Related
just dont buy their Vista! that should teach them something! never piss off thoses that supporting u!
netnerd said:
just dont buy their Vista! that should teach them something! never piss off thoses that supporting u!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never planned on it, what a rip off! XP will last another 3-5 years, then I am sure the next PC/MAC will have something better.
netnerd said:
just dont buy their Vista! that should teach them something! never piss off thoses that supporting u!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK....you got me....what does this have to do with upgrading your hermes.
maybe that you can not run upgrade software under vista
tco said:
OK....you got me....what does this have to do with upgrading your hermes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The pukes in Micro$oft's compliance and licensing department have demanded take down of all ROMs- source of the only stable, up-to-date WM versions of their piece-o-crap OS.
Palm did this to Shadowmite about a year ago after Cingular and Verizon started to complain to Palm. Basically MS is admiting that Gates is the carriers' *****- its a shame that sanctimonious prick elected to breed: conquers the computer world then surrenders it to Ma Bell, her children and their content providers.
Guess it's time to spread some pirated Office 2003 love....
I betcha what bothered them was the progress being made by the XDA Linux project- after seeing what Access released earlier this week M$ ought to be running scared.
I'm running SuSE Linux and have no problem upgrading my roms on my HTC TyTN.
and by the way.... all the little pretty pictures and how VISTA does multi windows with content.. Linux does too! XGL!!!!
This got me thinking.... can we load Linux on our phones?
This is annoying that M$ has to do this. They just cant leave anything alone.
Oh if Linux can do a ROM load then surely OSX can too then.
Yeah spread the good word on the process. In another topic of course(dont wanna de-rail)
This thread needs more LOLZOR1111!!!!
Seriously, wtf?
Don't buy Vista to show them what exactly?
Yeah, let's use a 5 year old OS with easily exploited security issues to teach them what?
The term cutting off your nose to spite your face comes to mind.
Also, they are protecting their legal intellectual property, and they are in the wrong?
What we do here has always been of dubious legal standing. We carry on as long as we are allowed, but we stop when we are told to stop, and that way nobody gets into trouble.
Get a grip on reality people.
Exactly well said. The trouble is instead of a nice comprehensive source of good ROMs made by people who know what they're doing. There'll be a proliferation of hacked-up images with random hacked version numbers scattered across the internet.
Will this result in fewer bricked phones and support calls?
AlanJC said:
Get a grip on reality people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't agree more.
Apparently a lot of people have problems with "reality" nowadays.
Yes, it sucks that the ROMs have to be pulled from the ftp servers.
Yes, Microsoft could do better and show a firmer stand regarding the carriers.
Yes, this online community is very valuable to Microsoft AND the carriers, if they realize it or not.
BUT: there are laws and if Microsoft demands the removal of the ROMs, it is their right to do so, like it or not. They could have used a more "aggressive" approach with their law department but they chose to use a more "soft" approach and this is a very wise decision.
However, Microsoft must realize that such unpopular decisions won't be forgotten and such actions will definetely not make their already bad reputation much better.
Calling for a boycott doesn't help much, I'm pretty sure myself that the carriers are behind the ROM removal, not necessarily Microsoft.
Maybe we should write a letter to the carriers, asking them if they're behind the pressure on Microsoft to have the ROMs removed. If the carriers are blamed instead and their decisions are out in the open, maybe they re-consider because trust me, I would NOT want to be a customer of a carrier who asked Microsoft to remove the ROMs. Definetely not.
personaly i'm not planning on getting vista untill maybe sp4
anyway
xp with 3th party software and no IE is safe enough
vista is mostly 3th party software functionality now as a std. ms thing
and fancy eye candy which linux and macos had for ages
but if ms see that vista is not selling as well as it should
and they connect the dots and form a picture that show that
their pull unoffical roms off sites
there is something wrong with their heads
Vista already not selling as well as it should - it started to show when it was released for volume (corporate) clients, and now its well clear that ordinary users dont rush to buy it despite all PR tsunami unleashed - maybe its "good, advanced, beautiful" and all the buzz, but even thick Joe User sees thats its somewhat lot of problems and complaints floating around.
The whole Vista thing was a reckless scheme - MS spent millions on development, but they lost the clear understanding of why exactly people will want it - on the latest stages it was more of make beleief.
Now they will have to transfer money from other branches, that is more profitable (namely being their Office branch, XBox being not profitable on their own). I think thats why they made it "WM6" (when it was clearly 5.2 originally and still 5.2 in matter of features and internal versioning) - for WM6 they can charge license fees from ODMs as for entirely new OS.
@All
Forget about roms, we will find alternative way to store them, so this is just empty talk. There are free filehosting sites, and other p2p distributing variants, so what's the problem? Microsoft has the rights to ask for deleting the roms, everyone know that. We will continiue what we doing but with difrend way of distributing rom images, thats all. About vista is sucks, you have to confirm every action you do about hunderd times, it works slow even with effects shutted down, and on high end configuration PC, it randomly loose settings, cookies, passwords, favorites, software and other stuff, overall it is unreliable fo usage.
I love to hate MS as much as the rest of you, but everybody needs to step back and take a breath on this one. The reason MS is doing this has nothing to do with piracy, Vista, progress, Linux, taking over the world, Bill Gates, them being money-grubbing pigs, or your grandmother.
The reasoning is simple...under US intellectual property laws, if they are made aware that someone is distributing their intellectual property (like a ROM that contains MS software) and they make no attempt to stop it, they forfeit their rights to that intellectual property. I don't think I need to explain why giving up their rights would be a bad idea for them.
In my experience, companies try to ignore sites like this for as long as they possibly can, because nobody wants to attract the kind of bad press a takedown notice causes. Inevitably, however, things get too big...a site gets a mention in the news, or it becomes the defacto source for ROMs, or it gets frequent mentions in other forums like cingular.com, and the attorneys finally have to face the fact that they can't possibly claim in court that they weren't aware that their IP was being distributed.
All companies do things like this every day to a lot of great sites and forums, not because they are jerks, but because the US legal system requires them to.
In the meantime, we just have to move on and do what everyone else does--find somewhere else to keep the bits
The reasoning is simple...under US intellectual property laws, if they are made aware that someone is distributing their intellectual property (like a ROM that contains MS software) and they make no attempt to stop it, they forfeit their rights to that intellectual property. I don't think I need to explain why giving up their rights would be a bad idea for them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually that's completely untrue. I think you're thinking of trademarks which do behave in that way. That was the reason for the necessary recent legal cases by Linus over the Linux trademark. There's no such requirement for copyrights or patents.
Not being on the inside it's hard to know the reason for the action: Whether it's the OEM's complaining. I think their logic is that if they only provide updates with new hardware then you'll have no choice but to buy their new hardware. and that people making updates for their older devices are harming their sales figures. they really are that dumb.
The alternative is that MS are annoyed/worried about all the information leaking about WM6 before launch and they simply want to control the release situation.
ivorh said:
Actually that's completely untrue. I think you're thinking of trademarks which do behave in that way. That was the reason for the necessary recent legal cases by Linus over the Linux trademark. There's no such requirement for copyrights or patents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not quite...the nature in which you forfeit rights is different between copyrights and trademarks, but due diligence is required for both. If a known copyright infringement is not pursued within the statute of limitations, implied license is granted, meaning the infringer can essentially distribute at will.
ivorh said:
Actually that's completely untrue. I think you're thinking of trademarks which do behave in that way. That was the reason for the necessary recent legal cases by Linus over the Linux trademark. There's no such requirement for copyrights or patents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not quite...the nature in which you forfeit rights is different between copyrights and trademarks, but due diligence is required for both. If a known copyright infringement is not pursued within the statute of limitations, implied license is granted.
No offence guys but Microsoft or the Vendors wouldn't have given crap about the roms here if it wasn't for the idiots (yes you know who you are) pestering the vendors and Microsoft about support for yet to be released roms. Either bugging them with questions on why something doesn't work anymore, how to use something in the new rom (GPS....), or warrenty repair for f'ing up one's device. Not to mention how pissed they must be for the even bigger idiots who contact Vender A and tell them they installed Vendor A rom on Vender B device
Really what it comes down to is if it costs them money they are going to make a stink and handling service calls for hacked/unsupported roms costs them money. Not to mention how much it would piss off Vendor A to spend money enhancing their rom only to have news sites promoting the rom to other Vendor B devices and have people installing it on Vendor B's device.
That's really what this is all about so if there is anyone to blame in all this, don't blame Microsoft or the Vendors, blame those people because if it wasn't for them, the vendors and Microsoft would have given a sh*t and probably just let things be the way they should be.
Maybe an appropriate response would be to overwhelm MS and the Carriers support systems with complaints about slow, non functioning, unstable software and devices.
The Carriers who actually sell most of us our phones should be ashamed of offering such substandard products. The diference between an "XDA-Developers sourced ROM" and the stock ROM on my device at least is enormous. Yet it was achieved by unpaid amateurs, I mean no disrespect to ROM chefs with this statement.
With the Windows update features built in to WM6 maybe there is a mechanism for MS to offer timely updates/fixes direct to the user. These updates could have incorporated "XDA-Developers" inspired enhancements and bug fixes. Sadly I feel this will not now be the case.
Yes, I can understand the global motives of MS in protecting its intelectual property but I cannot perceive any benefit to MS by exerting its right/might in this case.
</RANT>
Now let me just say right here and now that I'm not a coder so hang with me. It seems to me that google has an issue with pirates (due to the blocking of paid apps for dev phones) until they create a better solution I was hoping somebody might create some kind of module that any dev could use to prevent and curb piracy. I know it's not a huge deal as there's really not that much out there for downloading paid .apk but there are some.
What I would do breaks down into two parts, preventing redistribution of the .apk and then nagging users who have an outdated version (as with download-copy-refund-reinstall). If you made the program run at the moment it was installed and pull and then archive a piece of unique info such as the phone number and then force the whole app to double check the internal archive to the actual phone number it would not only prevent the giving away of apps but archiving the initial release person's info to the dev.
Step two is to force a version check from the app to a sever that has the current version. If you made some kind of update (even if very so minor about once a month) and gave let's say a month so that you're not forcing folks to update that day you could then make the program "nag" a user into updating (that you cannot do if you didn't pay for it) and after some length of time have the program stop working at all.
Now yes it is work for something that may only cost .99 but if the anti-piracy measures were open source then you could not only retrofit an existing program but build new pirate proof apps.
Thoughts?
Both methods are still fairly easily crackable. Just like it's impossible to "DRM" game cd's, music, and video - preventing piracy of software is a very difficult and always flawed things.
You can make copy protection pretty decent but eventually it's all still very crackable. There is no 'good' copy protection. If Google is waiting until they do have a 'good' system for it - it will never happen.
And yes, I actually am a coder with commercial interests that are copy "protected". In the end the question is always if people find it valuable enough to purchase or their time invaluable enough to spend it on cracking these things.
How about release all your code under an open source license and get paid through donations?
I LOL'd! Seriously, if you ever went that route you'd know usually people hardly ever donate, at all. You'll be working for $0.01 an hour. That's ok if it's a hobby project, but bigger projects are just not feasable that way.
It also depends a lot on the community though. For example, I've made freeware tools for gameserver admins and got a lot of donations. I've made mods for games that practically every player used - and these were RCE games, so they cost $$$ - and the total of donations was less than $100 for 100's of hours of work. It depends on the situation, the crowd, how useful the software is, etc, but in the end it comes down to people being cheapskates, but in a weird way.
By 'in a weird way' I mean that it is rather strange that if you ask for donations, hardly anybody will donate $5, but if you were to charge $5, lots of people would purchase and not care about the $5.
Of course this is not true for everybody. Personally I try to donate to free projects that I use - and I know there are several people who also do this. But it's not the 'general public'.
this isnt an issue about open source vs charging for a product. Nobody is doing anything about piracy for this particular handset. it so easy to steal these apps, and if nothing is done to stay ahead of the curve then everyone suffers. do we have to wait till the average user figures it out, or till somebody makes a blog and/or a youtube post on how to release paid apps and that even non root users can pirate these in seconds?
one of two people need to step up, either the devs and try and be a step ahead of the crackers or what i imagine as widespread piracy and the degrading of all app quality.
some have said that people wont bother stealing a .99 app, but i disagree.
robotmaxtron said:
this isnt an issue about open source vs charging for a product. Nobody is doing anything about piracy for this particular handset. it so easy to steal these apps, and if nothing is done to stay ahead of the curve then everyone suffers. do we have to wait till the average user figures it out, or till somebody makes a blog and/or a youtube post on how to release paid apps and that even non root users can pirate these in seconds?
one of two people need to step up, either the devs and try and be a step ahead of the crackers or what i imagine as widespread piracy and the degrading of all app quality.
some have said that people wont bother stealing a .99 app, but i disagree.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well i believe chainfire answered the question already, there is nothing they can do. Are you a dev? The only ones suffering are the developers. Piracy is here and no one can really do anything about it. There are more important issues to deal with in the world then piracy. Look at smartphone files - cabs - wm, you dont have to pay for one of those anymore they are out there for the taking. How long have they been around? One look at their situation and its pretty clear nothing can be done.
ummm
piracy is nothing new.... piracy has been around since back on the commodore 64, i cant even explain how many shoebox's of 5 1/4" floppys of games. Pirating windows..... the first version ever. Theres no way to stop it, what is made can always be undone. The use of online connectivity is the only way to stop people from pirating software. Those "servers" are at the expense of the company that released the software. All installs have to have a "phone-home". Why do you think WifiRouter for WM (i think thats what its called) can never be cracked for more than a week. Because the serial numbers are registered in a database, and hardware id's and whatnots are sent regarding that individual phone. If more than a few of set "phones" with the serial number given is used. That serial is blacklisted and deactivated. The software checks for serial status everytime it loads. Very good way of using such software. But others are a little different, like programs that can be cracked using a serial number, but the program is in a site that normally wouldnt ever have acccess to internet (construction sites, etc.) Its just something that cant be stopped.....
p.s. http://tinyurl.com/dczb66 and you will realize what chainfire meant by ruin and destroying software due to copy protection
piracy done right
they need to stop trying to figure out how to solve the problem and just say there is no problem. there is no single "market" for software for my pc.... there will never be one for android. developers will never be comfortable trusting security they have no say so in. apps will come from all edges of the cloud and google is sadly mistaken if they think they can control it.
here is what they should do.. Nothing
Let the developers on their own find ways to secure their apps. wether it be a simple pin number or a log in. as developers make security hackers will break it, then the devs make more, its that cycle that made Linux work in the first place.
regardless of what google does people will start protecting their apk's
If you want to sell programs, do the following and you won't have a problem.
Don't worry about piracy (DRM, Copy Protection, etc)
Make a good product
Don't over-charge for the product
Be upfront with the support offerings
Offer a reasonable satisfaction guarantee if demo is not available
Trying to limit and stop piracy is a failing battle and will ultimately end up costing the developer in the long run.
I come from both sides of the track, i'm a pirate (aka lacking moral compass) and developer. When I come across good software at a reasonable price, I don't think twice about purchasing it.
You could do likesome programmers who sell their product online and on the market at the same time.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=487790
Thanks to the masterBaron I have this program on my dev phone and I live in france.
soundwire said:
How about release all your code under an open source license and get paid through donations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Windows Mobile version of Klaxon has had around 200,000 downloads, and I have received less than $200 in donations. I spent several months on that project. Donationware/open source is does not work.
robotmaxtron said:
What I would do breaks down into two parts, preventing redistribution of the .apk and then nagging users who have an outdated version (as with download-copy-refund-reinstall). If you made the program run at the moment it was installed and pull and then archive a piece of unique info such as the phone number and then force the whole app to double check the internal archive to the actual phone number it would not only prevent the giving away of apps but archiving the initial release person's info to the dev.
Step two is to force a version check from the app to a sever that has the current version. If you made some kind of update (even if very so minor about once a month)....
Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd rather my number not be freely given out.
This would also be a problem if my number changed, but I don't buy apps that force version checks / expire / phone home. If it's good enough I look for a copy cleansed of such behavior, while i'd buy a good app without that behavior and if its not locked to hardware/providers. Copy protection can backfire and drive off customers.
How about release all your code under an open source license and get paid through donations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although I have some open source projects this will never work... A lot of people just like to get everything for free and are actually upset when needed to pay 1€ for an application.
I have people send me like 20€ but this is a very rare case! I would be lucky to have at most one costless weekend of drinking in a month, but no way to actually make a living that way.
And if you look into the work put in to most open-source projects ( in terms of hours ) its better to just do 1% of that work for a boss and get payed a lot more. Ofcourse I love doing this and thats mainly the reason why I join open-source projects... Making some money is a nice aspect which "could" happen.
As for copy protection... Like cf stated... There isnt an uncrackable copy protection and if creating one takes up half of the time of your projects development how much good would it be in terms of earning money. Its not a copy-protection problem but its a mind-set problem... People just dont like paying for things they use everyday...
inpherno3 said:
piracy is nothing new.... piracy has been around since back on the commodore 64, i cant even explain how many shoebox's of 5 1/4" floppys of games. Pirating windows..... the first version ever. Theres no way to stop it, what is made can always be undone. The use of online connectivity is the only way to stop people from pirating software. Those "servers" are at the expense of the company that released the software. All installs have to have a "phone-home". Why do you think WifiRouter for WM (i think thats what its called) can never be cracked for more than a week. Because the serial numbers are registered in a database, and hardware id's and whatnots are sent regarding that individual phone. If more than a few of set "phones" with the serial number given is used. That serial is blacklisted and deactivated. The software checks for serial status everytime it loads. Very good way of using such software. But others are a little different, like programs that can be cracked using a serial number, but the program is in a site that normally wouldnt ever have acccess to internet (construction sites, etc.) Its just something that cant be stopped.....
p.s. http://tinyurl.com/dczb66 and you will realize what chainfire meant by ruin and destroying software due to copy protection
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bull****. WifiRouter or whatever it is could easily be cracked by using fake DNS servers, manually editing the servers to a custom, or bypassing the online checks completely.
Their system is crap, and any skilled cracker could defeat online checks in just a bit of work.
The only truly invincible copy protection I've seen are either hardware, or extremely internet based (something that relies on external servers so much that it's useless without them, such as MMOs). Hardware can be modded, and you can recreate the servers for internet based.
Gary13579 said:
Bull****. WifiRouter or whatever it is could easily be cracked by using fake DNS servers, manually editing the servers to a custom, or bypassing the online checks completely.
Their system is crap, and any skilled cracker could defeat online checks in just a bit of work.
The only truly invincible copy protection I've seen are either hardware, or extremely internet based (something that relies on external servers so much that it's useless without them, such as MMOs). Hardware can be modded, and you can recreate the servers for internet based.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or you could just remove the TPM (or Variant) requirements from the software like the Hackintosh version of OSX.
piracy won't ever be stoped.. might take a vbbit longer for some one to bypass it's protecting but it will always be cracked sooner or later
best thing u can do is.. as said before just make a good product be craeative, dont over-charge, people will buy it support you..
heck better is better to make 20 bucks thank nothing at all
I've been playing around with all the 6.5 ROMS available on this forum (plus have been lurking for a while so felt like doing some contribution could be appreciated ).
My company is very stringent about enforcing Exchange ActiveSync policies, especially PIN CODE, timeout to lock and remote wipe.
I noticed that on the 230XX series (I have tested up to 23053) posted here, there are two different behaviors, one serie works with my Exchange Active Sync, one does not.
Since the PIN request and lock timeout work fine with them, I have to assume the remote wipe feature has somehow be disabled by this ROM.
I have been able to identify that a ROM will give me this problem even without connecting with my Exchange Server.
in 100% of the case, if I try to import a root certificate on a "hacked" ROM, it will be installed without any warning, just a "Certificate successfully installed, press OK" dialog.
Now, on a ROM that is not "hacked", when you try to import a root certificate, you are warned that this may be an unsafe operation and have actually to confirm.
This is very concerning to me, because the warning being removed means that any bad guy can leverage these ROM to deploy a rogue root certificate to your device and your device can start trusting wrong sites.
I do not intend this to be an exhaustive list, but as of my testing only the following two ROMs work correctly:
- NATF
- RRE
All the others do not. The source of the non-working ones is either the same, or these people have purposedly altered the ROM to change the security settings. But the result is the same, security altered ROMS.
If anyone could confirm they are experiencing the same, I would not feel alone on the planet
UM
I'd just like to reiterate that this is a development community- most of the cooked ROMS you've tried are experimental works in progress. We tend to take our experimenting a bit far here- but as none of our 'products' are really production tested, it's fairly safe to say that all of them are just a bit unsafe.
A stock ROM has the benefit of being tested in a production environment- and while performance on these ROMs may not be optimal, they are composed of a set recipe of components established between the OEM and Microsoft.
Many of our ROMs are conglomerations of various different components- so it's not exactly safe to say that any of them can be held completely accountable for device security- there may be plenty of exploits present behind the scenes that never have been exposed or rectified.
We're small-scale individual developers. Most, if not all of us, do this for fun. Many of our packages deliberately alter the way in which devices handle certificates and signing- because it allows us to expand the boundaries we develop within.
If you're looking for guaranteed security, your best bet is to stick with a completely stock device. If you choose to use another ROM, any insecurity is not on the developer, but you.
Very well said! On top most, actually all of the 6.5 based ROMs have a microsoft beta as a base. Though it may be a save bet that the latest built # may be the closest to the final release at Oct. 9 it's a common practice to reduce/alter some "security" settings an policies for an "easier" way to success. None of these facts is to blame on any ROM chef or developer or however you want to name these creative heads here.
Their work is just incredible and I bet that ms or HTC would be proud to have such guys on board.
Note:
I bet that some individuals of both companies keep a close eye on what's going on here.
Guys,
Don't get me wrong, I know what I'm doing when installing a beta that has been leaked.
First, it's illegal, we are stealing non published source code, infringing intellectual property and probably making ourselves guilty of too many felony counts to be able to get out of jail without a long white beard.
But, joke aside, this was not the point of my post and I am sorry if I didn't explain myself clearly.
There are 23053 builds that work well are 23053 that do not, as was the case with any previous build number and, consistantly, I have had two out of the pack working exactly as expected from a security perspective, and all of the rest not working as expected.
So, since I do not believe MS is deliberately compiling one tree of the code with embedded security and another without, it means that someone in the middle is affecting it.
That was my point.
UM
Hummm...
Wrong approach fellow...
Wrong place, wrong time and wrong people.
Don't expect to be received with an open heart while commenting such things...
Imagine the following scenario:
A priest enters a strip bar and tells the owner of his concerns of moral ground, about the practices that take pace there... LOL
I may understand your point, definitely not your purpose.
If you are lucky enough not the get flamed, you will at least see some frown faces...
Leave it...
As someone suggested before, remember this is a development community...
If what you find doesn't suit your needs simply suggest changes or don't use it at all.
If you concluded, after experimenting, that the only functional ROMs are NATF and RRE ones, allow me the following suggestion:
Choose between 3 options:
1. Use a stock ROM so you don't «steal» form anyone and don't risk having to spend 5 days in a row shaving...
2. Use a NATF ROM
3. Use an RRE ROM
I believe i made my point as gently as I could...
If i may have hurt some feelings, i am deeply sorry for that.
Cheers
Well, 2 points in answer to your post where you obviously did not read mine:
1) Did you miss the sentence that starts with "Joke aside" ??
2) Don't care of being flamed, I provided evidence to people that want to make up their miind, they don't need you to tell them what is safe or not for them
Bottom line is:
- if you do not want to have a phone crashing on you, use a stock ROM (that's actually a good joke... Stock ROMs do not crash less than their beta counterpart).
- if you do not want your passwords, contacts or personal data to end up into some hackers site, be careful about what ROM you install
wearing my flame proof vest.
UM
unlockMe said:
Well, 2 points in answer to your post where you obviously did not read mine:
1) Did you miss the sentence that starts with "Joke aside" ??
2) Don't care of being flamed, I provided evidence to people that want to make up their miind, they don't need you to tell them what is safe or not for them
Bottom line is:
- if you do not want to have a phone crashing on you, use a stock ROM (that's actually a good joke... Stock ROMs do not crash less than their beta counterpart).
- if you do not want your passwords, contacts or personal data to end up into some hackers site, be careful about what ROM you install
wearing my flame proof vest.
UM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dear UM,
I had a good laugh reading your last sentence LOL
I believe that wither you misunderstood me either I was not clear...
1. I am not accusing you of anything.
2. I read you whole message (points 1 and 2 included... They were there, weren't they...?)
3. I am not trying to demote you of you purposes... I was only trying to pass a message but given the fact the message wasn't delivered, I will try to rephrase...:
You are expressing both facts and opinions.
That is, indeed, you right given the fact we are in an open community and we, still, are in a free world (so to speak...).
I do not endorse or condemn none of your previous statements.
Knowing this community for quite some time and specially knowing it's member, active ones, passive ones, contributing ones, parasite ones, etc... I just know for sure that your comment in which you address people in such manner will have one of two possible outcomes:
1. Total ignorance
2. Flaming
Now, after this, do whatever you like Don't get me wrong and sorry if I made myself misunderstood
Nuff said.
Cheers.
This thread is not development related, moved to the appropriate section
The current state..
The last few days have been difficult. What has become clear now is that the Android Open Source Project is a framework. It’s licensed in such a way so that anyone can take it, modify it to their needs, and redistribute it as they please. Android belongs to everyone. This also means that big companies likes Google, HTC, Motorola, and whomever else can add their own pieces to it and share these pieces under whatever license they choose.
I’ve made lots of changes myself to the AOSP code, and added in code from lots of others. Building a better Droid, right?
The issue that’s raised is the redistribution of Google’s proprietary applications like Maps, GTalk, Market, and YouTube. These are not part of the open source project and are only part of “Google Experience” devices. They are Google’s intellectual property and I intend to respect that. I will no longer be distributing these applications as part of CyanogenMod. But it’s OK. None of the go-fast stuff that I do involves any of this stuff anyway. We need these applications though, because we all rely so heavily on their functionality. I’d love for Google to hand over the keys to the kingdom and let us all have it for free, but that’s not going to happen. And who can blame them?
There are lots of things we can do as end-users and modders, though, without violating anyones rights. Most importantly, we are entitled to back up our software. Since I don’t work with any of these closed source applications directly, what I intend to do is simply ship the next version of CyanogenMod as a “bare bones” ROM. You’ll be able to make calls, MMS, take photos, etc. In order to get our beloved Google sync and applications back, you’ll need to make a backup first. I’m working on an application that will do this for you.
The idea is that you’ll be able to Google-ify your CyanogenMod installation, with the applications and files that shipped on YOUR device already. Or, you can just use the basic ROM if you want. It will be perfectly functional if you don’t use the Google parts. I will include an alternative app store (SlideMe, or AndAppStore, not decided yet) with the basic ROM so that you can get your applications in case you don’t have a Google Experience device.
I’ll have more updates soon as I get all the code hammered out.
Thanks for all the support thru all of this.
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/the-current-state
The stuff Dreams are really made of....
I knew! Where there's a will there's a way! You can't keep a real boss down! Cyanogen I look forward to playing with this new stuff in the works. Rage on brother rage on, I for one honestly didn't want to leave android really, but I will continue to research back-up plans in case Google has anymore monkey wrenches laying around itching to be thrown...Good luck Cyanogen. We all owe you donations...real recognizes real! Dueces
This is great news Thank you!
fkn awesome!
this exactly what i thought and hoped would happen. everyone got in a tizy over nothing. so we have to back up before we flash which is just another way that the basic moder like myself can better understand the phone.
Does this means we need to wipe every time we flash a new rom?
tomvleeuwen said:
What do you guys think of sharing the 4.0.4 version over p2p networks?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone already has it.
Great
This sounds good, there is more than one way to skin a cat. I think they got upset when the new market app was released before they could get it out. They had to do something, but I think it will die down.
don't go there
tomvleeuwen said:
What do you guys think of sharing the 4.0.4 version over p2p networks?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cyanogen is doing his best to respect Google's legitimate copyrights, so suggesting that XDA get involved in distributing proprietary applications without a license only serves to undermine what is going on here. Mods: please remove.
ei8htohms said:
Cyanogen is doing his best to respect Google's legitimate copyrights, so suggesting that XDA get involved in distributing proprietary applications without a license only serves to undermine what is going on here. Mods: please remove.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I posted this in another thread but it would seem to be pertinent to here too:
Loccy said:
Let's face it, strictly speaking, all ROMs are warez.
Personally I'm surprised that it wasn't the Hero devs who got into trouble first, but this was all just a matter of time. I never understood the bizarre fixation that cropped up recently with QuickOffice and everyone going "omfg it's warez can't include it in romz!!!111!1one!". Why QuickOffice and not, say HTC_IME, or Work Email, or any number of other binary blobs that ROM cookers include as a matter of course now that have been "acquired" from non-orthodox source?
The Hero ROMs, let's face it, give people a means of "turning" their old phone into the latest and greatest HTC device. Each stable Hero ROM on the Dream/Magic potentially means a Hero device purchase lost. HTC are being far more hit in the pocket than Google are here - which is why I'm surprised the cease and desist wasn't directed at them.
I do think, however, this site and the people who run it are going to have to pick a side at some point. Either the position is "this is a site for developers, and as long as copyrighted material is not hosted on here in a fashion that would make us liable*, we will not suppress the work of individual devs". Or, their position is "no copyrighted material in any form, be that in the form to links to offsite storage repositories (eg. Rapidshare), or any other method". XDA doesn't *need* to do this in order to ensure the site does not get into legal hot water. I suspect they *might* do it, however, as some kind of misguided moral stance (and in my view the QuickOffice preoccupation was an example of just this). But in my opinion if they choose the latter then XDA is over as a site for realistic Android ROM development (and indeed, Windows Mobile and other OSes, if they apply the same standards across all their boards).
* elaborating on what I mean here - if people attach zips directly to their posts, and those zips are stored on the XDA servers, then XDA as a site is potentially liable. Alternatively, if instead people give a URL or a search string whereby people can find a ROM, but those files are not physically stored on XDA, they are not - any more than Google is liable for the many copyrighted MP3s you can find links to via their search engine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The bottom line is that if ROM devs decided they were going to respect ALL legitimate copyrights, there'd be no Hero ROMs, no Windows Mobile ROMs, in fact no ROMs apart from barebones AOSP ROMs which do less than a stock ROM.
ei8htohms said:
Mods: please remove.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I'm sorry, that's just ignorant. Just because you don't agree with a sentiment doesn't entitle you to demand the mods remove it. If the mods want to remove it they will (and in my view that would indicate which "side" they were choosing.) Personally, I don't know what it's like elsewhere around the world, but here in the UK one is at least allowed to speak freely, if not necessarily act freely.
kudos to cyanogen!
Loccy said:
If the mods want to remove it they will (and in my view that would indicate which "side" they were choosing.) Personally, I don't know what it's like elsewhere around the world, but here in the UK one is at least allowed to speak freely, if not necessarily act freely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think common U.S. practice is: if you speak freely, you get called names by people until you either cry or shoot them, thus proving to everyone that your original point is invalid.
But XDA has always had a policy of "if it doesn't get the site admins in trouble, it's probably ok." If memory serves, the site is in the Netherlands, and is subject to EU laws as to copyright, etc. I think that's important to remember when it comes to such things, since the EU laws as to intellectual property are in flux and not quite the same as those in the US or UK.
But the official policy is available in one of the toplevel forums here:
Flar said:
Hi Everybody,
We noticed that there is some confusion when it comes to posting sensitive material on xda-developers.com and mostly about what can and can't be posted.
We would like to clarify our point of view through this post.
Since the start of xda-developers this has always been a site that once in while has some sensitive material online, through the years this site has grown so big it's no longer possible to check every file on our servers or every post on the board, we also feel it wouldn't benefit the community if we did.
However with increased popularity comes an increased amount of legal complaints when sensitive material is found on our servers. Which is the reason why we have been more careful lately. Recently some sensitive material has shown up on the servers and we received legal complaints from companies who have the copyrights for this material, although we all feel this is very interesting and valuable material we cannot risk the future of xda-developers by ignoring the legal requests we receive, therefore this material has been taken offline.
We understand that maintaining the balance between legal and illegal is sometimes confusing and/or difficult but that is unfortunately how it works.
When it comes to posting sensitive material there are a couple suggestions we can make:
- if possible do not post the files on the xda-developers servers.
- use your common sense (if you feel something might not be legal it probably isn't).
- always keep in mind when posting software of any kind, that we will take it offline if there is a legal complaint from the copyright owner.
Warez is in no way accepted and will be removed upon discovery.
I hope this post will serve as a clear and valuable guideline.
Greetz,
Flar
Site admin.
P.s. When you have any questions you can always contact me or one of the moderators.
Last edited by Flar; 17th January 2007 at 10:14 AM..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone has an opinion, and they have, or should have, the right to decide for themselves what is correct. I am on the side of Cyanogen. I do not think what he did caused any harm or loss of revenue to anyone. We can not always have our way though, and I think that's the case here. I don't know him, but I do think he's smart enough to keep doing what he is EXTREMELY good at without putting himself in a bad position. It's just a stumbling block to get past. We are puting a lot of effort into pointing fingers and throwing around ideas, but if we placed this much energy into finding a fuctional solution, we might get past it a whole buch faster. A good army fights the war, not the battle.
Warez is in no way accepted and will be removed upon discovery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But every single ROM on here is warez to some extent or another! Certainly (just for example, I'm not picking on anyone specific here) Drizzy doesn't own the IPR for the contents of his Hero ROMs. I'm pretty sure the WinMo ROMs aren't being posted by Microsoft. If the policy is that "warez is in no way accepted and will be removed upon discovery", they're not doing much of a job, are they - every other post is "warez", if you take a strict interpretation.
I suppose I'm saying that "warez is in the eye of the beholder". I fully endorse the attitude "if it doesn't get the site admins in trouble, it's probably ok" - but I can't help thinking that relaxed attitude has been firmed up of late for whatever reason, given the QuickOffice oddness. I'm pretty sure no-one who own the IPR for QuickOffice was ever in touch (although do correct me if I'm wrong), so why the odd fixation recently?
Bottom line: stick to the attitudes and approaches that have made this site what it is, please don't start getting over zealous when there's no reason to.
Honestly did this need another topic though? I mean I'm all for good news like this, but add it on to one of the many topics that are out there. -.- (ready for flaming)
easy now
Loccy said:
The bottom line is that if ROM devs decided they were going to respect ALL legitimate copyrights, there'd be no Hero ROMs, no Windows Mobile ROMs, in fact no ROMs apart from barebones AOSP ROMs which do less than a stock ROM.
And I'm sorry, that's just ignorant. Just because you don't agree with a sentiment doesn't entitle you to demand the mods remove it. If the mods want to remove it they will (and in my view that would indicate which "side" they were choosing.) Personally, I don't know what it's like elsewhere around the world, but here in the UK one is at least allowed to speak freely, if not necessarily act freely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First off, I'm not demanding anything. I politely requested that the mods remove a suggestion that clearly seeks to circumvent the policies of XDA: We won't distribute warez. The poster knew the suggestion was specifically aimed at getting around the XDA policy, otherwise there would be no reason for a P2P distribution alternative in the first place.
A key component of intellectual property and copyright laws (at least in the US) is that the holder of the copyright must act to defend the copyright to some reasonable extent (no, I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what this entails exactly). Now that Google has acted to defend their copyrights in these instances, the line is clear. Google apps are paid apps (licensed to the handset manufacturers or service providers) and are not free to distribute without a license. Consequently, there shouldn't be much further debate about the fact that these are warez and are not to be distributed on or through XDA.
I'm not trying to attack anyone (the original poster, ROM devs or certainly yourself), but I am interested in XDA maintaining the high ground here and continuing to operate in a respectful and respectable manner.
Perhaps we should stay on topic?
te5ter said:
Perhaps we should stay on topic?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair point. Maybe we should take the "warez is in the eye of the beholder" debate to this thread. I do actually think it's a fascinating debate, personally. Oh, incidentally, just re-read my earlier post, and want to apologise to ei8htohms - I didn't mean to come off quite so brusque.
First, I'm very happy that there seems to be a workaround that Cyanogen feels comfortable in using.
However, I see it as a band-aid to a much larger problem. Yes, it addresses those few apps that Google specifically mentioned. But there seems to be potential future conflicts that could adversely affect this whole Android community.
What about all the other apps in there? The Camera/Camcorder/Gallery app for instance. The UI? Other HTC bits? And the biggie, the Search component? Does Google also lay claim to unified search, the widget, the particular framework involved in that?
I don't know the answer to that, I'm just asking. So much is left unanswered, I just feel this is only the beginning. For now, I guess it may be enough. But it still leaves so much up in the air.
Now the 2nd major issue: Cyanogen should be commended for taking the high road here and doing his best to adhere to Google's current request. I think we all know that there was never ever any question that no one saw this coming. It came from left field and shocked everyone beyond belief.
But will other rom devs be as diligent as Cyanogen? Will theme developers adhere to this? And with all of these added steps required to get a functioning "Google Experience", consider the flood of newbie questions this forum is about to endure. We all thought "brick" and "hardspl" questions were tedious at best ... prepare yourselves for the onslought of mass confusion. That fun has just begun.
I still believe the burden lies with Google to make this right. I'm not saying they should make their apps open source by any means. I'm just saying that there must be a way for Google to allow the inclusion of their apps (perhaps a different license or maybe some encryption trick that protects the apps from modification <I don't know, I'm not that smart>). Google needs to step up to the plate in this. They also need to save-face and stifle this PR nightmare. Android does not need this, Google does not need this, HTC does not need this, carriers do not need this, Cyanogen does not need this, and users do not need this. Growth of the entire Android project is simply too important. I see this as speed bump. They just made the bump too big and it needs to be shaved down some so everyone can get it over without damaging anything else.
this is great news indeed. can't wait to see what is to come!
As you all know we all love having our custom roms on our HTC devices, it makes them much faster and has many more applications and content!
But the truth is, is all this legal?
I wanted to hear it out straight from the horses mouth so i went straight to the big guys, Google INCs Android.
Dissapointingly on their website thye have no Contact Us or e-mail so i just browsed about.
What i found out?
I found out that Android is a free, open source Os so any one can come in, get an SDK and develop some apps.
What i didn't find out?
What i did not find out is it flashing or creating roms is legal.
So i went up to the guys who gave Android a try, HTC!
I asked them exactly this:
Is flashing custom Android roms legal on the HTC Hero/HTC Android phones?
This is because Android is a free open soruce fully customisable mobile platfrm created by google INC.
Thank you
They said:, well Terry from HTC said:
Dear Blazr Thank you for your enquiry about Android devices This is how we keep these devices up to date and current. What happens is that google inc release these Roms to us and we make HTC Rom updates from them, so they are 100% legal. If these steps have not helped, please let me know by responding using the link provided and I will be happy to check again for you. Best regards, Terry Snelling HTC customer support team HTC Corp. Global Service Division http://www.htc.com/europe/CA_Hotline.aspx
Then i asked my question again:
No i am asking if flashing UNOFFICAL CUSTOM MADE ROMS are legal, not flashinggoogles, please can you reply
And they said this:
Dear Blazr Thank you for your enquiry about Rom updates If you dont update to rom from www.HTC.com, or your providers website, then this will be a illegal rom and will lose your warranty. If these steps have not helped, please let me know by responding using the link provided and I will be happy to check again for you. Best regards, Terry Snelling HTC customer support team HTC Corp. Global Service Division http://www.htc.com/europe/CA_Hotline.aspx
Well i aint sure if this helped but there you go,
They said that
1 Flashing a rom not from HTC or Google is ILLEGAL
2 And that it will ruin your warranty
So if youre someone who doesn't care but wants the best from his device, like me, then continue supporting custom rom makers.
But if you are someone, like my aint, who LOVES their warranty and hates hacking and 'this nonsense,' they say. Then stick with Android 2.0.
But What do you think,
Thats what i would like to know!
Please respond and give your opiion,
Regards
Sorry if this is long
This is nothing new, we know this for already years. They (MS, HTC, etc.) tolerate it.
Many will argue that as you have paid for the device it is up to you what you do with the device..
I very much doubt flashing a non-official ROM is illegal.. I know of no law that it breaks..
Meekel said:
Many will argue that as you have paid for the device it is up to you what you do with the device..
I very much doubt flashing a non-official ROM is illegal.. I know of no law that it breaks..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the only thing it "breaks" is your warranty.
djn541 said:
I think the only thing it "breaks" is your warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct.. in addition, the email said an "illegal rom" not that it was illegal to flash a rom
Meekel said:
Correct.. in addition, the email said an "illegal rom" not that it was illegal to flash a rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. In the e-mail and "illegal rom" is a rom that does not originat from google itself, HTC (or other manufacturer), or your carrier. illegal roms, "cooked Roms" are only illegal in the sense that you will void your warranty. Not that you will go to prison.
lol, of course flashing an unoffical Windows Mobile ROM is illegal! From a legal standpoint, cooked ROMs are an intellectual property nightmare! That's why XDA has to remove links to ROM builds when they get a cease and desist letter. Otherwise, they'd go to court and lose the case because M$ is clearly within its rights to request the ROMs be taken down. Now, are you going to be imprisoned because you use a cooked ROM? Of course not. M$ is smart enough to know when not to alienate its best customers. HTC and M$ could take most of the software off this board in an instant due to all that software existing in a copyright gray area which favors them. However, they know when they should respect their enthusiast community and there's a defacto understanding between the device enthusiasts and them.
For Android, the situation's actually a bit different. Most of Android is open source, and licensed under an Apache 2 or a GPL v2 license. Flashing ROMs containing only the open source parts are completely legal (though warranty voiding because they're not from the OEM). However, Google includes some of their own closed source applications like YouTube, GMail, Google Maps, etc. in Android OS, and these cannot be redistributed as they are proprietary to Google. This ensures that only manufactures they approve can make Android devices with full functionality. The classic example of this is when Android ROM cook Cyanogen recieved a C&D letter from Google, because his custom firmware contained these applications and he was not within his legal rights to redistribute them with his ROMs. So, it can get a bit tricky with Android, but the short answer is yes, it's technically illegal to flash full cooked ROMS (i.e. with Google proprietary apps).
However, you shouldn't worry about the police taking you away or finding yourself with a lawsuit just because you flash a cooked ROM. The corporations usually don't mess with their enthusiast community, and usually the worst they do is have the offending software taken down. However, you should keep in mind that the corporations are almost always, in these cases, within their rights to issue a law suit or similar (though they always go for the big-time chefs and not the users, to make a point).
DaveTheTytnIIGuy said:
lol, of course flashing an unoffical Windows Mobile ROM is illegal! From a legal standpoint, cooked ROMs are an intellectual property nightmare! That's why XDA has to remove links to ROM builds when they get a cease and desist letter. Otherwise, they'd go to court and lose the case because M$ is clearly within its rights to request the ROMs be taken down. Now, are you going to be imprisoned because you use a cooked ROM? Of course not. M$ is smart enough to know when not to alienate its best customers. HTC and M$ could take most of the software off this board in an instant due to all that software existing in a copyright gray area which favors them. However, they know when they should respect their enthusiast community and there's a defacto understanding between the device enthusiasts and them.
For Android, the situation's actually a bit different. Most of Android is open source, and licensed under an Apache 2 or a GPL v2 license. Flashing ROMs containing only the open source parts are completely legal (though warranty voiding because they're not from the OEM). However, Google includes some of their own closed source applications like YouTube, GMail, Google Maps, etc. in Android OS, and these cannot be redistributed as they are proprietary to Google. This ensures that only manufactures they approve can make Android devices with full functionality. The classic example of this is when Android ROM cook Cyanogen recieved a C&D letter from Google, because his custom firmware contained these applications and he was not within his legal rights to redistribute them with his ROMs. So, it can get a bit tricky with Android, but the short answer is yes, it's technically illegal to flash full cooked ROMS (i.e. with Google proprietary apps).
However, you shouldn't worry about the police taking you away or finding yourself with a lawsuit just because you flash a cooked ROM. The corporations usually don't mess with their enthusiast community, and usually the worst they do is have the offending software taken down. However, you should keep in mind that the corporations are almost always, in these cases, within their rights to issue a law suit or similar (though they always go for the big-time chefs and not the users, to make a point).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said. Kudos to you
DaveTheTytnIIGuy said:
lol, of course flashing an unoffical Windows Mobile ROM is illegal! From a legal standpoint, cooked ROMs are an intellectual property nightmare! That's why XDA has to remove links to ROM builds when they get a cease and desist letter. Otherwise, they'd go to court and lose the case because M$ is clearly within its rights to request the ROMs be taken down. Now, are you going to be imprisoned because you use a cooked ROM? Of course not. M$ is smart enough to know when not to alienate its best customers. HTC and M$ could take most of the software off this board in an instant due to all that software existing in a copyright gray area which favors them. However, they know when they should respect their enthusiast community and there's a defacto understanding between the device enthusiasts and them.
For Android, the situation's actually a bit different. Most of Android is open source, and licensed under an Apache 2 or a GPL v2 license. Flashing ROMs containing only the open source parts are completely legal (though warranty voiding because they're not from the OEM). However, Google includes some of their own closed source applications like YouTube, GMail, Google Maps, etc. in Android OS, and these cannot be redistributed as they are proprietary to Google. This ensures that only manufactures they approve can make Android devices with full functionality. The classic example of this is when Android ROM cook Cyanogen recieved a C&D letter from Google, because his custom firmware contained these applications and he was not within his legal rights to redistribute them with his ROMs. So, it can get a bit tricky with Android, but the short answer is yes, it's technically illegal to flash full cooked ROMS (i.e. with Google proprietary apps).
However, you shouldn't worry about the police taking you away or finding yourself with a lawsuit just because you flash a cooked ROM. The corporations usually don't mess with their enthusiast community, and usually the worst they do is have the offending software taken down. However, you should keep in mind that the corporations are almost always, in these cases, within their rights to issue a law suit or similar (though they always go for the big-time chefs and not the users, to make a point).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said man, well said. They wouldn't track you down cause you flashed a rom but if some how, what are the likes of this but, a clever police man checked out your phone then we may be introuble. But thats what i a saying cause Modacos rom has google applications in it i think..
Non the less, what they have said is that it is illegal to post custom roms with their applications in it, so its sort of legal to flash your own rom without the need of googles stuff.
djn541 said:
I think the only thing it "breaks" is your warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, if the thing breaks from manufactors defects then i cant return it and have tp pay to get it fixed otherwise i must say hello to insurance, which i aint sure how much it is on the Hero.
Meekel said:
Many will argue that as you have paid for the device it is up to you what you do with the device..
I very much doubt flashing a non-official ROM is illegal.. I know of no law that it breaks..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, it just breaks the manufactors agreement but they say its illegal, its like putting CFW on a PSP or Wii.??
Also if you piad 400 of your great british pounds or american bucks then you should be able to do what you like to it, when you like to it, (except be a stupid p!rate)..
blazr said:
True, it just breaks the manufactors agreement but they say its illegal, its like putting CFW on a PSP or Wii.??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disgaree with this statement purely on the fact that in the UK no one has been prosecuted for chipping/modding a games console.
They have only be prosecuted for selling these devices..
I understand your point though..
Meekel said:
I disgaree with this statement purely on the fact that in the UK no one has been prosecuted for chipping/modding a games console.
They have only be prosecuted for selling these devices..
I understand your point though..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe not, but I'm fairly sure UK law states that "circumventing protection" is a crime. Flashing a ROM isn't illegal, but HSPL/SSPL is as you're circumventing the protection which prevents you from flashing.
Distributing ROMs is also illegal as you are making/distributing copies of someone else's source code.
So I think that as long as you don't use HSPL/SSPL and don't distribute your ROMs it wouldn't be illegal. But then again, I'm no solicitor (lawyer for you yanks )
Blade0rz said:
Maybe not, but I'm fairly sure UK law states that "circumventing protection" is a crime. Flashing a ROM isn't illegal, but HSPL/SSPL is as you're circumventing the protection which prevents you from flashing.
Distributing ROMs is also illegal as you are making/distributing copies of someone else's source code.
So I think that as long as you don't use HSPL/SSPL and don't distribute your ROMs it wouldn't be illegal. But then again, I'm no solicitor (lawyer for you yanks )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that distributing ROMs is illegal as you would be using IP from whatever company it is therefore would be breaking the law..
Ack, it's a complicated issue ain't it..?
Your very right. Its a very complicated issue as it falls under many categories. And the fact that laws are very different in different countries. This issue can be compared with lots of cases.
I will try to resume it this way:
1) When you purchase an electronic device containing software, you own the hardware, but only are licensing the usage of the provided software. This means you cannot do whatever you want with the device, i.e. you may not reverse engineer the software (at least in most western countries).
2) Flashing offical ROM's, which are provided by the manufacturer to be used by customers are not illegal, or it would be the manufacturer's responsability if he did not license the software for distribution. If the customer bricks the device while flashing it, he way lose warranty.
3) Flashing unofficial ROM's: the legal aspect of it is not concerning the act of flashing, but the question if you are entitled to a valid license of all included software modules. In most cases you are not. Even if you are entitled to the software modules contained in the unoffical ROM, flashing it to the device definitly voids the warranty. The question is: can the manufacturer prove you used an unofficial ROM. In most cases he can't, specially if you flash back to an offical ROM prior to sending the faulty device in.
4) In practical terms: as long as you download the unoffical ROM without spreading it yourself (aka using a P2P client) and as long as you don't offer the unoffical ROM yourself, it is very unlikely that you risk any legal trouble. The reason being that the offense has a very small value compared to the difficulty to actually prove anything. No policeman has the knowledge and authority to check the firmware of your phone...
However, in case of malfunction, the manufacturer can always refuse warranty if he can prove that an unoffical ROM has been flashed to the device. Again, often manufacturers like HTC seem to be pretty customer-friendly. I have a Blue Angel that broke within warranty after I flashed a custom ROM (was conincidence and not the ROM's fault). I got a free repair, but the device was returned with the latest official HTC ROM. Fair enough.
5) What you should be carefull about: take care not to publish (or at least in a traceable way) unofficial firmware containing third party software which has not been licensed, i.e. using a cracked version.
6) Final thoughts: As has been stated here already, I believe that a forum like this one is probably monitored by people from Microsoft and HTC (both companies being the reason for this forum to exist in first place). Because it has been pretty clean and basically providing corrected ROM's to entusiasts, no real harm is done to either company and perhaps even quite the opposite: any problem you experience on an HTC phone, search for a resultion in Google and you end up here. I think this is the best support forum any company could desire, so why make a war against it...
Cheers,
vma
Well said vma
Deffinition of illegal,
1. not according to or authorized by law
2. not sanctioned by official rules
I think in the context we're discussing here #1 does NOT apply, but #2 does.
I don't think any law has been written that makes it a crime to flash a custom ROM to your phone. However according to some "official" rules it is illegal. But when you commit an illegal act that is a violation of rules, it is not punishible by law. No, the punishment is handed down by the manufacturer and that is the voiding of your warranty.
It's hard to commit a truly illegal crime against yourself. Can you steal from yourself? Can you hit yourself in the head and be prosecuted for assault? The only one I can think of is suicide. But have you ever seen the crime of suicide prosecuted? (I'm not talking about assisted suicide here)
Interesting discussion, and just my 2 cents,
@dirkbonn:
Your line of thinking is wrong. I am by no means a lawyer or what so ever, BUT: the flashing of cooked ROM's is illegal because:
1) It required REVERSE ENGINEERING of software to be done. Defined in most countries as illegal.
2) It involves the use of unlicensed software. Defined in most countries as illegal.
3) It involves in many cases the removal of locks imposed by the operator. Again, this is illegal, because you accepted a contract in which you commited to refrain from doing that.
What some people don't seem to understand is: when you purchase the device, it comes with software which you only license for use. You do not own the software. Also, you are only granted to use the provided versions. You cannot assume that you have the right to use a more recent version or a version in another language. The right to decide upon that, belongs to the owner of the intellectual property of the software.
Again, debating about the logic of such laws will not change the law.
To change the law, you need to vote for the right politicians and pressure them to approve laws, you are comfortable with.
In my modest opinion, laws regarding the protection of intellectual property have to quickly be revised, in order to avoid having the whole population commiting offenses and crimes.
Cheers,
vma
Request to HTC
hello everybody. recently I asked HTC about this issue.
Question:
"Dear Sirs and Madams
I wanted to ask you if updating a HTC Touch HD from WM 6.1 to WM 6.5 with a downloaded ROM not from the HTC or Microsoft-Website is illegal or not. For me it is clear that if I do so, I lose my warranty on it, but am I allowed to do so?"
Answer:
"Thank you for contacting us. Installing non official ROM on your devcie will void your warranty . It may also cause problems in funcionality on your device. It is up to you to decide to install any ROM on your device. I trust that this resolves your query, please do not hesitate to contact us again if required."
best regards,
sblubb
Definatly not illegal. Will void your warranty BUT most of the things you get in your warranty are covered by your statutory rights, which you still have.
As an employee of Vodafone UK. I can confirm from a network operators POV, we do NOT refuse warranty exchanges on an Android device that has been rooted or custom ROM'ed as long as the fault is a hardware fault.
This is because Android is open source and it is illegal to try and charge or restrict it.
Windows devices however, we will not do anything if they are not running the stock image. That is because Windows is licensed software that the manufacturers have to pay to use.