Login at Kodi Home

ilovemymac · 2014-11-03, 01:32

Movies yes but TV seems ok most of the time. But then again it's free so it's not perfect but beats paying $80 a month

There are a few addons I see have old content that i haven't seen since 50s 60s and some of it is not even on DVD so for that I admit yes I watch pirates addons but 99% I doubt care about a show that old they don't want people pirating the latest movies and such.

~~Ned Scott~~ · 2014-11-03, 01:35

Well, like I said "Even if those add-ons were using high quality video...":

http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=...pid1827896

calev · 2014-11-03, 03:49

Quote:We are not synonymous with those add-ons. They don't add any value to the program, not even for pirates (seriously, don't make me spell out how to pirate the right way. It's so easy and doesn't involve any shittastic file locker sites.).

True, but you don't get threats from Warner Brothers or HBO for using the shittastic file locker sites. Seems like the website owners are the only ones who get the heat for those. eg megaupload.

nickr · 2014-11-03, 04:03

Not necessarily. When you get to be as big as xbmc AND get a reputation for being a vehicle for accessing shittastic sites, you're gonna be a target. The foundation wants to mitigate that reputation, which has largely been built up by association with the fusions and hubs of this world. Getting a name that is more protectable is part of that. Taking down eBay sales that include addons that contravene xbmc's policy is part of that.

ilovemymac · 2014-11-03, 04:06

How can you take down an add just because it has addons? Seems over reach of power. I mean I don't understand how XBMC can take down someone's listings as long as they are staring that the addons are not a part of XBMC.

I don't know sorry to step on toes just makes me think of all the govt crap goin on here and so many trying to over step.

nickr · 2014-11-03, 04:14

(2014-11-03, 04:06)ilovemymac Wrote: How can you take down an add just because it has addons? Seems over reach of power. I mean I don't understand how XBMC can take down someone's listings as long as they are staring that the addons are not a part of XBMC.

I don't know sorry to step on toes just makes me think of all the govt crap goin on here and so many trying to over step.

It is the association between the addons that promote piracy with the name xbmc.

ilovemymac · 2014-11-03, 04:18

So If they don't say XBMC then it's ok

~~Ned Scott~~ · (This post was last modified: 2014-11-03, 12:14 by Ned Scott.)

(2014-11-03, 03:49)calev Wrote:
Quote:We are not synonymous with those add-ons. They don't add any value to the program, not even for pirates (seriously, don't make me spell out how to pirate the right way. It's so easy and doesn't involve any shittastic file locker sites.).

True, but you don't get threats from Warner Brothers or HBO for using the shittastic file locker sites. Seems like the website owners are the only ones who get the heat for those. eg megaupload.

They're going after the add-ons, now: http://torrentfreak.com/fact-wipes-pirat...ub-141026/

I'm not sure if I totally agree with github removing a bunch of python scripts which don't contain any content themselves. XBMC/Kodi is still a level away from that kind of removal, thankfully, so even a mistaken identity might not cause that to happen to us yet, but the issue of people thinking XBMC is a pirate video service will only grow if we do nothing.

It hurts our image, it hurts sponsors (not just money, but mirror servers and various other things), it hurts going to conventions, it hurts attracting new developers. I mean, look at gamergate, where if you take a position on that, no matter what it is, you will piss someone off. Being neutral is really important on hot topic issues, regardless of legal concerns.

~~Ned Scott~~ · 2014-11-03, 05:03

(2014-11-03, 04:18)ilovemymac Wrote: So If they don't say XBMC then it's ok

XBMC or Kodi, yes, then it would be okay. You can even say "this is SOMENAME Media Center, and it is based on XBMC/Kodi code" or something like that, as that is a simple statement of fact, so long as it isn't implying some kind of official connection or endorsement. this is mentioned in our trademark policy (which was copied from Mozilla, so people have to do the same with FireFox and pre-installing browser extensions):

http://kodi.wiki/view/Official:Trademark...ifications

Quote:If you're taking full advantage of the open-source nature of XBMC Foundation's products and making significant functional changes, you may not redistribute the fruits of your labor under any XBMC Foundation trademark, without XBMC Foundation's prior written consent. For example, if the product you've modified is Kodi, you may not use XBMC Foundation or Kodi, in whole or in part, in its name. Also, it would be inappropriate for you to say "based on Kodi". Instead, in the interest of complete accuracy, you could describe your executables as "based on Kodi technology", or "incorporating Kodi source code."

It goes on to say that you can request permission from the XBMC Foundation in some cases of modification, such as those that don't involve bootleg video add-ons. I'm also trying to encourage the Board of Directors to include a pre-approval list of minor modifications that are okay, to lessen the number of requests (like wanting to change the default language, or pre-configuring a remote control, etc).

~~Ned Scott~~ · (This post was last modified: 2014-11-03, 05:10 by Ned Scott.)

Here's a fresh example: http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=...pid1828026

There's a big impact when an add-on/service is pre-installed on XBMC/Kodi. The mental impact, the impression left on people, is that it is "official". Even if it doesn't seem like a big difference between an add-on being pre-installed or not, the impact is bigger than you might think. The act of having to add an add-on tells a person "this isn't a normal service. I am going out of my way to add this to XBMC/Kodi". Most people then seem to understand that those add-ons and services are from a 3rd party.

reefmonger · 2014-11-03, 06:26

Some interesting points here. I can fully understand the need to not be associated with "piracy" however the obstruction of a individual selling 2 used media players on Ebay seems over the top. There are many arguments that can be made for and against "xbmc" including public domain. You can easily spend a fortune
defending "trademarks". Good luck on defending them in China and many other countries.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfe...-you-lose/

~~Ned Scott~~ · 2014-11-03, 06:53

It doesn't cost us anything to ask ebay to takedown listings. I'm not sure what you're talking about when you say "the obstruction of a individual selling 2 used media players on Ebay seems over the top"? Hundreds (if not thousands) of listings are being processed, so if one was in error, by all means, please bring it to the attention of contact@kodi.tv

Personally, I would have preferred to give an initial contact e-mail to the sellers before using ebay's process of taking things down, just to help smooth the process over, but I'm told that there's no easy way to notify people in that bulk unless you use the takedown tool that ebay provides. I'm not the one who handles the takedowns either, so I haven't seen this interface for myself, but I have no reason to doubt this. Ebay doesn't always make things easy. It's like Nate said to Torrent Freak, we work with the tools we are given.

Technically speaking these listings violate Ebay's ToS even without our trademark objections. The burden is on the seller to read and follow those terms. I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who say they didn't know that these boxes that "magically" give free TV and movies was somehow not allowed. Common sense screams "this is probably not totally legal".

Piers · 2014-11-03, 11:58

A valid question, turned into yet another debate about piracy with a patronising reply from Martijn? The XBMC forum hasn't changed.

**Martijn** · (This post was last modified: 2014-11-03, 12:29 by Martijn.)

(2014-11-03, 11:58)Piers Wrote: A valid question, turned into yet another debate about piracy with a patronising reply from Martijn? The XBMC forum hasn't changed.

What reply?
the one about kodi.de? Seriously that has been mentioned and answered so many times that you simply cannot give a normal answer to it any more. It's al mentioned multiple times on the forum, the blog and in the FAQ.
When he says he's a lawyer i would have expected that due to this he would know that there are differences in what area you do/have a trademark. My mistake for assuming he knew this (not intended to be patronising). Sorry about that

This is not a discussion about piracy or whatever. This is simply about our policy and not the contents of it.
You don't follow the follow the policy, don't use the name XBMC / KODI

calev · 2014-11-03, 21:14

(2014-11-03, 04:03)nickr Wrote: Not necessarily. When you get to be as big as xbmc AND get a reputation for being a vehicle for accessing shittastic sites, you're gonna be a target. The foundation wants to mitigate that reputation, which has largely been built up by association with the fusions and hubs of this world. Getting a name that is more protectable is part of that. Taking down eBay sales that include addons that contravene xbmc's policy is part of that.

I was looking at this from the user's perspective. I understand why XBMC/KODI is trying to keep its name separate from those addons. Eventually, legal action is going to happen against whoever maintains those addons.They are just getting to popular. Kodi should be as far away as possible. Just saying that from a users point of view it is safer than other methods that involve uploading at the same time as downloading. At least in the us.