Develop Bugs

SPB Clone - Nag Screen Removal

SPB Clone is a fine bit of software. It makes a full ghost copy of your BA that you can reinstall after a hard reset - all the registry settings, installed software. etc.
The demo version is fully working but after installing via a clone you get a nag screen that continually pops up to remind you to buy the software.
Because I was so impressed with SPB Clone, I wrote to SPB to ask them if they could provide me with a single user licence at a less painful price, since the PDA I was cloning was actually my phone, and I'm not a big company with many PDAs. They told me that, sadly, SPB Clone was only available on an enterprise licence but then they told me how to remove the nag screen....
1. Open the folder \Windows\StartUp in File Explorer.
2. Tap and Hold and select View All Files.
3. Select bootupdt.exe and select Cut from context menu.
4. Change to the root folder "\" and tap and hold on the empty space within folder view. Select Paste from context menu.
5. Soft reset.
6. Remove bootupdt.exe from the root folder.

And you were not able to find this out yourself?
Last year when I had my tires changed the clerk put a sign on my inner mirror to come back in 50km. And there was of course an ad on the sticker. Your post is like "Hey, today I opened my car and pulled the sticker of the mirror. You won't believe: I've got clear sight again!"

Nice of you to repay their generosity by putting this information in the public domain...

@tintoy: Generosity? I consider this being spam. Nobody wants new posts about "I now know how to reboot!" or "My how-to: Plugging USB cable in". I would accept those kinda posts if he'd just tell about product X, which is cheaper than Y but has same or more features like A, B, C. Only hassle you have to solve is to remove [filename] from autostart.

Chatty said:
And you were not able to find this out yourself?
Last year when I had my tires changed the clerk put a sign on my inner mirror to come back in 50km. And there was of course an ad on the sticker. Your post is like "Hey, today I opened my car and pulled the sticker of the mirror. You won't believe: I've got clear sight again!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, well I'm terribly sorry that my lo-tech post offends your obviously tender, high-brow sensibilities.
God help you if someone with less knowledge than you asks you a question face-to-face; I'd imagine they'd deck you with an attitude like yours.
Try and remember that there are, in fact, some people that don't know as much about a subject as you and that, to them, as it was to me, a tip like this is very useful, although it's obviously far, far beneath someone who is clearly an IT deity. Please allow me to prostrate myself before you - in fact, I'm genuflecting before my monitor even now!
Mind you; your grammar, spelling and punctuation aren't up to much. If you're going to slight someone on a written forum, at least make sure you can write, eh?

tintoy said:
Nice of you to repay their generosity by putting this information in the public domain...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm a firm believer in freedom of information.
SPB gave me this information because I am a single user.
I have provided this information to other single users.
If an unscrupulous company wishes to use unlicensed software, possibly risking prosecution, that's their remit, not mine.

madcapmagician said:
Oh, well I'm terribly sorry that my lo-tech post offends your obviously tender, high-brow sensibilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, your're starting to get insulting. That's why I'll answer the last time to this thread.
madcapmagician said:
God help you if someone with less knowledge than you asks you a question face-to-face; I'd imagine they'd deck you with an attitude like yours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not comparable because this is a forum, not a chat. Most questions can be answered by just searching the forum. And I was not against your post in whole but about the way you described it.
madcapmagician said:
Try and remember that there are, in fact, some people that don't know as much about a subject as you and that, to them, as it was to me, a tip like this is very useful, although it's obviously far, far beneath someone who is clearly an IT deity. Please allow me to prostrate myself before you - in fact, I'm genuflecting before my monitor even now!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Farcical. No comment.
madcapmagician said:
Mind you; your grammar, spelling and punctuation aren't up to much. If you're going to slight someone on a written forum, at least make sure you can write, eh?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you stepped over the line. If you ain't got no further arguments (if there has been at least one already) you start to insult people. That will make you look respectable, indeed. Although English is not my mother tongue I do speak more than one language. How many do you speak? (Not that I'm really interested.)

Chatty said:
Ok, your're starting to get insulting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your original post was both rude and insulting, hence my reply.
This is not comparable because this is a forum, not a chat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How so? Do you not bring your manners to a forum? You are, in effect, saying that because you cannot see your fellow forumers face-to-face you feel you do not have to be polite to them.....and you then get upset when they are impolite back to you.
Most questions can be answered by just searching the forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you assume I didn't? Again, you are being insulting. I scoured the web to find the answer, like most other noobs would do. From the way you wrote, I got the impression you are very IT-literate - well, I am not and there are many others like me. My post is for them.
And I was not against your post in whole but about the way you described it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then I suggest you re-read your first post: in your head, when you typed it, it may have sounded witty and polite and to-the-point; that is not how it came across. If you felt my description was at fault, you should have said so, rather than making rude, tangential comments.
madcapmagician said:
Try and remember that there are, in fact, some people that don't know as much about a subject as you and that, to them, as it was to me, a tip like this is very useful
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to reiterate the point.
Here you stepped over the line.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, although in my head, when I typed it, it was quid pro quo.
I will publicly apologise here and now for being rude.
Please understand that there is nothing berating in this post - I am merely trying to articulate myself without you being able to physically hear my voice.

madcapmagician said:
Hey guys, I know a way that you can get the hard work of dozens of developers for free. Heck they gave it to me, and so it is implied that they want me to share it with the entire internet. Aren't I morally and ethically bankrupt?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, you are.
Chatty said:
There is this tire change sticker in my car that is driving me batty
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm, interesting
tintoy said:
Nice of you to repay their generosity by putting this information in the public domain...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chatty said:
Generosity? Huh...spam. X, Y, uh A, B, C, Marco, polo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exsqueezeme
madcapmagician said:
Everyone marvel at my use of polysyllabic word play. I am the master of the keyboard. Chatty, my swing thing is bigger than yours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
madcapmagician again said:
I am a firm believer in freedom of unscrupulousness. It was granted to us in the 18th ammendment to the Constitution. SPB gave me the information because I am single minded and they have no desire to make money. They are actually just out to provide a community service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, excellent points, all of them!
Chatty Cathy said:
Actually my swing thing is bigger. And I speak multiple languages, just not very well. A donde esta la casa de pepe?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stunning!
madcapmagician said:
Why are you rude to me just because I was rude to you? Don't you understand the consequences of disturbing the molecular dismobilization of the antisymmetric wave function? Egad man. Let me cut loose some more words from my Microsoft Word thesaurus...prostrate, genuflecting, forumers (huh?), tangential, exoskeletal, plebiscite. Take that!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you guys know how tired the rest of us are of this kind of non-productive grade school banter? I am waiting for the "your momma" insults to start any minute. Can someone please delete this thread.

The original post in this thread was a useful piece of information on how to remove the nag screen on a piece of software.
It was not a "How-to" on rebooting or plugging in a USB cable, and i am sure that anyone who wants to use the SPB Clone would be grateful for this information.
The fact that you either didnt understand what the post was about or didnt care doesnt mean you have to immediately flame the poster, if you have no use for the information in a certain thread just move on to the next thread. Trading insults back and forth is the biggest spam anyone could expect to see in a forum, especially this one, which provides so much good information to those of us who use these devices.

I continue to be floored by people's casual attitude toward trading software keys, hacking apps, and getting around nag screens. If the developer did not want you to see the nag screen then he/she WOULD NOT HAVE PUT IT THERE. If the developer gave instructions to one user on how to remove the nag, then great...what a nice developer/company. But unless they expressly gave that person permission to post it out to potentially thousands of people then it is JUST PLAIN WRONG. There is no gray area here, folks. Most of us have to live in a grown-up world and are tired of the impacts that other people's adolescent, situational ethics imposes on us. Do unto others...

cw6447 said:
I continue to be floored by people's casual attitude toward trading software keys, hacking apps, and getting around nag screens. If the developer did not want you to see the nag screen then he/she WOULD NOT HAVE PUT IT THERE. If the developer gave instructions to one user on how to remove the nag, then great...what a nice developer/company. But unless they expressly gave that person permission to post it out to potentially thousands of people then it is JUST PLAIN WRONG. There is no gray area here, folks. Most of us have to live in a grown-up world and are tired of the impacts that other people's adolescent, situational ethics imposes on us. Do unto others...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you on the ethics of "stealing" software, my main complaint here was the instant flaming that madcapmagician received after posting, that is not what this community is about. he was not posting a "how-to" on the process of rebooting, he was relaying the information given to him as he received it, i think that the information can be used by those who are ok with "stealing" software and those who disagree can just disregard the information. If the mods decide that the information shouldnt be here they have the power to remove it.

Forgive me for carrying on with this ridiculous and pointless conversation but is it not in fact illegal to unlock contract mobile phones? Would the cellular providers be happy for 1000's of people to remove their branding and software from devices which they have sold? If the software company had not wanted to help the individual then they would not have told him to start with. I am sure that nobody is so special that a software company would whisper information into his ear that they didn't want to be made common knowledge.
This is a tech support forum, it has helped me as well as many, many other people. If you want to start talking about wrong, immoral, illegal or any other description you may have then start looking at what other people are doing.
I appreciate this forum, and it's members. For crying out loud, stop arguing and get on with the job in hand.

Zylo, I agree with you in one regard. The post is perfectly legit insomuch as it is helpful and technically related. But only for people without a conscience. Bret, you are symptomatic of this new generation of kids with no personal accountability in life. To pretend that you can guess that a software company doesn't mind you giving away their software for free is ludicrous. madcap probably got ahold of some sales guy who thought it would be nice to do him a favor. Do you think the owners, investors or developers would have told him to feel free to post it on forums around the internet? Why not take that info and sell it for a profit on eBay? Or better yet why not just sell the software as your own? If they were giving you a free copy then they wouldn't mind you doing whatever you want with it. Right? You see, you keep blurring the lines of common decency to the point where eventually anything goes. You won't understand until someday you actually become a responsible citizen, start your own business, and put your hard-earned money and time out on the line. I bet when the leeches and thieves come after your product you will have a whole different attitude. The "right thing" to do in this case is so easy and obvious. I fear for a world where people can't make that distinction.

Sorry if what i said came across as a flaming. It was not intended as such. I'm just aware that softweare companies have many employees, from designers to developers to marketing people to managers. Of all these people the ones who seeme to have the most alturistitc (read non commercially-minded) approach always seem to be the developers. They are typically just concerned with writing good software and makng it work. If you asked a developer for a free copy of his/her software for 'testing' they'd probally give it to you without complaint! If, however, you asked them if they'd like their contract to end at the end of its term becuase you were going to make the software they wrote completly unprofitable by telling everyone how to get it for free they might be slightly less generous!

Your points have been taken on board but for the record, I work for a small, local mobile phone dealer. How much business do you think we lose from people unlocking phones, and therefore not returning to us?
I'm not saying that is right or wrong but what I am saying is that it is illegal. It is stealing from the provider and taking profits away from independant dealers. Also, how are you to know that my own business did not fail due to non-payers? You obviously open your mouth before engaging your brain. I could not recover the debts owed to my company and it resulted in the business closing. Is that not also theft?
If you want to target anyone go for the real criminals who sell ripped off software and DVD's on the Sunday markets. They are the real problem, not one guy who has made a very small post who has admitted to have lttle understanding of what he has done. I'm sure you have now all alienated him so he will never return to this site again.
Talk about a mountain out of a molehill.

Yeah. Can we consider this conversation over?
Please don't be offended by my posts @madcapmagician, I was just making a point, not trying to demonise you! I would imagine there is even a fairly decent discsussion that could be had about what consitutes ripping off software and what consitutes fair use...

I found my original e-mail and SPB’s reply:
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerzy Bulowski
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 1:01 pm
To: [email protected]
Subject: Clone
Dear Sir or Madam,
I recently downloaded your demo of Clone and have to say that, already, it has served me well after my phone required a hard reset the other day.
I was so impressed that I decided to purchase a copy but was absolutely horrified to see the price of $199. Whilst I can appreciate that Clone is suited to large businesses with many corporate PDAs, I am a single user - the PDA in question is actually my HTC Blue Angel mobile phone - and I was wondering whether you could sell me a single-licence version for a price more similar to what you charge for Pocket Plus?
If this is not possible could you tell me how long the annoying reminder screen will continue to pop up on my phone?
I look forward to your reply.
Regards,
Jerzy Bulowski
Hello Jerzy,
Spb Clone is enterprise product and there's not any "single user" licenses.
How to remove the nag screen in your case:
1. Open folder \Windows\StartUp in File Explorer. 2. Tap and Hold and select View All files. 3. Select bootupd.exe and select Cut from context menu. 4. Change to the root folder "\" and tap-n-hold on the empty space within folder view. Select "Paste" from context menu. 5. Soft reset. 6. Remove bootupd.exe from the root folder.
Best regards,
Alexander Shalin
Customer Support Team
Spb Software House
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.spbsoftwarehouse.com
Phone: +7 812 324 49 44
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bret, perhaps I should point out that you can download SPB Clone for free from their website, as a demo version. Corporate customers, if they liked it, would then buy a licensed copy for $199.00 – I have “stolen” nothing.
Chris - As far as the ethics of posting said information in the public domain are concerned, my conscience is clear. This information is for single users, like myself. If an unscrupulous company wishes to make use of this information then it’s their ethics that are at fault, not mine.
Tintoy – I’m not offended. It was Chatty’s immediate, condescending, demeaning post that riled me. Zylograth said what I should have, instead of replying as I did:
The fact that you either didn’t understand what the post was about or didn’t care doesn’t mean you have to immediately flame the poster, if you have no use for the information in a certain thread just move on to the next thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that’s that!

AFAIK I think it's still open to debate whether we discuss cracking. I'm happy to talk about cracking, but not cracks.
Odeean makes a good point that cracking and reversing is part of the education of programming; if you're a commercial developer, or would be one, it's worth knowing weaknesses and pitfalls.
People shouldn't come on here and say "wantttt - crack for thai-g" etc. That's just silly and damn lazy. If you don't know how to get warez, you should be using a Motorola, not even a Nokia. But you should be rewarding programmers, or you should understand when there aren't programmers left to program because they've all gone broke. (And I'm not just talking about cash.. we don't all program for the $$)
But if you want to learn how to crack thai-g, search, ask nicely, or learn and tell. But don't distribute cracks (at least publically). There are other boards for that, and we have enough trouble keeping this board clean enough now-a-days
V

Take it like a man!
Madcap, my almost 3-year old daughter tries to make equally bad logic when I have caught her sneaking a cookie before supper. If you were in court you would be your own worst enemy. The email from spb said "How to remove the nag screen in YOUR case". Not "in your case and EVERY other person you can broadcast it to". Show me where he added, "And please feel free to share this with other single users". ONCE AGAIN, if they did not expressly permit you to give this to other people then it is just plain wrong! No, not illegal...it's the spb CSR's ignorant fault for giving it out to you. Let's say you are standing behind a guy in line at the QuickTrip. You witness the cashier ring up his order, but forget to ring up his Snickers bar. When the customer makes the cashier aware of the error, the cashier says,"Oh that's ok, just go ahead and take it." Does that then give you the right to grab a Snickers bar and put it in your pocket without paying for it? If one person got a freebie then everyone should get it, right? How long do you think QuickTrip will survive giving away it's products? It really isn't any different. Software is intangible property that should be treated as tangible. Just because you can get away with it doesn't mean you should. It is just like all of the thieves who thought downloading music they did not pay for was OK. It wasn't...still isn't...never will be.
As for your equally weak argument of, "If an unscrupulous company wishes to make use of this information then it’s their ethics that are at fault, not mine." Let's take the same QuickTrip. While you are at the counter paying for your snacks (except for the Snickers bar tucked into your pocket), you oversee another employee opening the safe behind the counter. Because of your excellent eyesight and brilliant mind, you see and remember the combination. When you get home you go out to the SafesAndVaultsDevelopers.com forums and post about the dummy at QuickTrip opening up the safe right in front of everyone. You also post the combination to the safe because "if an unscrupulous person wishes to make use of this information then it’s their ethics that are at fault, not mine." Great logic. I wish I could send you to time-out like I can my daughter.
Try this. Reply back to spb. Tell that same Customer Service Rep that you are posting this hack on all of the popular PDA sites on the internet. And copy the support group at spb, too. After they respond to you, post their letter back here. I will be waiting to see the response.
Now I know you would never have posted the above spb info on a site where you thought "unscrupulous" people could visit and get hold of it. I mean, what jerk in their right mind would do that to a company and possibly expose them to real dollar losses? So since you know everyone here is trustworthy, why don't you go ahead and post your email account password, your xda forum password, and the PIN to your ATM account on here. Throw in your momma's phone number for grins. We won't do anything bad with it.
Am I going off on you? Yes. When someone tries to make a clearly black and white argument grey, and aggressively attempts to defend that indefensible position over and again, they deserve to be called out. Take it like a man.

your support is used with a Petition

Hi,
Please participate to petition, otherwise it becomes soon boringly here.
XDA Developers Petition
MfG
S64

Not much info in this post, but the link is to the petition to allow XDA-Developers to host ROMs again. MS banned them from hosting them a while back, and all it did was make people use File-Sharing websites instead.
Personally, I think having them held on XDA-Dev and moderated is a much more secure method than having to store them on file sharing.
If you want XDA-Dev to be able to host ROMs, sign the petition. If you don't, don't!

Thanks Stu for clarifying this thread! Interesting petition...I'll check it out.

thanks sign and put in sig

perhaps a better name for this petition would be "Dear Microsoft, my name's XXX and I like stealing your software"

That does not have to steal only change nothing also.
Everyone, which any HTC of the telephones possesses, the software already paid.
Hoping are not still more people of your opinion.
We all profit from forums like this.
Everyone that that does not please, can dissolve its account here.

I have absolutely nothing against xda-developers's roms, i've used many of them and I think they're great.
I do, however. think that it's slightly naive to tell a notoriously litigious company that you enjoy stealing their products.

Onto my soapbox
I do not, and never have, considered what XDA Dev does to be stealing. We take released ROMs, and make the best ones we can from the best bits. To my mind, it's very similar to taking a load of Ford cars (say) and making a car with the best bits - so some ROMs have the space of a people carrier (Dutty), some have the performance of a GT (TNT) and some have the customisability of a Focus ST (Pandora). Ford have then come along and told us we cannot hold these finished cars on our yard, so we're making them and distributing them via all the local dealerships!
To my mind, it's much easier to keep dangerous ROMs off the streets (and hence lower "warranty" claims) if we're just allowed to host the ROMs again. That'll give the chefs and mods a lot more control and simplify the current stupid situation of having to use file sharing sites.
Apologies for the analogy (and I know everyone will disagree with the cars/manufacturer/ROMs parrallels, but it was only a hastily thrown together example) but this is just my two cents worth.

unfortunately software is not like a car, it is one of those lovely bits of intangible IP that allows the manufacturer to have enduring rights over it - it doesn't matter what we consider to be stealing, it's not our consideration to make.
tbh i think that xda-devs would be a great help to certain phone companies (just look how awful the first vario II rom was compared to some of the roms that have come out of here), but you may as well petition the RIAA to allow you to download music for free because you're really good at remixing

I do not understand your point. We do not "ask for free music" we already paid for it. As far as i know, our hermes came with a valid licence no? And as far as i know, htc is giving us the ability to download wm6 without paying once more for it...

HTC pay M$ for a license to allow them to create device specific roms, these roms are either distributed to people who bought direct from HTC or are distributed via providers such as tmobile (who license the software from HTC/M$ and develop it further). Similarly, a person who wished to cover or remix a song must obtain the right to do it from the original creator/owner of the intellectual property that is the music/words/etc.
HTC and providers try to protect the money they have paid for licenses by making it necessary to enter IMEI/serial numbers in order to download rom updates and provide them only for their customers.
Xda developers do not license the right to develop roms from M$ or HTC

Umm, You all do know that you're quite a few months late on this whole spreading the word on the petition thing...right?
I did sign the petition...long ago, but myself..I don't see what the fuss is about, Im sure I have missed a couple posts, but so far in this wm6 section, I have only seen one person with a bogus ROM they had got, and were asking about, also Im pretty sure they said that came from a torrent.
The ftp here isn't known to be the cleanest, as far as bogus files etc, and yes I know there is a locked down section..once the file is approved or whatever the word used in this case might be, but that requires mod's to constantly stay ontop of, and files are shared before they get there.
Also, I don't know how fat the pipe is here, but all this hosting on the fileshare sites has to be helping..I would think, cause the number of HTC devices increases, along with the numbers of cooked ROM's, Im sure even now, the number of downloads for all the cooked roms just in this section has to be outrageous.

Regarding Rights To OUR Intellectual Property Here

In light of what I considered to be a couple of very disturbing developments, I think at this point, a dialogue/debate needs to be opened on what rights/copyrights a contributor has on the intellectual material he/she posts here.
Sakajati was abruptly censored when he suggested that future roms may be administered through a tool bar and not administered through this site.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=3288089&postcount=10332
And the way that BeyondInvisible was driven off this site by the " takers " and not supported by this site. ( the people that stole his new pay/per icons and published them for free, should have been banned). http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=2798052#post2798052 because he dared suggest that it might be time for all the takers to pony up.
When your work becomes widely successful ala; olinex, jockyw, sakajati, MobileMatt, JCKOTZE, Schap, in the kaiser forums, at what point does toiling around in poverty while you work hard for others for free, become less attractive than selling your work?
Who now owns your work , you, XDA, is it copyrighted? When you decide to take it private what ownership rights does XDA retain?
If you request that XDA remove your work, can they leave an archive of it?
I love this site it is the greatest resource on the net for PDA's but I think these subjects could use a good going over by the Mods and the membership.
Dennis

Removing SJ's toolbar was NOT censorship, regardless of how you're trying to spin it. We received several complaints from users who don't feel comfortable being required to install a toolbar just to use their favorite ROM... ask any Mod, we all get the emails. The action I took (editing the toolbar links) is the most benign available to Moderators. I could have closed the thread, and moved it to a Mod-only section while the investigation/discussion took place. Instead, I opted to merely edit out the download links.
There is no justification for requiring users to install a toolbar into Internet Explorer (or any other browser in the Windows environment) just so they can have access to a Chef's ROMs.
Now while a decision has not yet been made, I can confidently say that if SJ had promoted his toolbar as a tool to help all users of his ROMs get the latest "breaking" new on development, and NOT required it in order to obtain the password required for flashing, then we [most likely] would have allowed the toolbar to stay linked on XDA.

I think part of the problem here is that many seem to think that they are entitled to what the chefs produce for nothing. The hours spent porting and testing should count for something but for many it is just expected. I for one have no problem contributing what I can when I'm able. It is too bad that more don't do this.
Kirby

Intellectual property laws protect the inventor/creator rights of ownership to their intellectual property in cyber media. So there is no fear but a concern for any coder that his or her work marketing could be abused or it could be stolen. That is the risk one takes without his or her choice when they share their creations with others.
I also read XDA rules, and it clearly states that soliciting anything for money is prohibited. many cooks are on the border line of asking for money rather encouraging donation for sharing the fruit of their work with others. I do not have a problem with that and believe the majority here share my sentiment. I have a problem however with someone begging for donation without any substantiating efforts, invention or creation to merit the donation solicitation. That being said, I believe SJ was a true gentleman in all of his posts and never infringed on callus donation request; having a tool bar that he feels if XDA was out ( and it was out few times in the past month) as an optional site but not alternative support site that can be accessed where members can help each other is not a bad idea.
We seem to forget sometimes that XDA site was created to help one developer another achieve excellence in the field of e-communication.
so again, I have no problem with SJ promoting his tool bar as long as it is not used to ransom donation for solving issues and i am sure like I said earlier, this is NOT SJ's intention.

NotATreoFan said:
Removing SJ's toolbar was NOT censorship, regardless of how you're trying to spin it. We received several complaints from users who don't feel comfortable being required to install a toolbar just to use their favorite ROM...
There is no justification for requiring users to install a toolbar into Internet Explorer (or any other browser in the Windows environment) just so they can have access to a Chef's ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was one of my major points, there " was " no requirement . because there " was no rom ". You struck preemptively to something that had not happened yet, because it might happen in the future. You squashed his right to promote a private project , as many many people do here, because a few ungrateful people complained that in the future they might have to obtain the rom it SJ's way.
Had he stated that the next rom would be available only by joining his website, would you have shut him down?
My question is, at what point does a chef have the right to take his work private, and how , without any interference from this site.
Believe me, I am not trying to "spin " anything against anyone, I have a great deal of respect for you and all you have done for this forum ( we miss your input in the Kaiser world ) I just thought that it was a heavy handed response ( and yes censorship ) to something that hadn't even happened yet.
A simple PM could have alieviated the situation for the time being, while the Mods figured it out. Not a head on erase everything, assault SJ's right to promote his work and wares.
And I would say again, that the integrity of this site depends on people to share openly and honestly without fear of unjustified reprisal, SJ has said that he will not for the time being, take any new roms private. I think that is enough for all his links to be restored. If not, what other definitions of censorship do you have ?
JimmyMcGee said:
Your opinion is respected. But the appearance was that he WAS requiring people to use the Toolbar to get the Password for the ROM.
Sakajati can do what ever he wants with his ROM, if he chooses to require the Toolbar, that's his choice. If XDA, the people who maintain and provide some presence for his ROM here say that's not in the spirit of the community, then he can release the ROMs on his website soley.
Basically you have to follow certain rules to post your stuff on SourceForge, so think of at as the same thing.
You seem to be the only one with a problem. sakajati is a great guy and is being cooperative in the investigation.
There is written law and common law. This falls more into to "Common Law" area, which is why I said it was a Grey area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I brought this over from the Hyperdragon thread to here, to discuss.
I just want everyone to know, this has more to do with the big picture than it has to do with sakajati. This has nothing to do with NATF or with jimmy and I am probably not the only one who has a problem with the way it was handled. I am just the one with the big mouth. And we all know that sakajati would never say a word or give anything less than his full cooperation.
I just want someone to tell me not just for SJ, but for the good of the whole community and as a precedent for future complaints of this type, why SJ couldn't have been shot a PM asking what his intentions were, and if they approached a grey area, he could have been informed and he would have cooperated. End of any problem. It is not like there was any urgency, as I said before, there was no requirement because there was no rom.
And if people did over react then it is good for everyone to get a dialogue started. That is what this site is all about.
Thanks guys for doing a great job !

denco7 said:
That was one of my major points, there " was " no requirement . because there " was no rom ". You struck preemptively to something that had not happened yet, because it might happen in the future. You squashed his right to promote a private project , as many many people do here, because a few ungrateful people complained that in the future they might have to obtain the rom it SJ's way.
Had he stated that the next rom would be available only by joining his website, would you have shut him down?
My question is, at what point does a chef have the right to take his work private, and how , without any interference from this site.
Believe me, I am not trying to "spin " anything against anyone, I have a great deal of respect for you and all you have done for this forum ( we miss your input in the Kaiser world ) I just thought that it was a heavy handed response ( and yes censorship ) to something that hadn't even happened yet.
A simple PM could have alieviated the situation for the time being, while the Mods figured it out. Not a head on erase everything, assault SJ's right to promote his work and wares.
And I would say again, that the integrity of this site depends on people to share openly and honestly without fear of unjustified reprisal, SJ has said that he will not for the time being, take any new roms private. I think that is enough for all his links to be restored. If not, what other definitions of censorship do you have ?
I brought this over from the Hyperdragon thread to here, to discuss.
I just want everyone to know, this has more to do with the big picture than it has to do with sakajati. This has nothing to do with NATF or with jimmy and I am probably not the only one who has a problem with the way it was handled. I am just the one with the big mouth. And we all know that sakajati would never say a word or give anything less than his full cooperation.
I just want someone to tell me not just for SJ, but for the good of the whole community and as a precedent for future complaints of this type, why SJ couldn't have been shot a PM asking what his intentions were, and if they approached a grey area, he could have been informed and he would have cooperated. End of any problem. It is not like there was any urgency, as I said before, there was no requirement because there was no rom.
And if people did over react then it is good for everyone to get a dialogue started. That is what this site is all about.
Thanks guys for doing a great job !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Friend read this...
sakajati said:
Just uploaded the cab to download center. It will add [Slide down for call functions] feature.
*** Please all of you install my toolbar [mod edit: link removed], this is the tool that will keep you updated and you will receive alert/message via the toolbar for news and announcements regularly from me. If you're using HyperDragon ROMs, you have to install it since the next rom release will be password protected and you'll get the password only via this toolbar . No adware, spyware, crapware, underware, read the Toolbar Privacy [mod edit: link removed]for details.***
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read the Green Parts. The general consensus is IF sakajati REQUIRES people to use the Toolbar to use his ROMs, he is no longer contributing to the XDA ROM Community.
sakajati is ALLOWED and not censored to require this if he so chooses. However the ramifications are, that he would no longer be allowed to advertise his ROM here.
The "common law" rule is, if you post a ROM on XDA, you are contributing to the community and the ROM shall have NO STRINGS attached. No requirement to Give Money, no requirement to have a toolbar installed.
If sakajati wishes to offer his toolbar as a way to stay in "constant contact" with him, then I don't see a problem. But the release of the ROM shall not be contingent on the toolbar. At least not while it is advertised on XDA.
And P.S. lets not get into calling ROMs Intellectual Property, because honestly, ROMs are Microsoft's I.P. All chefs do is tweak, improve and skin ROMs. And I don't mean to take anything away from chefs awesome work by saying that. So saying sakajati's ROM is his I.P. is like saying you taking you Toyota Celica, painting it Pink with Green Racing strips and boring out the engine, makes that car your I.P.
But as NATF has said, no final desicsion has been made, I only type this reply to give full disclosure, to show that our intentions are not to censor.
Thanks.

JimmyMcGee said:
If sakajati wishes to offer his toolbar as a way to stay in "constant contact" with him, then I don't see a problem. But the release of the ROM shall not be contingent on the toolbar. At least not while it is advertised on XDA.
But as NATF has said, no final decision has been made, I only type this reply to give full disclosure, to show that our intentions are not to censor.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since this has all been put to rest, I just have some final thoughts and then I'll shut up.
It was never about XDA's/Mod's disapproval as to what he intended to do, you all are entrusted with the success and smooth running of this site and have every right to administer this site as you see fit, (as I have every right to question why ) And it was not really about SJ, he was just the vehicle of my overall concern about creative people leaving this site because of real and perceived ( do it our way or get out ) disagreements.
I guess I just wanted to know, if people decided to take their projects private,such as a new rom, would they still be welcome here to support older projects or develop new projects here ( that fell within XDA guildlines ) and while supporting their projects, could they in a subtle non-commercial way, direct people to private/financially enhancing projects.
And of course I still object to the way it was handled, that sort of, " we are taking it all down until we decide " way of doing it, is something that happens to noobs that don't know any better. Not to someone who has done as much for, and contributed so much to the Kaiser community as sakajati has done.
The Mods always preach, " if you have a dispute with another member, take it to PM, " Unfortunately this great advise wasn't followed, and I am glad that SJ was not offended by this and did not pack up his toys and go home ( like unfortunately other members have done )
And I am sorry if " I " have offended anyone, that was not my intention. I love this site and think that discussions like this benefit the longevity of this site. I am glad everything has been resolved and I will shut up and go away now
Oh yeah ........one more thing
And P.S. lets not get into calling ROMs Intellectual Property, because honestly, ROMs are Microsoft's I.P. All chefs do is tweak, improve and skin ROMs. And I don't mean to take anything away from chefs awesome work by saying that. So saying sakajati's ROM is his I.P. is like saying you taking you Toyota Celica, painting it Pink with Green Racing strips and boring out the engine, makes that car your I.P.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell that to Chip Foose and Orange County Choppers. They take other people's parts, design and tweak and create masterpieces worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Your telling me a Foose Design isn't intellectual property?

denco7 said:
The Mods always preach, " if you have a dispute with another member, take it to PM, " Unfortunately this great advise wasn't followed, and I am glad that SJ was not offended by this and did not pack up his toys and go home ( like unfortunately other members have done )
And I am sorry if " I " have offended anyone, that was not my intention. I love this site and think that discussions like this benefit the longevity of this site. I am glad everything has been resolved and I will shut up and go away now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not an issue of personal disagreement, it is a violation of our rules of operation. When we see questionable activity, we will always take the action of stopping the activity, contacting the OP, and trying to resolve it quickly. I am sure SJ understands this as well as anyone here that it was nothing personal, and simply just S.O.P. around here. It's a lot easier to take down a problem for a couple days, and then let it back up with an apology than it is to remove it after we've debated.
As for you question about prior contributions, of course anyone is welcome to support anything that they have and continue to offer that is in compliance with our rules here. Nothing even stops a user from selling some stuff, and giving others away. It's just that they can't post the stuff they're selling here, just the donation ware.

IP
I have just a couple points. The Phoenix team has a separate website we use for tracking bugs and other discussion so we don't clutter up this site. However our intent is to foster creativity, open communication and cooperation among users and chefs which we hope results in better products for the users of this site. So don't always think a private website like ours or SJ's is a bad thing.
However, I would like to point out what was only stated one time in the thread--the guts of these roms are the ip of microsoft and htc. Now as chef's we find other bits and pieces that are added--and these are the ip of their creators. Sometimes we contribute our own ip--like skins, icons and very specific know how to get the roms to help our devices perform at peak efficiency. But anyone who would try to take a rom private and sell it, would have some major issues without first getting license to do so from MS, HTC and those other people who own the other intellectual property.
There are many examples of apps that were developed by talented people here that have gone commercial. Those apps are still discussed and linked to here because they all have trial periods. There is nothing wrong with commercializing your own ip..The wrong comes when you commercialize ip that you don't own or haven't properly license.
So let's continue a great tradition of creativity. I believe that this site is the primary reason that HTC and microsoft keep trying to make a better operating system. This site is where many ideas come from. This site gives the OS life beyond the normal experience.

denco7 said:
(snip)
Oh yeah ........one more thing
Tell that to Chip Foose and Orange County Choppers. They take other people's parts, design and tweak and create masterpieces worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Your telling me a Foose Design isn't intellectual property?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pfft Those Posers

some confused thinking here -
A cook can ask for a contribution for his time but there is no way he can claim that a cooked rom is his IPR because it's belongs to someone else start with - no licence to modify has been granted!
Now creating programs from scratch, that's a different issue and how they want to deal with payment is upto them.

my theory is whoever created the forum and then got ppl to volounter to mantain it
ITS THERE FORUM
Its really up to them what they want to do

Permission to use files? From who, Google, HTC, Samsung, etc?

trock79 said:
Did you have permission from the original devs? I don't think so. I understand Jdkoreclipse is not a member here but there were others that were involved including myself. It is not wise to release something you did not ask permission for and obviously did not know what was put into it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
trock79 said:
Where is the credit?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
r2DoesInc said:
Should have asked bro. That's all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
synisterwolf said:
Stealing stolen work is still not ok...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have got to be kidding me? Are you serious? Permission from who? Surely not from you or any other half-assed, want to be, developer who, technically, has stolen work from Google, HTC, Motorola, Acer, Samsung, LG, etc. Just because you have altered someone else's work to get it to function on a device that it was not intended for doesn't entitle you to anything. We're talking about files that real devs worked their asses off to get working on specific phone models. In no shape, form, or fashion, have you done any of this on your own. So stop *****ing about something that you didn't earn nor deserve! I hope you don't think that decompiling, tweaking, and then recompiling the actual dev's work makes you special. Can you show us, the community, the permission which you received from any of the developers or manufacturers to use their **** in the first place? If the answer to that question is "no", then you or anybody else who "helps" out in the modification of somebody else's actual work should not receive credit from anyone until you prove that you were given the same permission, regarding the files, that you are asking for in return.

inb4 ****storm

REMOVED.........

I'm so confused right now...

I understand the sentiment behind this topic, but you're presenting it in a very abrasive manner.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App

NilsP said:
Well, As much as I enjoy it, I was looking for a good reason to quit "developing" ROM's.
Since your summary of what a "developer" is was so good it convinced me I am just a "hack" so I guess I have a good reason now.
Plus, now that I know I am just a common thief because I never asked Google or even HTC's permission I have even more reason.
Thanks for your help....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Truthfully Nils, I don't know how you guys do it anyway. Every thread I've been in on here (with the exception of MIUI and IncROM) has been a bunch of morons screaming for updates and bug fixes, as if the only thing in ya'll's life that should matter is getting their pathetic asses a new ROM fix. I would have blown up long ago if I were you, so you're a much better man than me.

NilsP said:
Well, As much as I enjoy it, I was looking for a good reason to quit "developing" ROM's.
Since your summary of what a "developer" is was so good it convinced me I am just a "hack" so I guess I have a good reason now.
Plus, now that I know I am just a common thief because I never asked Google or even HTC's permission I have even more reason.
Thanks for your help....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NilsP, this wasn't aimed at you, but to each their own. Sounds like your mind was already made up. That's solely your decision.
@raptir, I wasn't trying to come off as abrasive. I just wanted to put a few things in perspective. No one should make that big of a deal over files that didn't belong to them originally. It doesn't matter how a person modifies the original file, the idea was someone else's from the jump. It's sickening to watch a new cook get ganged up on by people who wouldn't even have a clue if the original file didn't exist to begin with.
The thread in which I quoted the three people from was going fine up until trock79's post. When a person feels as if the world owes them something, it becomes a situation. Members of the forum need to address crap like this immediately, if only to let people like he/she know that we (the community) is all that matters. Without us, there would be nothing.

justsayinbro said:
You have got to be kidding me? Are you serious? Permission from who? Surely not from you or any other half-assed, want to be, developer who, technically, has stolen work from Google, HTC, Motorola, Acer, Samsung, LG, etc. Just because you have altered someone else's work to get it to function on a device that it was not intended for doesn't entitle you to anything. We're talking about files that real devs worked their asses off to get working on specific phone models. In no shape, form, or fashion, have you done any of this on your own. So stop *****ing about something that you didn't earn nor deserve! I hope you don't think that decompiling, tweaking, and then recompiling the actual dev's work makes you special. Can you show us, the community, the permission which you received from any of the developers or manufacturers to use their **** in the first place? If the answer to that question is "no", then you or anybody else who "helps" out in the modification of somebody else's actual work should not receive credit from anyone until you prove that you were given the same permission, regarding the files, that you are asking for in return.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its just the way it is boss. But every now and then you'll find some cool dudes who don't care about the forks and kangs because they just do this for fun (coincidentally those are the dudes who are so good at what they do that they even know they're gonna get kanged). Stick around and you'll see...

REMOVED.........

I haven't asked HTC, Google's nor VZW permission for any of the files I have posted here and across many forums. While I do not edit the files I guess this would just make me a thief and I shoud pull them all.

How about open source code (which makes up Android and the released code from the hardware manufacturers)?

justsayinbro said:
You have got to be kidding me? Are you serious? Permission from who? Surely not from you or any other half-assed, want to be, developer who, technically, has stolen work from Google, HTC, Motorola, Acer, Samsung, LG, etc. Just because you have altered someone else's work to get it to function on a device that it was not intended for doesn't entitle you to anything. We're talking about files that real devs worked their asses off to get working on specific phone models. In no shape, form, or fashion, have you done any of this on your own. So stop *****ing about something that you didn't earn nor deserve! I hope you don't think that decompiling, tweaking, and then recompiling the actual dev's work makes you special. Can you show us, the community, the permission which you received from any of the developers or manufacturers to use their **** in the first place? If the answer to that question is "no", then you or anybody else who "helps" out in the modification of somebody else's actual work should not receive credit from anyone until you prove that you were given the same permission, regarding the files, that you are asking for in return.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude google's code is meant to be shared... That's why they release SDKs to the masses. It's not stealing. From what I gather from your post and tone of it. You're the thief and call out all the other devs shows the lack of respect you have for them.

justsayinbro said:
You have got to be kidding me? Are you serious? Permission from who? Surely not from you or any other half-assed, want to be, developer who, technically, has stolen work from Google, HTC, Motorola, Acer, Samsung, LG, etc. Just because you have altered someone else's work to get it to function on a device that it was not intended for doesn't entitle you to anything. We're talking about files that real devs worked their asses off to get working on specific phone models. In no shape, form, or fashion, have you done any of this on your own. So stop *****ing about something that you didn't earn nor deserve! I hope you don't think that decompiling, tweaking, and then recompiling the actual dev's work makes you special. Can you show us, the community, the permission which you received from any of the developers or manufacturers to use their **** in the first place? If the answer to that question is "no", then you or anybody else who "helps" out in the modification of somebody else's actual work should not receive credit from anyone until you prove that you were given the same permission, regarding the files, that you are asking for in return.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read the thread and I remember thinking pretty much what you wrote, but I give you credit for coming out and saying it. I doubt you will find much support though as some people have huge egos that need to be stroked.

justsayinbro said:
NilsP, this wasn't aimed at you, but to each their own. Sounds like your mind was already made up. That's solely your decision.
@raptir, I wasn't trying to come off as abrasive. I just wanted to put a few things in perspective. No one should make that big of a deal over files that didn't belong to them originally. It doesn't matter how a person modifies the original file, the idea was someone else's from the jump. It's sickening to watch a new cook get ganged up on by people who wouldn't even have a clue if the original file didn't exist to begin with.
The thread in which I quoted the three people from was going fine up until trock79's post. When a person feels as if the world owes them something, it becomes a situation. Members of the forum need to address crap like this immediately, if only to let people like he/she know that we (the community) is all that matters. Without us, there would be nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From the xda rules that we all agreed to abide by before posting here...
12. Using the work of others.
If you are developing something that is based on the work of another Member, you MUST first seek their permission, and you must give credit to the member whose work you used. If a dispute occurs about who developed / created a piece of work, first try to settle the matter by private message and NOT in open forum. If this fails then you may contact a moderator with clear evidence that the work was created by you.
Convincing evidence will result in copied work being removed. If there is no clear evidence you created the work then in the spirit of sharing all work will remain posted on the forums.
These rules apply to all software posted on XDA unless that software comes with a license that waives these rules.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Noticed all the quotes are from my thread, so thought I'd comment.
You make a point, but in the wrong manner. While I agree that you shouldn't say others don't have permission if you yourself don't, you should be able to claim some territory. Such as for the fixes that got it working on a particular device. The reason I did not in my thread is because I didn't use any fix from someone, when I mentioned what it was based from, I only used the Motorola software included. The new rebuilt one is from a friend's Droid X. He let me root it and use the system dump of it. So to a certain degree, a can agree with what you are saying, but not completely.

Point of view
Nobody asked for your opinion, yet you give it anyway.
Nobody asked for any of the "devs" to do their work, yet they did it anyway.
Nobody asked Linus Torvalds if they could use his work to build on open source operating system.
Nobody likes it when you steal their work and claim it as their own.
Everyone appreciates when you give credit where credit is due.
Everyone likes it when their hard work is recognized.
Everyone has paid for their device and has the right to modify it in any way they see fit.
You have made your point.
You could make a far more effective point if you used a little character, acumen and respect.
Much love my friends

Sounds like your yelling at r2doesinc OP... uses everyone's work he does...
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App

The xda book, why we should pay it?

for sure you have heard about the new "XDA Developers' Android Hacker's Toolkit"
It is certainly a good idea to regroup all the forums method inside a book,wrote by hackers and geek.
the only thing I think is strange is that XDA focused on idea sharing and hacker philosopy.
So why do we have to pay for this book? It should be free, because it is not "original", all of us in some way wrote it...I don't want to pay it not because i don't want to spend money, but because I think it should respect the hacker philosopy.
what do you think?

meccaandroid said:
for sure you have heard about the new "XDA Developers' Android Hacker's Toolkit"
It is certainly a good idea to regroup all the forums method inside a book,wrote by hackers and geek.
the only thing I think is strange is that XDA focused on idea sharing and hacker philosopy.
So why do we have to pay for this book? It should be free, because it is not "original", all of us in some way wrote it...I don't want to pay it not because i don't want to spend money, but because I think it should respect the hacker philosopy.
what do you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that XDA provide us with a great place to come and learn and share our knowledge. In order to achive this their is going to be costs and if they can make some extra money from selling a book. To then use the said money to make this service even better, i can only see it as a good thing. Also a lot of people find it easier to read from a book than a computer screen.
Edit - I have just read the portal artical, and all the profits are going to the EFF, although the money is not going directly into XDA, it will directly help and benifit XDA, as they have done in the past.
All revenue earned through purchases of the book on Amazon will be donated to the EFF, which has given assistance to members of our community in the past. It’s available in both physical and eBook formats. Without further ado, here’s where you can get it right now:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Profits go to a good cause.
Don't want to pay, just read the forums instead.
Simple.

conantroutman said:
Profits go to a good cause.
Don't want to pay, just read the forums instead.
Simple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes the profits are going to a very good cause. And to be honest with you I don't have any problem spending the $23 USD plus tax for the book. I really don't see why anyone would have a problem with it. But you just can not please all of the people no matter how hard you try.

I ordered mine in October, 2011. After many delays (like the Galaxy S3) I received my copy from amazon on Tuesday. I will use this weekend to read it. Learn some pointers.

As mentioned, profits from Amazon sales are donated to EFF.
All other profits (as anyone knows that has worked with a publisher), will be minuscule. We didn't do this to earn revenue, but to give people a great way to learn about Android development.
Keep on eye on the Portal...we'll be giving away a batch of free copies in the near future.

svetius said:
As mentioned, profits from Amazon sales are donated to EFF.
All other profits (as anyone knows that has worked with a publisher), will be minuscule. We didn't do this to earn revenue, but to give people a great way to learn about Android development.
Keep on eye on the Portal...we'll be giving away a batch of free copies in the near future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the tip, another good reason to go to the portal besides when the forums are down for maintenance.

svetius said:
As mentioned, profits from Amazon sales are donated to EFF.
All other profits (as anyone knows that has worked with a publisher), will be minuscule. We didn't do this to earn revenue, but to give people a great way to learn about Android development.
Keep on eye on the Portal...we'll be giving away a batch of free copies in the near future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the tip, i will keep an eye out for that, stay at home dad = Poor

Good things come at a price..'nuff said.