Kodi Community Forum

How easy will it be to terminate the agreement? Who decides how much of a refund is due if not all?

Is condone the word you really want to use? Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you quote a post that the agreement expires in 12 days anyway?

Let's go back to the bank again. Let's say that because the bank stole money from your checking account you stop paying your mortgage. Now when you go to court you not only have to prove your case but defend your own actions. This muddies the water and the only winners will be the lawyers.

You say condone, I suggest they are, perhaps grudgingly, living up to their agreement. This leaves them open for legal action in the future if it is needed.

ETA: To reiterate I really have no idea of the specifics. All of this is speculation based on my experience that not everything is as cut and dry as it appears on the surface.

I am so amazed that you can be all up in arms about the GPL, and at the same time, lie about Dutch law to your customers (breaking the Dutch Commercial Code in the same way that DitISTV did) and break our Trademark Policy.
I can not take anything you say seriously because of this.

(2015-05-06, 17:06)Robotica Wrote: [ -> ]Regarding facts:

Owning the code.
I've never seen any CLA (or the like) which could give ownership to XBMC Foundation. So I think as Github presents commits, authorship (and thus ownership) is determent. So XBMC codebase has many, many owners. Specifcally, the active and prominent (former) Foundation members. Those guys write most large features and leave bughunting to the community. The Foundation merely represents those authors.

And the license is GPL v2 and latter. But the codebase isn't consistent about GPL v2 vs. GPL v2 and latter.

But be warned, those are sensitive topics. So those "facts" aren't consistent and/or open to the community. Or I must have missed some communication.

First of all, welcome back, Robotica! I look forward to future conspiracy theories.

Second, it looks like you have it written down pretty accurately. We do not have a CLA, which is why we do not mention the XBMC Foundation in the copyright header. Instead, since the majority of the code is contributed by the Team, we find it fairly simple to just call it owned by Team Kodi and call it a day. If an individual author requested his or her name be included in the copyright notice during a PR, we'd consider how to handle the situation at that time. With that said, I think a fair number of people actually like that the Foundation doesn't control the codebase, as it makes it infinitely more impossible to ever relicense it to something else.

The goal of the Foundation, at least as I see it, is to provide support for distribution, user support, promotion, and transportation so that Kodi team members can individually determine architecture and future guidance. It also exists, to some extent, to help prevent confusion and limit liability.

With regards to the original topic, I mostly second ronie. Further, it's hard to take the complaints of a competitor seriously. A few months ago the tvaddons guys also complained to us about superrepo. Maybe the complaint is valid. Maybe it isn't. But being somebody in direct competition makes anything you say worth not much more than a grain of salt.

It appears I might be trying to reason with a person that I should not be.

The copyright header has been incorrect for years, but I think it was the result of a misunderstanding. I believe the original intent was not to imply that a specific group held the copyright, but rather to say that the copyright was held by those who contributed to the XBMC project. These headers have existed and been copied to other code files from a time when "Team XBMC" wasn't exactly that formal about who they were, if I understand correctly. This was also done long before a Foundation had been set up.

I've suggested new wording myself, and I've suggested we ask our lawyer about it, but I never heard anything more about it. It really is something that needs to be clarified, but most people don't listen to me when I say things like this, so I try not to think about it or let it upset me.

If j1nx is violating our trademarks then allow me to echo some of his statements, so that others cannot dismiss them so easily. VidOnMe is an embarrassment on our group. They violated our trust, they have hurt our brand, and their product itself is shit. They lied about their employees posing as users to promote their hardware on our forum, and when they apologized for it they pretended as if it only happened once. That's all without even considering the GPL violations. I once stood up for VidOnMe, because I thought we should try to educate them and give them a chance to do the right thing. Now I feel like all I ended up doing was enabling their behavior.

We don't know what to do. We don't want any trouble, and we just want to make a cool media center without any scary issues. So we'll wait till the 18th, remove their logo, and hope we never have to repeat this situation again.

Whatever issues people might have with j1nx should be treated as a different topic. On that topic, what the flying fuck do you think you are doing, j1nx? At least you word it so that you say you're just using Kodi, but you know about the massive uphill battle we've had regarding this piracy image, and you must know that this still ends up hurting the Kodi project.

(2015-05-07, 00:40)Ned Scott Wrote: [ -> ]We don't know what to do. We don't want any trouble, and we just want to make a cool media center without any scary issues. So we'll wait till the 18th, remove their logo, and hope we never have to repeat this situation again.

Not that my opinion is worth anything but I think that is perfectly reasonable. Chances are by the time you came up with a game plan and got legal advice you would not be taking it down much sooner anyway.

I hate that you guys are going through this.

Again, not that it means much, but from a new guy's impression I think you guys are doing an excellent job with what you can control of your own image. I look at how much you care about the media and the experience and that has to be about more than what some may use it for. I paid a lot of money to develop my DVD collection and you are serving it up to me in a way that beats anything I have ever seen. Not to mention the way you guys police the board.

(2015-05-07, 00:40)Ned Scott Wrote: [ -> ]Whatever issues people might have with j1nx should be treated as a different topic. On that topic, what the flying fuck do you think you are doing, j1nx? At least you word it so that you say you're just using Kodi, but you know about the massive uphill battle we've had regarding this piracy image, and you must know that this still ends up hurting the Kodi project.

As you guys apparently can not talk about one thing without dragging in the other. I will comment on it. But only because Ned appears to be the only one that at least takes some effort to look at the history.

Yes, I might be walking a dangerous path, but for sure I do not want to follow and therefor left the hypocritic path some of you guys are still on. I understand completely you guys need to do "something", but you guys are completely lost a) your roots. b) the connection with your userbase c) sense of reality. At the moment that piracy stand is WAY overdone IMHO.

I see Team members shouting so loud about piracy, the amount of hypocriticy is dripping from it and can been seen (maybe even smelled) from miles away. A year ago (maybe two), we all knew where all our TV-Series and movies came from. Full automated download systems where wildly discussed. And ofcourse;

None of us had build HTPC's with DVD-players inside that were properly region locked and used those machines to watch our bought DVD's. No we all have had a DVD player for that. The HTPC we all build was not an (over) expensive DVD player. No we used it to play our downloaded copies of movies and series. Sure there really will be the occasional hero that ripped all their official movies and only uses that, but c'mon be at least honest to yourself. In the old days, when I bought a DVD, I watched it and that was it. There was really NO point in ripping that movie onto a disk so I could watch it over and over again. Even if I only wanted to watch it once, we just shoved it into the DVD player. At that time XBMC was really not better than the better DVD player out there.

Because of the evolution of internet speeds, downloading now a days is a bit stupid as we all can downlaod faster as the movie duration. Hence why there is a shift in streaming. First it started off with streaming straight from usenet. Later on those copies went behind normal weblinks and http upload services.

I have always used XBMC for my pirated content and will keep doing so. For you guys out there reading this; Be freaking honest with yourself. I understand the Team members cannot shout it out loud and have to politically correctly respond, but at this moment the go way overboard with it.

I am not accusing any one. I am not pointing fingers to any one. Above words are my expressed opinion. Read it, think about it and be honest with yourself before you reply.



My view on the future;
You guys might aggressively dumping all shit over me now, but for the project to survice the evolution of the Internet and it own userbase, the current piracy path/stand taken if the biggest threat of the project. Please do not think that if you guys pull the finger and all just stop working on the code, that not soon "Cood-E" or similar will surface. I can't do it, but the world is way bigger than that. Smart people not joining you in your current codong mission is by no means an indication of the project getting at a halt if you stop. Where something stops, something else begin.

Kodi on itself just for local content what you guys would like it to be seen as because of your fear to have the plug pulled has no future imho. With the ARM hardware and the Android/Linux ports for that, hence they do not even have the optical players nor the storage capacity. (Sure you can dump it on a NAS, but again, the stuff on there will be 99% downloaded content | be honest with yourself).

So again; To me Kodi == Piracy, but because of that I also see why the Foundation tries to let the world believe otherwise. The user base keeps growing so for you to not get the plug pulled you need to. You do however forget that Kodi it's immensly growing popularity is because of the piracy possibilities of it; Keep trying to prove otherwise, will bring the foundation down eventually.

It either get canceled by some legal action and soon some fork will arise at the darker places of internet
OR
You succeed in your mission to distance yourself, but than Kodi on it self has no future and soon some fork will arise at the darker places of internet (embrasing the piracy).

Maybe, MAYBE with closed sourced binary addons and some official plugins for HULU, Netflix etc it might survive a bit longer, but in the end piracy will still win (I believe).

So, I strongly believe in what Robotica says;

Quote:The legal home of the codebase, the US, is the largest threat to the codebase. This is the reality and XBMC Foundation should reflect this so proper stewardship could thrive.

Now onto my site;

My site has been long time off-line and only recently became active again. It is not finished yet, but this is what it would look like when I am done;

- I sell multimedia player hardware. Officially imported under the right TARIC codes and pay all BTW (VAT) (Nothing illegal there, and people with a little bit of insight will see the margins are really not that great)

- This device comes with default OpenELEC and KODI. I will respect all GPL licenses. The software is free and the sources are available.

- I sell an additional service that can be selected at the product / cart page to install an initial addon pack. The addon pack is/will be marketed as the content provider (The J1nxPack). Again, the software remains free and downloadable, respecting each and every license. I sell the service NOT the software.

I will most likely advertise the hardware as KODI media player. The software is comes with is default, absolutely nothing has been changed. This respects both the GPL as Trademark.

By dutch law none of the above is Illegal. It is illegal to provide the content or even the links to the content. However it is not illegal to sell tools /software that can be used for illegal actions. (You are allowed to sell knives that are murder weapons, using them for that purpose isn't)

Yes it sells, no it does not pay my bills.

Why? Because it is what we "the people / users" want.
(Why do you think PopCorn Time is so freaking popular in such a short time)

A few years from now, the world is using "Cood-E", a select few/group of nerds are using KODI inside their ivory tower.

(2015-05-06, 23:42)natethomas Wrote: [ -> ]

(2015-05-06, 17:06)Robotica Wrote: [ -> ]Regarding facts:

Owning the code.
I've never seen any CLA (or the like) which could give ownership to XBMC Foundation. So I think as Github presents commits, authorship (and thus ownership) is determent. So XBMC codebase has many, many owners. Specifcally, the active and prominent (former) Foundation members. Those guys write most large features and leave bughunting to the community. The Foundation merely represents those authors.

And the license is GPL v2 and latter. But the codebase isn't consistent about GPL v2 vs. GPL v2 and latter.

But be warned, those are sensitive topics. So those "facts" aren't consistent and/or open to the community. Or I must have missed some communication.

First of all, welcome back, Robotica! I look forward to future conspiracy theories.

Second, it looks like you have it written down pretty accurately. We do not have a CLA, which is why we do not mention the XBMC Foundation in the copyright header. Instead, since the majority of the code is contributed by the Team, we find it fairly simple to just call it owned by Team Kodi and call it a day. If an individual author requested his or her name be included in the copyright notice during a PR, we'd consider how to handle the situation at that time. With that said, I think a fair number of people actually like that the Foundation doesn't control the codebase, as it makes it infinitely more impossible to ever relicense it to something else.

The goal of the Foundation, at least as I see it, is to provide support for distribution, user support, promotion, and transportation so that Kodi team members can individually determine architecture and future guidance. It also exists, to some extent, to help prevent confusion and limit liability.

With regards to the original topic, I mostly second ronie. Further, it's hard to take the complaints of a competitor seriously. A few months ago the tvaddons guys also complained to us about superrepo. Maybe the complaint is valid. Maybe it isn't. But being somebody in direct competition makes anything you say worth not much more than a grain of salt.

Let's face it Nate:
You haven't seen this Foundation's Letter of Inc. neither the application form for the tax-exempt status (501©3). They both clearly state the foundations purpose and goals.
Why express your opinion, which isn't based on facts?
However, I like this distributed copyright for the codebase in terms of legality. I simple think this Foundation is not open and thus shady (yet, things are better). Now we're talking again the same discussion while issues are not-solved and thus keep popping-up. But first signs of the community seeking other resorts are easily seen on the dropped forum activity.

@ned/j1nx:
As for team XBMC vs. XBMC Foundation: The first has no legal status but the Foundation has. That's the reason team XBMC is in the copyright header. To keep ownership distributed while not becoming single point to attack.

ps. While code is distributed by XBMC Foundation and current architecture has matured so much, I would stop thinking in liabilities and start thinking in opportunities. Current codebase is not more "piracy" supporting than any OS or browser out there.

But I'm out of this discussion. Those obvious problems aren't fixed for years.

From your site:

Quote:Wat houd dat nu eigenlijk in dat “streamen”. Streamen kun je het beste uitleggen als; Tijdens het downloaden het bestand alvast afspelen, waarbij je alles wat je al gezien hebt direct weer weggooit. Je kijkt dus de film tijdens het downloaden, maar gooit ook direct de film weer weg. Je download daarom dus feitelijk niet.

This is false advertising, and an incorrect representation of the law.

Quote:Volledig geïnstalleerd en voor geconfigureerde installatie

Whether it is a "pack" or not (and it seems you hurriedly made that - as it doesn't even have a description yet), the trademark policy does not allow you to ship devices which contain modified instances of Kodi. If you want to do so you need to stop using our trademarked name and logo.

(2015-05-07, 11:08)j1nx Wrote: [ -> ]I will most likely advertise the hardware as KODI media player. The software is comes with is default, absolutely nothing has been changed. This respects both the GPL as Trademark.

That's a good one. You are selling a box which is titled "TLBB-V2 | XBMC / Kodi Piraten editie" ("XBMC / Kodi Pirate Edition").That is a clear violation of the trademark policy.

If you can't accept the no piracy policy of the forum, i suggest that you found your own one.

(2015-05-07, 12:12)Kib Wrote: [ -> ]From your site:

Quote:Wat houd dat nu eigenlijk in dat “streamen”. Streamen kun je het beste uitleggen als; Tijdens het downloaden het bestand alvast afspelen, waarbij je alles wat je al gezien hebt direct weer weggooit. Je kijkt dus de film tijdens het downloaden, maar gooit ook direct de film weer weg. Je download daarom dus feitelijk niet.

This is false advertising, and an incorrect representation of the law.

True to make it even worse; Copy pasted at a certain other website. BUT: I never state that it makes it legal, like the other guy did.

(2015-05-07, 12:12)Kib Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Volledig geïnstalleerd en voor geconfigureerde installatie

Whether it is a "pack" or not (and it seems you hurriedly made that - as it doesn't even have a description yet), the trademark policy does not allow you to ship devices which contain modified instances of Kodi. If you want to do so you need to stop using our trademarked name and logo.

Like I said; WIP

(2015-05-07, 12:13)membrane Wrote: [ -> ]

(2015-05-07, 11:08)j1nx Wrote: [ -> ]I will most likely advertise the hardware as KODI media player. The software is comes with is default, absolutely nothing has been changed. This respects both the GPL as Trademark.

That's a good one. You are selling a box which is titled "TLBB-V2 | XBMC / Kodi Piraten editie" ("XBMC / Kodi Pirate Edition").That is a clear violation of the trademark policy.

If you can't accept the no piracy policy of the forum, i suggest that you found your own one.

True.

Keep checking, tho. I am sure I will find a way (that you most likely still do not like, yet) that falls within the bounderies. And so will many others.

@J1nx:
I doubt that trademark is registered in EU. Certainly not in many exotic countries since that would be really expensive (and useless while the software is still free unless the software is actively distributed).

(2015-05-07, 11:08)j1nx Wrote: [ -> ]None of us had build HTPC's with DVD-players inside that were properly region locked and used those machines to watch our bought DVD's. No we all have had a DVD player for that. The HTPC we all build was not an (over) expensive DVD player. No we used it to play our downloaded copies of movies and series. Sure there really will be the occasional hero that ripped all their official movies and only uses that, but c'mon be at least honest to yourself. In the old days, when I bought a DVD, I watched it and that was it. There was really NO point in ripping that movie onto a disk so I could watch it over and over again. Even if I only wanted to watch it once, we just shoved it into the DVD player. At that time XBMC was really not better than the better DVD player out there.

So your viewing habits and living conditions are universal? For some of us physical media is terribly inconvenient and yes I have seen the same movie/series countless times. I am not alone. I see people talking about ripping their media here all the time.

Why would I ever need Kodi to view pirated material? I wouldn't care about something I stole as much as something I bought so any media player would be sufficient. I am pretty sure that whatever banned plug-ins are out there I can get to those streams without Kodi too.

The process is still too involved for the average person but if someone figures out how to bridge the gap I think most people would have Kodi in their homes.