so we can go to volleyball state championship. Either way you are donating money to that "charity" then they are washing your car sexily. Lastly the solicit the car wash "cost" of a donation up front.
The most important thing though is to look at the situation. Go back anytime last month and look at the state of things. The first thing the dev did was release a rom to the forums, it started gaining in popularity. Then he released some updates, bugfixes and general tweaks. The rom kept getting better and better and faithful users decided that they wanted to inspire the dev to keep up his good work so numurous people, me included, donated. Now I have only been moved to donated 3 times before, to the xda site, and since I was on a touchpro2 to NRG and MightyMike. In every instance I have donated because the people have provided with a very good product that has greatly improved my experience on my phone. Back to the story, We all donated, the dev never asked for it as payment to the rom, the roms were always available, heck there is nearly a 2 month back catalog, and I am sure there are people out there that will swear that each and every release has the best battery, or the best that, etc. So now the dev has a huge update, He has never publicly stated that he is releasing the rom as an early release and an awesome email ends up in my inbox, which can be considered nothing more than a thank you for your support. He has never stated that he is going to continue releasing roms early to donators or if it is a one time deal. Unless the dev makes a statement about it the only logical conclusion that can be drawn is that he will continue to release his rom normally but if he has a huge .1 update then maybe those "benchmark" roms will be release a little early. Since that is the current case.
If someone was to put up a phantom thread with no downloads and start asking for donations for proposed things, get rid of them. That is clearly not the case here.

I don't agree with xda in this.. schizo is a great dev with a great rom and it is fully available to the public for free. Schizo never even brought up the new release in his thread until the donators thanked him for it. Bad move xda for coming down on a dev that's just taking care of his loyal supporters.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

I have no prob with early releases, but him posting in his thread about the features of an unreleased public rom is considered a teaser and that is why the mods shut him down.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

othan1 said:
Last thing.
I hate criticizing or supporting rules without exposing loopholes (Lawful Neutral with evil tendencies). Here's what I would do as the dev.
1. Follow the friggin' rules.
2. Make a post such as "Having troubles with the newest Beta for XXX ROM"
3. Ardent followers will recognize that ROM and ask why they don't have it
4. The OP (secondary account for the dev or a friend) will explain it's a paid beta (or "required donation" beta if you prefer) of XXXX user's ROM and can contact him here: [email protected] or however you guys do it.
5. "BUT I DON'T WANNA PAY!!!" Well, I think the dev mentioned it will be open to all on XX/XX/XXXX and he'll make a post when it's freely available as per the rules.
Ta-da. Totally within the rules to ask for assistance on ROMs even when others may or may not have them.
And don't lie. Ever. There is never a reason to lie. Dev, put a small, easily noticed and easily fixed bug in your ROM so it's a legitimate post.
People willing to buy an early beta are happy. XDA is happy. Moderators are happy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats exactly what happened in the thread, and exactly the point I was trying to get across.
He never said 'donate and you'll get the early releases!!'
The mods on here are independent people and pretty much do whatever the hell they want, so the mod in the Epic forum might be more tight-holed than the one in say, the Hero forum. Where donate-to-get early is the norm.

Well I truly hope the rules at xda are changed or reworded becuase if things are continually enforced that are not in the rules that sounds like a military state.

Man! Speaking of rules I hope ur like 16-17 yourself. Otherwise those are some pedophile type hypotheticals.... lol!
othan1 said:
Because it's not a donation if you have to pay for it to get it.
Let's say you go to one of those car washes...you know, with the 16 year old girls in skimpy bathing suits with the sign, Donations Only. Now, you pull up there and expect a car wash, but they tell you that you have to pay before they'll even start anything. Not knowing how good a job they'll do, you have no idea how much you'd want to pay them so, because you don't want to pay until it's done, they send you to the back of the line until they make enough money to open it to everyone.
Say one guy pays $15 to that donation and, although the view of their supple, tight breasts smashed against his windshield is highly stimulating, they do little to the car but smear mud all over and leave streaks on the window. They're done now. Great show, but that's not why he came to the car wash. He regrets giving that money now because he drives away with blue balls and a dirty car. Not worth the "donation".
Donations are something given for products/services received up front, otherwise, it's called a charge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

Rather then changing the rules..I think they should set a presidents on what way it would be considered ok to do this.

One comment on something that was said in the thread that got closed. A few posters there complained about charging for something that's GPL'ed. Actually, it's totally, unambiguously, and 100% legal to charge for things that are GPL'ed. It's also totally, unambiguously, and 100% legal for anyone who acquires a copy of it to turn around and redistribute it -- for free, or for money.
The GPL2 requires that Schiz license his changes under the same terms. So, anybody who donates and downloads the beta release acquires a license to use it under the GPL2. Likewise, the GPL2 requires that Schiz make the source available to those specific users. The GPL2 does NOT require that Schiz bend over backwards to immediately make his changes instantly available for free to the general public. Or ever make them available for free to the general public at all. Officially, you don't become a licensee of Schiz' changes until you either a) donate, and download it from him, or b) he posts it publicly and you download it from wherever he puts it. HOWEVER, the GPL2 also entitles anyone who acquires a copy of Schiz's changes to redistribute them independently of Schiz.
That's the check and balance. If 10 users feel poor/stingy and want to split the cost of a donation so one can grab it and give copies to everyone else, it's 100% legit and legal under the GPL. It would be equally legal for Schiz to get mad and refuse to answer questions from anyone he caught doing that, because the GPL only conveys the right to obtain the source and redistribute it. The GPL conveys no right to tech support. The fact that something is legal doesn't necessarily mean others have to regard it as good and morally acceptable. You have every right to regard someone as an immoral asshole for doing something that's nevertheless completely legal. Big corporations do things that are technically legal every day, and get excoriated for it by Slashdot users on a regular basis
Suppose I use GPL'ed source to develop an internal app used by a major corporation. There's NO requirement that the source to that internal app ever be made available to anyone outside the company, since only the company is the licensee of the modified code. The only time the source has to be made available to anyone outside the company is if the app ends up getting used in an app used by the company's own customers. That's where lots of big companies get into trouble... they'll use GPL'ed code for years for internal vertical-market apps, then slip it into a publicly-released client app without realizing the licensing implications of doing so until it's too late.
Giving another example, it would be absolutely 100% legal for Tivo to charge customers $100 to upgrade to a newer version of their software. However, under GPL2, it would be 100% legal for anyone who paid $100 for it to redistribute it to others -- Tivo-owning or not. Where the GPL2 and GPL3 differ is that under the GPL2, it's entirely legal for Tivo to respond by making their hardware refuse to allow the upgrade unless you also present it with a valid license code. However, even in the case of the GPL3, the intent of the GPL isn't necessarily to enable anyone to take Tivo's software and build his own Tivo from scratch -- it's to guarantee Tivo owners the freedom to hack and modify their own Tivo to better meet their own individual needs and improve it beyond what Tivo itself is willing/able to do.
The point is that the GPL doesn't quite mean what many people believe it does, and in some contexts the distinction between GPL2 and GPL3 are very important. Android is actually Apache-licensed, but because it's inextricably bundled with Linux, it's effectively governed by the GPL2 as well (for the most part).

AT&T Webcast about Atrix Dev Mar 29 @ 11AM PST

Hey everyone, being as this is a webcast about Android Development I'm not sure if it belongs here or in "General" so Mods please move it if you think it doesn't belong.
Anyway, lets get on the AT&T webcast tomorrow and bug them about bootloader access, you do have to register to participate but it's easy enough. It begins at 11AM PST and says it is an hour long. You need Microsoft Office Live Meeting (or you could call in) but it's free to download.
http://developer.att.com/developer/forward.jsp?passedItemId=5300338
I fully realize that this may be a futile action but in my experience persistence pays off and I'm not done bothering them quite yet, maybe 6 months down the road if they still aren't doing anything for us I'll give, but not yet!
Aside: I'm assuming that since this uses full featured meeting software there will be an opportunity to ask questions.

Awesome! Yes, please do! It worked for HSUPA, it is worth a shot.

...why would you bug AT&T about a Motorola device? Waste of effort.

Ririal said:
...why would you bug AT&T about a Motorola device? Waste of effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Presenters:
Greg Wilson, Technology Evangelist, Motorola Mobility
Greg is a Technology Evangelist at Motorola Mobility, helping developers to create the best possible Android applications. Prior to joining Motorola, Greg was at Palm (and its various incarnations) doing similar work for the Palm OS developer community. Greg has been programming since the early days of the microcomputer, and has written software for programmable calculators, IBM mainframes, and an assortment of microprocessor architectures and microcomputer operating systems.
Peter van der Linden, Technology Evangelist, Motorola Mobility
Peter is the Android Technology Evangelist within the Developer Tools and Technical Services team at Motorola. He is not afraid of bugs, and has a collection of several prize bugs (software only).
They work for Motorola.

youareme7 said:
Hey everyone, being as this is a webcast about Android Development I'm not sure if it belongs here or in "General" so Mods please move it if you think it doesn't belong.
Anyway, lets get on the AT&T webcast tomorrow and bug them about bootloader access, you do have to register to participate but it's easy enough. It begins at 11AM PST and says it is an hour long. You need Microsoft Office Live Meeting (or you could call in) but it's free to download.
http://developer.att.com/developer/forward.jsp?passedItemId=5300338
I fully realize that this may be a futile action but in my experience persistence pays off and I'm not done bothering them quite yet, maybe 6 months down the road if they still aren't doing anything for us I'll give, but not yet!
Aside: I'm assuming that since this uses full featured meeting software there will be an opportunity to ask questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Make sure to point out the number of people that want this.
http://www.groubal.com/motorola-lockedencrypted-bootloader-policy/

I'm not going to be able to watch and partcipate for this. I would like if someone could record this conference.
Thanks.
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

Ririal said:
...why would you bug AT&T about a Motorola device? Waste of effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because AT&T is behind 99pct of the problems with the Atrix:
- No Side Loading - AT&T
- Reduced Speeds - AT&T
- No Root Access - AT&T
Motorola made it pretty clear pre-release they wanted to open up the bootloader, AT&T obviously shut that down.

maybe they will give us the key for the bootloader, probably not, however its a good place to voice our concern

hate_Romania said:
maybe they will give us the key for the bootloader, probably not, however its a good place to voice our concern
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt it. I asked in their MotoDev forum.
http://community.developer.motorola...trix-App-summit-on-March-29th-2011/td-p/12350

I'm not sure if it would actually do us any good, but I mean i guess it would be worth a try. Who is all gunna be the conference tomorrow??

I think (When it comes to their "bootloader solution") what they meant to say was "We do what we think is right when it comes to working with devs and customers, and will continue to do so in the future". And, what everyone took that to mean was "THEY ARE GONNA UNLOCK THE BOOTLOADER FOR US". I'm not saying I agree AT ALL, I just sometimes try to look at it from both sides.
I definitely want this thing unlocked, but I'm not counting on Moto to do too much about it. Not to say opinions shouldn't be voiced!

No one should be blaming ATT for the locked bootloader. Motorola's Droids (except for OG Droid) all have been locked down and they are on Verizon's network. Feel free to blame ATT for upload speeds, fake 4G, no sideloading, global warming, etc...

The Motorola employee that's going to be there is an application developer. He's unlikely to know anything about, much less have an answer for, anything about the bootloader. Harassing employees makes the entire community look bad and childish. If you have a REAL problem with it, other than bandwagon hatred for something a lot of you clearly don't understand, follow the appropriate channels. Lawyer up and file a formal complaint. Harassing them over the internet won't get you anywhere. If you REALLY believe that it's changed anything so far, I'm sorry you're that ignorant.
All the whining and harassing got nowhere, but when a thought out, well written petition was put into place and formal requests were made, look what happened: Motorola released their source. They didn't do it to "appease the masses", or to "shut us up." They did it because the proper channels were followed and they honored that. You have to understand that the amount of people who want the bootloader unlocked is a very, VERY small portion of their total userbase. It's entirely ignorant to claim that everyone wants this. Motorola isn't some evil overlord who wants their users to hate them. They're a business. Do you honestly think they'll care if a few hundred users out of the hundreds of thousands they have leave over the bootloader being locked? Unlikely. They've recognized the issue, and have announced they will have a solution for developers soon, which is more than they're even obligated to do in the first place. They don't owe you anything, having such an entitled attitude is hurtful to the entire process. Be patient.
I mean no disrespect to anyone in particular, so please, be respectful and mature of the situation. If you don't like it, that's fine, voice your opinion respectfully.

I second Ririal. Those two that are going to be presenting tomorrow are evangelists, and are going to be pretty in the dark about the situation.

I think the chat will be very interesting. Devs being there should be good for a prediction on where Moto plans to take the Atrix... wonder if we can ask questions in a round about way to see if they slip on how they unlock the bootloader to develop on the phone... lol yea I know wishful thinking this isn't a cartoon or movie lol but one can dream... I'll try and make the chat and see if I can record it for you guys
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App

I have school at that time but can someone do me a favour and bug them about his.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=980047
Its common with half the people that unlocked the Atrix.

I have a meeting tomorrow and can't participate in the webcast.
However, would somebody _please_ tell them that there are companies out there who really want to develop applications for the webtop.
I have the go-ahead at work to port our primary Linux/X Windows application to the webtop on the Atrix, but cannot move forward so long as hacking/rooting the device is necessary. We can only develop using officially authorized channels.
Thanks in advance for anyone who can bring this up to them.

Ririal said:
The Motorola employee that's going to be there is an application developer. He's unlikely to know anything about, much less have an answer for, anything about the bootloader. Harassing employees makes the entire community look bad and childish. If you have a REAL problem with it, other than bandwagon hatred for something a lot of you clearly don't understand, follow the appropriate channels. Lawyer up and file a formal complaint. Harassing them over the internet won't get you anywhere. If you REALLY believe that it's changed anything so far, I'm sorry you're that ignorant.
All the whining and harassing got nowhere, but when a thought out, well written petition was put into place and formal requests were made, look what happened: Motorola released their source. They didn't do it to "appease the masses", or to "shut us up." They did it because the proper channels were followed and they honored that. You have to understand that the amount of people who want the bootloader unlocked is a very, VERY small portion of their total userbase. It's entirely ignorant to claim that everyone wants this. Motorola isn't some evil overlord who wants their users to hate them. They're a business. Do you honestly think they'll care if a few hundred users out of the hundreds of thousands they have leave over the bootloader being locked? Unlikely. They've recognized the issue, and have announced they will have a solution for developers soon, which is more than they're even obligated to do in the first place. They don't owe you anything, having such an entitled attitude is hurtful to the entire process. Be patient.
I mean no disrespect to anyone in particular, so please, be respectful and mature of the situation. If you don't like it, that's fine, voice your opinion respectfully.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed Ririal.
The petition I've started doesn't actually complain about anything, it asks for an announcement at the very least. Just something for Developers to be hopeful for. It also just requests an option for Developers not for everyone.
We are working very hard to follow the right channels on the topic and generate positive support to show Motorola that there is an enthusiastic user-base out there.
http://www.groubal.com/motorola-lockedencrypted-bootloader-policy/

ikenley said:
Agreed Ririal.
The petition I've started doesn't actually complain about anything, it asks for an announcement at the very least. Just something for Developers to be hopeful for. It also just requests an option for Developers not for everyone.
We are working very hard to follow the right channels on the topic and generate positive support to show Motorola that there is an enthusiastic user-base out there.
http://www.groubal.com/motorola-lockedencrypted-bootloader-policy/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely. I saw your petition and have signed it. I'd love to see them, at the very least, give us an answer. We may not like it, but at least we'd have one instead of empty promises right now. No need to get upset about it, though

electronaut said:
I have a meeting tomorrow and can't participate in the webcast.
However, would somebody _please_ tell them that there are companies out there who really want to develop applications for the webtop.
I have the go-ahead at work to port our primary Linux/X Windows application to the webtop on the Atrix, but cannot move forward so long as hacking/rooting the device is necessary. We can only develop using officially authorized channels.
Thanks in advance for anyone who can bring this up to them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THIS THIS
Being able to create/load webtop apps would be an awesome feature that would turn the webtop from an interesting sideshow to a must-have.
I am hesitant to spend anything on the lapdock because I don't think it would be much more useful than the phone itself. If I could throw OpenOffice down on there or something using apt-get then I would totally buy it.
I understand that Moto might want to control the user experience, as nobody is going to be doing any high-powered computation or gaming on it, but third-party apps would be really neat.

Closing the Samsung Galaxy backdoor with the Replicant Samsung RIL

Back in March, Replicant developers revealed a backdoor in the Samsung Galaxy application processor that lets the modem perform I/O operations on the device's storage.
(There was one security researcher who claimed on Ars Technica there was no evidence that the backdoor was used; Replicant's developers have responded to that here and here.)
Anyway, any progress on Galaxy S5 ROMs that use Replicant's replacement library, which won't collaborate with the backdoor, whether it's been used or not?
CC @Leigh Kennedy, @a2441918, @elelinux, @optx, @firebird11, @albinoman887, @kornfed, @ks3rv3rg, @BeansTown106, @tp2215, @edgarf28, @keysoh2, @AxAtAx

Nobdy...
Anyone?

Up

Up

@Leigh Kennedy, @a2441918, @elelinux, @optx, @firebird11, @albinoman887, @kornfed, @ks3rv3rg, @BeansTown106, @tp2215, @edgarf28, @keysoh2, @AxAtAx, Denis "GNUtoo" Carikli and Paul Kocialkowski where you at?
Security holes like this effect the community as a whole. I have no doubt this an intentional flaw brought to us all by the Auroragold mission. Whats it going to take for this type of lunacy to stop, a figurehead's child's phone getting hacked by a malicious actor, or terrorist? Because it's only a matter of time before that exact threat is a damning reality, & Samsung will be left holding the bag. This flaw has been an open wound for me ever since I first read Paul Kocialkowski's report in February. The issue has been burred for way too long; on behalf of devs, users, people who don't want to know, and the ones that just wont ever get it, I demand a full community based effort to KILL THIS BUG. This is why were all here right? On XDA, we help one and other learn, as well as help ourselves to use our personal devices better, and soon, safer. But if we are not making a strong enough effort to get what we require as basic device security, why use one at all?
".....because once NSA introduces a weakness, a vulnerability, it’s not only the NSA that can exploit it". -Karsten Nohl

Agent Soap said:
@Leigh Kennedy, @a2441918, @elelinux, @optx, @firebird11, @albinoman887, @kornfed, @ks3rv3rg, @BeansTown106, @tp2215, @edgarf28, @keysoh2, @AxAtAx, Denis "GNUtoo" Carikli and Paul Kocialkowski where you at?
I demand a full community based effort to KILL THIS BUG. This is why were all here right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the reason you are here, do something about it, instead of 'demanding' someone else doing it for you.

kornfed said:
If that's the reason you are here, do something about it, instead of 'demanding' someone else doing it for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your input. I mentor felons and teach them to use linux, windows, and android, essentally building a small army of informed individuals, teaching others to teach others. Sooo congrads for calling me out! And thanks for editing my statement to make me look silly.

Agent Soap said:
Thank you for your input. I mentor felons and teach them to use linux, windows, and android. Sooo congrads for calling me out!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good, take the lead, we are all very excited about your efforts.

kornfed said:
Good, take the lead, we are all very excited about your efforts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whats your deal with me man? If you love these flaws, please please please continue to berate/belittle/troll me. I didnt deliberately make your phone work against you, hate on someone who deserves your hate. If you are such a narcissist that you cant see that your higher skill set will aid with RESOLVING the problem, please gtfo the away. Use your anger on some one else. Because in the real world I'm the scariest thing on the street, here, you are. Now that **** measuring competition has completed, what can we do as a community to resolve this important security issue?

:laugh:

Good question and nice of you to bring this up. I think people don't give these matters enough attention.
I mean you can play pretend with your "encrypted" & "selinux secure" device as much as you want but there's no sense to it if the hardware is hardwired to spy on you.

This is an active backdoor
Six months later...
Is this backdoor still not fixed by current ROMs?