Related
Quote from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/08/business/08phone-web.html
WASHINGTON, June 7 (AP) — A federal agency has banned imports of new cellphones made with Qualcomm semiconductors because the chips violate a patent held by Broadcom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems it will cause so much trouble for HTC and O2 since many of their phones uses the Qualcomm chip.
Oh no! Bye-bye HTC Kaiser
But wait, there is no problem in Europe (yet).
Bye-Bye HTC Kaiser in US
gogol said:
Oh no! Bye-bye HTC Kaiser
But wait, there is no problem in Europe (yet).
Bye-Bye HTC Kaiser in US
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Steve Jobs still has influence and a good lobby in the Usa ;-)
I am not too familiar with US law, but the article said:
A) This decision pissed off a lot of very big companies: Motorola, Samsung, AT&T, Version and more.
B) There is still a chance to overturn it:
The White House now has 60 days to approve or overturn the ruling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So there will be enormous pressure to allow the chips or for Broadcom to settle.
Isnt it more likely that:
A)the judging be overruled be over-ruled by an out of court settlement due to pressure by the carriers
or
B) Broadcom would license it to Qualcomm for a fee (ofcourse)
Im pretty sure the article didnt conclude that there was a definate ban yet.
Heijdemann said:
Steve Jobs still has influence and a good lobby in the Usa ;-)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, I'm not the only one that thought of this...not really seriously, but the thought did cross my mind .
Well thats just a bunch of crap. Well hopefully they settle this soon.
I would think B would be most likely and a reasonable choice, Apple did that for the iphone didn't it? Anyways, I'm in Canada, not US, w00t.
A news report I read today (Thurs Jan 03, 2008) stated that a US Federal Court judge has ruled that Qualcomm must cease immediately selling 3rd generation WCDMA cellular chips that infringe on patents held by Broadcom.
The news report did NOT list which exact chips these are.
So, obvious question: does the P3650 Polaris CPU fall into the "banned for Qualcomm" category ?
Does anyone have reliable, accurate knowledge of which chips are actually affected by this ?
Hi,
I found this article:
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/...d=HVYWDP3Q0PICWQSNDLSCKHA?articleID=205206967
It contains the following statement:
"Shipments of chipsets for devices intended for international markets were not affected by the ruling."
Regards,
hqqh
Yes, thank you for that. I'd found 2 other similar reports.
"Shipments of chipsets for devices intended for international markets were not affected by the ruling."
This is a comment from Qualcomm - perhaps Broadcom doesn't believe it !?
The situation seems critical enough. It's very hard to believe any of the reports tell all of the truth.
Read this http://www.broadcom.com/docs/press/12-31-07_Permanent_Injunction_Order.pdf
in brief the MSM7200 chipset (in the polaris) has been banned in the ruling, but as far as I know it only affects devices sold in the US
hinz said:
Read this http://www.broadcom.com/docs/press/12-31-07_Permanent_Injunction_Order.pdf
in brief the MSM7200 chipset (in the polaris) has been banned in the ruling, but as far as I know it only affects devices sold in the US
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh my God. I got TC only this new year and i am in US. What does that mean if it is banned.... Can any one tell me what should we do if this ban news is correct..
I don't think there will be big problems. Also considering the amount of phones the chipset is in already. Most likely Qualcomm will be using the same chipset with some modifications to avoid legal problems. Or they make a deal and pay some (a lot) of money to continue using the current chipset.
If they are wise they keep most of the stuff the same (it would cost a lot of money to design a completely new chipset). And as I've read it now, the legal problems with the chipset don't include the parts where we have problems with (video driver). Only time will tell... But so far I'm not that worried.
By the way, the ruling als states (as far as I've read) that they can keep on selling the chips to their current partners where they already have a deal with. So there won't be an early end to the HTC phones with this chipset.
a ruling in us only goes in us companys have to sue in every country to enforce patents
so one can just buy a qualcomm based phone from another country then usa have it ship'd that they cant sell them in usa dont mean feds will be comming round collecting know qualcomm owning offenders
But in what country is the HQ of Qualcomm? A quick look at wikipedia shows that's in the US. (or ofcourse I'm looking at another company, who knows )
Qualcomm (NASDAQ: QCOM) is a wireless telecommunications research and development company based in San Diego, California.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That could make it difficult with this ruling. However they would be stupid not to find a solution because it will be difficult for them if they can't continue. They've tried legal action so far and that hasn't payed off. But I can imagine there are still other options they can explore and probably will explore as well.
RaptorRVL said:
But in what country is the HQ of Qualcomm? A quick look at wikipedia shows that's in the US. (or ofcourse I'm looking at another company, who knows )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, that's them. If you're ever in the area (lol), I'll cruise you by and show you their little complex of buildings.
hinz said:
Read this http://www.broadcom.com/docs/press/12-31-07_Permanent_Injunction_Order.pdf
in brief the MSM7200 chipset (in the polaris) has been banned in the ruling, but as far as I know it only affects devices sold in the US
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the link to the actual ruling.
Yes, I agree that the ruling is quite clear - the MSM7200 chip (in the Polaris) is subject to patent restriction, but limited to the US. (That is a puzzle in itself). Unless Qualcomm pays Broadcom the prescribed royalties for US-sold products, the Polaris as it is currently fabricated is dead-in-the water in the US.
This is not to say that Qualcomm won't appeal the ruling. My hard experience over many years is that when lawyers and judges become involved, they are the only end-winners.
Qualcomm also maintain that they have pin-to-pin equivalents that do not infringe, but the Polaris as currently manufactured does not use these alternatives.
Now I also wonder at a question I have asked in another thread - UK retailers that are currently claiming stock or "real soon now" stock (eg. Expansys UK) have also recently edited the spec list to quote ONLY 2100Mhz for UMTS in Europe.
The US and other countries (including Aus) use 850Mhz outside the cities. So if we accept that newly-arriving retail stock is limited to 2100Mhz (ie. single, not tri-band) then the UTMS capability is very limited.
And then I lose interest in the thing.
The HTC website still says HSDPA/UMTS: 2100 MHz (Europe), 850/1900 MHz (USA).
Wonder if this will change...it did for the S730 (has the same chipset as the Polaris).
kevinrirvine said:
Relax posts 11 and 12. I have the Polaris in my hand right now and it is for sure TRIBAND UMTS/HSDPA and as I like to say for our side of the Pond. I am one of the first in the USA to have this device and it does work very quickly I might add on the US 850/1900MHZ UMTS/HSDPA Band. Buy it for it is the lightest pocket pc/pda/phone on the market and very good looking too.Thanks, Kevin
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your comment. That is exactly what I have been asking of current owners for 3-4 days now (up till now, no answer).
BUT I will not lay out $$$ until I am absolutely assured that the device as now retailed now is tri-band.
There still remains the distinct possibility that retail stock before and after this court ruling are differently configured.
ianl8888 said:
Thank you for your comment. That is exactly what I have been asking of current owners for 3-4 days now (up till now, no answer).
BUT I will not lay out $$$ until I am absolutely assured that the device as now retailed now is tri-band.
There still remains the distinct possibility that retail stock before and after this court ruling are differently configured.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@ianl8888,
I think truthfully your making a mine out of a molehill. Htc or no oem can change the spec's after a device is released and this whole quaLcomm situation is stll filled with uncertainty and it will take possibly yrs for the courts and lawyer's to resolve. I bought mine just 3 dys ago at www.onthegosolutions.com and they are very reputABLE and I have done bsuiness with them for yrs and you will get the Polaris triband and all I assure you. No one in the country USA has stock now yet they do and it will ship the same day however you like. As for expansys UK, NEVER, REPEAT NEVER GO BY ANYHING THEY SAY OR DO FOR I HAVE DEALT WITH THEM BEFORE AND IT WAS A NIGHTMARE.
kevinrirvine said:
As for expansys UK, NEVER, REPEAT NEVER GO BY ANYHING THEY SAY OR DO FOR I HAVE DEALT WITH THEM BEFORE AND IT WAS A NIGHTMARE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? in what way? I have it on back order with them.
Side questions: Am I allowed to use my credit card for multiple back orders? I might have to place another back order with a different retailer if they are really that bad.
Abbsta said:
Really? in what way? I have it on back order with them.
Side questions: Am I allowed to use my credit card for multiple back orders? I might have to place another back order with a different retailer if they are really that bad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They really are that bad and it is a long and complicated story. Deal with Clove Tech and Tell them Kevin Irvine sent you and they will take very good care of your order and keep you up to date about stock pricing etc. A very honest company. Simply put, I sent several e-mails to them to cancel my order for the toshiba g900 when it was first released and they never had the courtesy of a reply back and then out of the blue stock came in and they shipped to me, charged my card illegally and to top it all off did not declare the device properly for US Customs so it was held for days until I not they had to solve the problem. Then when I finally received it I refused delivery and expansys never returned any of fed ex's calls to return the item to them and you probably get the point by now.
Yes, to your first question but be careful here for if the companies your placing your backorder's with get stock on the same day for example your in trouble. Kevin
Sorry to hear about that and I better cancel it then. Cheers for the advice Kevin.
kevinrirvine said:
@ianl8888,
I think truthfully your making a mine out of a molehill. Htc or no oem can change the spec's after a device is released and this whole quaLcomm situation is stll filled with uncertainty and it will take possibly yrs for the courts and lawyer's to resolve. I bought mine just 3 dys ago at www.onthegosolutions.com and they are very reputABLE and I have done bsuiness with them for yrs and you will get the Polaris triband and all I assure you. No one in the country USA has stock now yet they do and it will ship the same day however you like. As for expansys UK, NEVER, REPEAT NEVER GO BY ANYHING THEY SAY OR DO FOR I HAVE DEALT WITH THEM BEFORE AND IT WAS A NIGHTMARE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, thank you for your comment. I had no doubt that earlier retail supply was tri-band; I have much doubt about later supply - the Court order states "IMMEDIATE STOP ..." and turning off available UMTS frequencies is a fairly simple ROM change. That's not a molehill. Perhaps the ROM cookers here can bypass that !
The only bright spot here is the limitation to US-only sales. Purchasing a fully specced device from elsewhere bypasses that, with the downside of Warranty service also being elsewhere.
I agree with you on marketing - marketers are to be trusted even less than lawyers, if that were possible. UK retailers other than Expansys have also changed the spec list in the last 3-4 days.
Supply is still in the "real soon now" category for most of the world. So we only have to wait for "real soon now".
Lastly, I'm not panicking in the slightest. If the thing really is crippled by Qualcomm's Court-decided patent infringements, that's simply too bad. Another "thing" will turn up eventually, without the rain clouds, in response to demonstrated world-wide demand. But the impact of this Court decision will be felt - we can't yet predict how.
how to check UMTS
Hello Everyone, I am using HTC touch cruise for the last one week and it is such a cool device. got from On the go solutions. But after lots of confusions in the thread, is it any way to check what frequency of UMTS that my phone supports. I m with T-Mobile and there is no 3G. Is there any where can i check.. Please...
Mates, think waht you're discussing 'bout!
Qualcomm is forbidden to sell it's chips - since the beginning of this week!
HTC may have ordered a few 10.000th items of this chip for the polaris which are obviously already delivered.
The polaris is assembled in taiwan.
And last the devices have to be delivered all 'round the world (hee - something like santa hoohoo).
You thing, the time from delivering the chips from qc to htc and the device in the stores is less than one week?
All devices, which are sold till now are fully functional!
All other will do well too ...
Designing a mobile (any so called hightech) lasts several months. If they change the umts-functions they will to it by firmware change they won't be able to simply replace the chip. Or they leave it like it is, maybe some compensation will be payed to Broadcomm.
greetz
a happy polaris owner
Just posted a pretty lengthy message on the T-Mobile forums... Post replies there if possible.
http://forums.t-mobile.com/t5/T-Mobile-G2/T-Mobile-Why-I-m-returning-my-G2/m-p/502593
Dear T-Mobile,
I thought I would write you this little note to explain why I have returned my G2. You see, Google created the Android Operating System to provide an Free, Open-Source alternative to proprietary Smart-Phone Operating Systems such as Windows Mobile and the iPhone. Google has done this to untangle the Smart-Phone ecosystem from the likes of Microsoft and Apple. The mantra of Open-Source software is: "If you don't like something, you can download the source and change it yourself!" Evidently, you do not understand this concept.
In case you were somehow unaware, the Linux kernel is protected by the GNU Public License (version 2). You can read the full license here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
By selling a locked-down device (such as the G2), you defeat the capability of developers to contribute to the Android platform. Many features in the mainline Android project have come from the "modder" community. Furthermore, your supplier, HTC, refuses to comply with the GNU license. Numerous attempts to contact them about this violation are met with the following form response:
"HTC will typically publish on developer.htc.com the Kernel open source code for recently released devices as soon as possible. HTC will normally publish this within 90 to 120 days. This time frame is within the requirements of the open source community."
This is not acceptable. Read the license - it is clearly states that source code must be made available to those who ask for it.
Adding insult to injury, you have also misrepresented the device by being less-than-honest about its specs and capabilities. Many users are surprised to find they only have 1.3GB available on a 4GB phone. Say what you will about "reserved space" - this is not the case on *any* other Android handset. Meanwhile, you have taken cash on the side to pre-load certain "useful applications" (crapware such as Photobucket) - which cannot be removed by the user. And to no one's surprise, you have removed built-in features of Froyo (such as Tethering.)
It's unfortunate that you have chosen this path for your Android handsets. Neither HTC nor T-Mobile own Android, Linux, or the numerous other software components contained therein. You cannot simply do with them as you please. Hopefully you will release future handsets without these restrictions - until then I will continue to support the efforts of those who unlock your software protection.
Regards,
An ex-G2 owner
Personally, I think you are blowing this "anti-root" debacle out of proportion.
G2 will be rooted, just give it time.
I will give you the 4GB w/ 1.3GB free space argument. No argument here.
SuperFly03 said:
Personally, I think you are blowing this "anti-root" debacle out of proportion.
G2 will be rooted, just give it time.
I will give you the 4GB w/ 1.3GB free space argument. No argument here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
How do you REALLY about htc and t-mobile?
I'm sure they're all getting out their tissues for you.
You can get off of the soapbox now.
HamNCheese said:
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The requirement is 90-120 days after release right? We are 5 days into release.
The 4GB, as I said, I have no argument against because it is a bit misleading but then again there is an 8GB SDHC card.
The useless applications can be removed when rooted. Until then, I haven't seen an Android phone not come with at least a few useless applications. They suck but they can be removed eventually.
I agree with you that is your device that you paid for... I'm not a fan of content protection. I, in fact, hate it but the 1000 people who don't buy a device because of it don't compare to the 2million people who do buy the device so I don't get too worked up about it.
I think you are being a bit dramatic.
I totally agree with this letter root is my deciding factor on wether I'm purchasing this phone. And I'm purchasing it out rite. The whole 500. It irritates me I'm told what to dob with something I spent so much money on. I purchase a mts because I assumed I could root and write to system and what not because I wanted a phone with a keyboard and this was all that was out but I hated the espresso ui. Granted I can change roms but the lack of system writeable acess and no kernel has killed our mts development. The forum is a ghost town. I have a rooted g1 and let people use it as a loaner. Not one person has ever messed it up with root acess. Who is anyone to tell me what I can do with something I purchas. Would you buy a house and let someone tell you you can't changes the drapes or carpet. If your into cars or motorcycles you wouldn't purchase one and be told you can't upgrade the parts. I've never bought a computer I couldn't change my os on. And wasn't jailbreaking and unlocking made legal. So technically aren't anti root methodes illegal
Phone just came out dude give it time... there will be updates
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
HamNCheese said:
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Misleading specs = bad, and possibly illegal
Bloatware = effing annoying
Not providing source = annoying, but the source requirement is worthless unless someone higher up in the chain enforces it
Removing things from the OS? Guess what: that's the other side of open source.
The G2 has its issues, and I don't fault people for returning it. I also personally prefer open hardware - the freedom to break what I have bought. But I agree with SuperFly03 that you are blowing things out of proportion. T-Mobile and HTC also have a right to make money and protect themselves from perceived customer abuses.
I like your letter and agree with you, if you were to create an electronic petition I would sign it as a 7+ year T-mo user paying $140+/mo for the last 3yr. I did sign such a petition 2yr ago after the g1 release, "keep android open" as I recall. Truth is your only other options are much more restrictive outside of the android OS. So much focus of Devs is on keeping android free and open that nothing the coperations do can stop them IMHO. Just keep the Devs beer/coffee coffers full and rejoyce in all that android was meant to be. BTW "Bandit Splash"
Buy a Moto Razr and call it a night.
- Fly like a G2
I would agree with you. Bloat ware is becoming popular with htc. I moved to the G2 from the EVO because of the non sense ui. Further more I think your letter is appropate for tmo. I decided to buy the phone out right from my work (Radioshack) without any service and running on wifi I have no disappointments yet. Besides spending the $500+ for the phone...
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk
ezcape said:
Buy a Moto Razr and call it a night.
- Fly like a G2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
SuperFly03 said:
The requirement is 90-120 days after release right? We are 5 days into release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
I'm disappointed (and fairly angry) that I had to sign a 2 yr contract & pay cash out of pocket just to get a Device that has been been falsely advertised and has Disabilities...
T-mo always comes out w/ BS devices that suck, ones no-one else wants, and it seems they shafted us with their flagship Android successor.
HamNCheese said:
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They can do what they choose with Android, Google backs them as they did officially state that limiting Android to a vanilla, untouched build would essentially violate the fundamentals of having an 'open' OS.
Its up to the consumer to decide what they like and they don't.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
SmartHat said:
I'm disappointed (and fairly angry) that I had to sign a 2 yr contract & pay cash out of pocket just to get a Device that has been been falsely advertised and has Disabilities...
T-mo always comes out w/ BS devices that suck, ones no-one else wants, and it seems they shafted us with their flagship Android successor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair, you didn't HAVE to sign a 2 year contract. It's really not worth it to save a couple of hundred bucks off the initial cost of the phone. Heck, I've seen unopened G2s on craigslist for around $400 already...
That being said, I still have until tomorrow to decide if I'm going to return this POS. I bought it outright, and my money is on this phone never being rooted. I know it hasn't been long yet, but it's not gonna happen.
EDIT: if this rumored OTA includes wifi tethering, I'll be happy. Also supposed to have a radio update...I guess I will wait and see!
seancneal said:
To be fair, you didn't HAVE to sign a 2 year contract. It's really not worth it to save a couple of hundred bucks off the initial cost of the phone. Heck, I've seen unopened G2s on craigslist for around $400 already...
That being said, I still have until tomorrow to decide if I'm going to return this POS. I bought it outright, and my money is on this phone never being rooted. I know it hasn't been long yet, but it's not gonna happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HamNCheese said:
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good god... the phone has been out less than 6 days and there is so much negativity.
Wow... this is sad.
Please read this license page:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
under which Android is licensed. Android is released under the Apache Software License 2.0. Some parts may be GPL, such as the Linux Kernel, but overall the "Android" parts are covered by ASL v2.0 not GPL.
Clackamas said:
Please read this license page:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
under which Android is license. Android is released under the Apache Software License 2.0. Some parts may be GPL, such as the Linux Kernel, but overall it is covered by ASL v2.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I refer to the GPL, I'm referring to Linux - the kernel. The Android license does not cover the kernel. I could care less about the source of dashboard and all that. The Apache license allows some bits to be closed. But Linux is the problem here - the kernel source does not fall into that category at all.
Good god... the phone has been out less than 6 days and there is so much negativity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're entitled to your opinion. And I'm entitled to mine - which should be clear by now.
The time issue has to do with the 14 day "buyer's remorse" return period. My tracking number has to be visible by Thursday to be accepted, as I got the phone 2 weeks ago Friday.
HamNCheese said:
When I refer to the GPL, I'm referring to Linux - the kernel. The Android license does not cover the kernel. I could care less about the source of dashboard and all that. The Apache license allows some bits to be closed. But Linux is the problem here - the kernel source does not fall into that category at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And like many, you don't understand the GPL either.
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING
As Linus points out: Software using the standard interface and derived works are excluded. So, companies such as NVIDA and ATI can release drivers for the kernel without having to release the source to their "derived words". I am also unclear exactly where in the license it says source code must be immediately available. Surely it is a market disadvantage to require the release of such immediately with the product. That would be a significant liability to companies wishing to use GPL based code. 90 - 120 days isn't unreasonable. And the fact that the kernel version being used is publish means that > 90% of the source code is available at product release shows the spirit of intent.
As most of you would know, we have learned quite a bit about Defy bootloader during the last week.
We always thought that Motorola don't have a method to unlock production defys (defys shipped to end users). Well we have sufficient information now to prove that Motorola have a method, and that it converts production defys to engineering defys (Phones used by Motorola engineers to make ROMs and other stuff)
This is actually better than a simple unlocked boot-loader because eng defys have unlimited applications (because we have direct access to MOBO/CPU) like overclocking gpu, installing other OS like Ubuntu, Debian, WP7 etc. into NAND and a lot more.
So the problem here is that the tools required for ENG switch is only available to Motorola employees. Till now we have no further information on it. The tools are TI OMAP BOARD CONFIGURATION TOOL and a 16MB .bin file. Other significance of this method is that it might also unlock other phones with OMAP(3xxx/xxxx?) board. Also this method seems to be very stable.
So the good news is that this software is available for most Motorola repair centers. That means it would be easier to get a leak. Of course the highly paid Motorola engineers with 6digit paycheck wont leak it but we should consider low level repair executives (they already leak sbfs and RSDlite).
So my suggestion is we start a bounty thread in XDA to tempt them.
If you have a solution and if you are concerned about anonymity, please PM me.
PS : There are lots of bounty threads in xda.
Hi,
Setting a Bounty would be cool, but is legal ?
Cause it is not like "I pay you a lot of money if you steal this software for me"
the|gamer said:
Hi,
Setting a Bounty would be cool, but is legal ?
Cause it is not like "I pay you a lot of money if you steal this software for me"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmm. It depend's on which country you are from.
I'm quite on it. Minimum/maximum fee could be set (like US$2 min and 20 bucks max, or anything like this). And someone with access to Motorola's employees (I think the user racca works on a Moto distributor, but I'm not sure of it, I think he mentioned it in some thread a few months ago) could rush and "bribe" them. If people could be a bit more clear about which kind of employees should have access to this software, I could try and convince one of them (you know, people here in Brazil aren't that much into honesty, but are a lot into money) about heading us a leak from TI's software. I'll have to take my phone to MOTOAssist soon ("menu" and "back" keys' backlights are weaker than normal), so I'd have at least an actual reason to talk to an assist technician (assuming they have access to the board configuration tool).
Yet, since I'm no hacker (yet, I'm planning on getting a Nook Color - which community here in XDA seems to provide all you need to start your own ROM - and starting messing around with it) nor coder (know only a little about C programming), I would not try and mess around with TI's software, but only upload it somewhere and give you guys a link for it.
K3n bH1mur4 said:
I'm quite on it. Minimum/maximum fee could be set (like US$2 min and 20 bucks max, or anything like this).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We could even promote it with ads. The best way would be to set up our on website, maybe in Brazil(or with some webhost who would like to host this) where you could bribe your way out and then promote it with ads. There is a remote chance that XDA might not approve a bounty thread here (of illegal implications), but we could publish the website here and all other major forums (chinese forums as well).
royale1223 said:
We could even promote it with ads. The best way would be to set up our on website, maybe in Brazil(or with some webhost who would like to host this) where you could bribe your way out and then promote it with ads. There is a remote chance that XDA might not approve a bounty thread here (of illegal implications), but we could publish the website here and all other major forums (chinese forums as well).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dunno, since it's illegal, it may not be the best option to promote it. Obviously, it's still not immoral, but we all know that morality and law often do not converge, so it may be better to go rogue, talking in private with motoassist technicians and stuff like that, because, even if we're just fighting for our rights, we're still using non-legal ways, and risking to be sued for it.
I don't think promoting a website is illegal. What's illegal is hosting an illegal one.
Promoting a website who promises cash for employees of a corporation who leak internal software used by that corp. might be considered illegal in most places. Fortunately (or not, I'll explain why), we have jurisprudence to embase of: in september 1st, last year, a judge here in Brazil condemned Moto to update a customer's Dext/CLIQ to Android 2.1 (Moto did not provide this update here in Brazil, even though it did in many countries) without voiding the warranty.
I know it's just one case, in just one country, and updating an android version is way different than providing unlocked bootloaders (or the tools for users to do so). And, yes, I agree with placing a bounty at the tool. Yet, if we get caught, Moto can still argue that we had other ways to pursue our rights, and we should have used the justice system to do so, if we believed we were that right. Yet, they're a multimillion-worthy company (even bigger after being purchased by Google), and we're a bunch of broke users, at most devs making a couple thousand dollars, and would have little chance against their lawyers. Last, but not least, employers who help us may get caught and fired because of us, and I sincerely want nobody (ok, maybe a few of the highest executives) to get fired just for me to get an unlocked BL.
So, my point is: let's make this a stealth action. Get a reason for your phone to be taken to Motoassist (no intentional bricking, please! You must flash an official SBF before taking it there! - at least if your phone is still under warranty), get to talk with one of their technicians, and mention - indifferently - that some guys are giving alway big money for any Moto employee who leaks that TI OMAP software. Something like this: "hey, did you hear that crazy devs at this dev forum are paying the first moto technician to hand them some sort of software? Something OMAP-related, I don't know for sure. All I know is that the reward is some nice cash."
When the word spread, we could have an unlocked bootloader within a month.
Yet, we got a single issue to deal: how to ensure the person who gives us the SW first will actually receive the cash? I've seen a few bounties here before, but them all were settled by XDA devs (so the bounty keeper could just donate the sum to that dev), never saw something like paying "outsiders".
One of my friends (Defy+ user) has a contact with a Motorola service guy. He says that that guy knows everything about Motorola software and he's with us because he himself uses custom ROMs and controls an entire service center. He's ready to take my device under warranty though it's rooted along every single hack/MOD for Defy installed
Will try contacting him
And let's post this in the forums of all other locked Motorola devices with OMAP 3xxx chips.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
swapnil360 said:
One of my friends (Defy+ user) has a contact with a Motorola service guy. He says that that guy knows everything about Motorola software and he's with us because he himself uses custom ROMs and controls an entire service center. He's ready to take my device under warranty though it's rooted along every single hack/MOD for Defy installed
Will try contacting him
And let's post this in the forums of all other locked Motorola devices with OMAP 3xxx chips.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Talk with this guy. If he has access to a copy of TI's SW, and handle it to us, I'm pretty sure we could him get a nice reward. Not as high as if putting a bounty, but definitely enough to make the effort worth it.
I mean, supposing that this is actually gonna help unlock EVERY OMAP 3 (and possibly all OMAP-based phones) out there, and that this way the process is reversible (at least to me, it looks like no eFuse is being blown there, you know, assistance technicians can't just blow eFuses like that - taking the phone to the assistance under warranty shouldn't void it, and that's what a blown eFuse would do), loads of people would help. Imagine a single dollar from every OMAP 3 XDA user (take a look here for an INCOMPLETE list of OMAP 3 devices with ~30 ANDROID ONLY phones/tablets), that would make a lot of money.
this is good....and i think it will be best to not mention the location,identities,or any hint of similarities of the perosn source once you guys get contacts & manifests from that guy(source). so as not to compromise his profession.
he could be fired & worse can be sued by leaking private details.
best discuss it in private,after getting in touch w/ him...
just a tought of CAUTION...
hailmary said:
this is good....and i think it will be best to not mention the location,identities,or any hint of similarities of the perosn source once you guys get contacts & manifests from that guy(source). so as not to compromise his profession.
he could be fired & worse can be sued by leaking private details.
best discuss it in private,after getting in touch w/ him...
just a tought of CAUTION...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah we would ensure him that.
I'll help u out....juzz tell me what to get from moto officials
hemil said:
I'll help u out....juzz tell me what to get from moto officials
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do u know motorola mobility service center in mbai?
we only hav private shops with motos certificate...
i dont think they can help...
all they say is we'll send it to factory(?)
Sent from my MB525 using xda premium
@hemil Please pm me.
hemil said:
I'll help u out....juzz tell me what to get from moto officials
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey buddy... just wait for my call today...
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Putting up an ads offering money for violation the law may be a bit problematic. No website will be excited to host it. Another issue is that in the end someone will have to actually post it, someone in particular. And that one person will be in danger of being a subject of interest of various law enforcement agencies. You know, at the end of the day they always want someone to put the responsibility on, the culprit, a scapegoat. So you make heat and you put some particular person into it even before there is any result.
I would prefer to focus more on personal face to face private communications with the service guys. It's harder to prove and if something goes wrong (the guy records it etc.) our guy can always say he was just kidding, bullshitting, bigmouthing.
Anyway, if you are thinking about this seriously, here are few remarks.
don't offer the particular sum, it's not tactical; not even here should be mentioned any particular number; instead, let the service guy ask his price
if the first contact with a potential source is established, ask first for a proof; specify what the proof is supposed to be (a screenshot? a video recording of the software in action?)
figure out a way how to actually collect the money; people are willing to donate but they will not donate to anyone, only to someone trustworthy (but Epsylon will surely want to have nothing to do with everything even remotely questionable, let alone illegal); the "collector" will be under the lights, he may get attention of people we don't want to deal with
who actually will be allowed to donate? anyone? how to avoid an agent to donate and then simply track where the money is going?
figure out a way how to actually make a safe and smooth deal (money <-> software); will it be in person or electronically? how to verify we are given what we paid for? classical problem: no one of both parties is willing to make his move first, but we can't give away the money for a software we would start verifying not until the money is gone
figure out how to avoid being robbed (fake offers from people who would want to grab the money and run away) as well as being caught (fake offers from the dummy guy - LE agent); in both cases the correct proof might be given, though, but the intentions are wrong
For the particular mechanics of the exchange in person, one of numerous possible ways may go like this:
our guy comes with an intentionally bricked Defy repairable only with the software in question together with the ordinary USB cable (or without, if special USB cable is needed; in that case the cable must be part of the deal), and with an empty flash drive recognizable at the first sight; no money on him
our guy passes the flash drive and the Defy (and the USB cable, if no special cable is needed) to the "source" and watches closely
the source copies the software onto the flash drive, runs the software from the flash drive, connects the Defy via the cable provided and actually unbricks the phone (this must be more elaborated on; what if the software uses some libraries from the windows directories etc. which are not copied onto the flash drive? he may or may not have the installer, but just copying the installer isn't enough, he would have to copy the installer on the flash drive, then run the installer from it and install it back onto the flash drive and run it from there)
our guy gets the phone (and the cable) back, the source unplugs the flash drive and keeps it for now, our guy watches the flash drive is not connected to anything from now on
now the software is copied onto the flash drive and verified it's working, thus ordinary hand-to-hand exchange may proceed; our guy didn't bring the money to avoid being robbed, they both now may go grab the money or our guy may call his buddy with the money etc. (also needs to be heavily elaborated on)
Sensitive parts must be detailed in-depth, I am just indicating the outline, one of many possible. Still it's very far from perfect.
As you can see it's not that easy and there are many potential points of failure so this action may never really come to the practical realization.
What about a little bit different or alternative ways? Are there any? It would be useful to ask Epsylon what he would actually wish for the most - had he been able to wish for anything.
isn't it illegal to post copyrighted stuff and also its against forum rules..
i mean that if someone gets his hand on that super tool, then how can he shares it with us???
rishi2100 said:
isn't it illegal to post copyrighted stuff and also its against forum rules..
i mean that if someone gets his hand on that super tool, then how can he shares it with us???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
huh !! think about moto when they actually ditch us with promises ? whats wrong if what we are screaming for last 1 year . and didnt get any updates ? huh think about tht before u speak about illegal stuffs . if moto is doing all sought of ways to keep us away from our rights . what we do undercover to get us right can no way be questioned when we have told thousands of times that we need updates .
more over the authority can question us only and only when they are themselves self guilt free .... but instead they are pretending to be saint sitting behind the curtains and doing all sought of locking stuff to deprive us of our rights
@jhonsmithx Let's not get ahead of ourselves. First of all lets concentrate on getting the source. Also I urge users to use a bit of social engineering to do that(using fb/g ). We'll put together a plan according to the situation after that. Also note that this is a pretty long shot. We might not get a source after all.
rishi2100 said:
isn't it illegal to post copyrighted stuff and also its against forum rules..
i mean that if someone gets his hand on that super tool, then how can he shares it with us???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could think of atleast 10 ways to share anonymously. Though I wont be posting them here.
Why do we have to push regulations for stupid people?:
The bill, SB 962, was created by California state Senator Mark Leno along with San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón, who's been a staunch advocate of anti-theft measures for phones. Ahead of the bill, Gascón urged cellphone makers — including Apple and Samsung — to make stolen smartphones more of a headache for thieves, going so far as to hire security experts to try and bypass the built-in security measures to illustrate that smartphone makers weren't doing enough. An earlier version of the legislation also included tablets, and any other handheld "advanced mobile communications device," language that was stripped out in favor of targeting only smartphones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/25/6000095/californias-smartphone-kill-switch-bill-now-law
Will .gov.control be circumvented with rooted devices and ROMs?
WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?!?!?!
LinuxAssailant said:
Why do we have to push regulations for stupid people?:
http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/25/6000095/californias-smartphone-kill-switch-bill-now-law
Will .gov.control be circumvented with rooted devices and ROMs?
WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?!?!?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just came here to post this but I see you already have beat me to it. So, anyone wanna speculate as to how this can be defeated? Obviously we don't know yet whether this will be a hardware or a software issue. Hopefully software. I think we need to start petitioning and going door to door to stop this thing before it becomes law. **** California. Always trying to ram their nanny state bull**** down everyone's throats.
I just created a petition about this:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...law-mandating-smartphone-kill-switch/TN8Nxrtv
Please sign and share!
countercharge said:
I just came here to post this but I see you already have beat me to it. So, anyone wanna speculate as to how this can be defeated? Obviously we don't know yet whether this will be a hardware or a software issue. Hopefully software. I think we need to start petitioning and going door to door to stop this thing before it becomes law. **** California. Always trying to ram their nanny state bull**** down everyone's throats.
I just created a petition about this:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...law-mandating-smartphone-kill-switch/TN8Nxrtv
Please sign and share!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has already passed and become law... it was signed into law Monday, and starts being required next year.
Petitions don't help, as Jerry (Pinko-Commie) Brown cares not for us, only what they tell him needs to happen.