Posts: 25
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation:
0
2017-02-20, 18:51
(This post was last modified: 2017-02-20, 18:51 by memoriesman49.)
Not a troll. The original post was about infringement of trademark of kodi and wanting to get the kodi community to attack via facebook,google,web host,etc. My point is very simple if Kodi is concerned about trademark infringement it is their responsibility!!! The "Call to Arms: Combating Trademark Infringement" not mine nor yours to defend, while most of the website listed just talking about Kodi. You may not like it but it is just an enthusiast expressing their views, just as you have done. I am not complaining about anything just pointing to the face that trademark infringement violations is Kodi's responsibility. I am not in favor of mindless attempts to get others to attack people they do not know, to impugn motives, and cause person damage by getting them suspended from social media. This is all wrong.
Posts: 17,409
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation:
586
Hitcher
Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 17,409
When did we ask anyone it attack others?
Posts: 25
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation:
0
Orinigal post,"I was thinking, it shouldn't be too difficult to stop the worst of offenders, when they are using the word "Kodi" in their business name, it is direct trademark infringement to the highest degree and without even needing to question content, shouldn't be too difficult to get taken down. Enough with this madness, let's all do our part and get complaining!" Then supply links and places where to attack those who have offended by "... using the word "Kodi" in their business name," sound like a "Call To Arms..." to go after perceived trademark infringement. So, the author of Call To Arms:Combating Trademark Infringement is asking the community to use tactics aka attacking via web host and social media. Seem clear.
Posts: 315
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation:
11
Woah. Where did you convert that to attacking people?
Posts: 2,771
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
95
What the OP genuinely meant is known to him, not me. However, I read his post as meaning "go after to reduce the harm they're doing". I would suggest that "attack" is a very strong (and loaded) word in this sense, and certainly not in the sense of "attacking via web hosts and social media". We "smear" no-one, and I'd ask you not to repeat that unless you can back it up.
We have a trademark. We have the right - indeed, the obligation, if we wish to keep it - to defend it. If we find it being misused, as it frequently is, then we can do something about it within the limits set by the law. At no point are we going to "attack" anyone, but we will request takedowns as necessary to protect the name. If that's a takedown against a group of enthusiasts who are wrongly using the Kodi name to swap piracy tips, we choose to distance ourselves from that and do not give them permission to use our name as a direct result.
However - and this is where we get into your "grass roots" point - we're just volunteers. This is no-one's job, it's simply a media project that we choose to invest our time and effort into for fun, as strange as that may seem. So the above becomes particularly relevant when someone is profiting from the Kodi name by running commercial businesses that damage our reputation. But - and here's the rub - we don't have teams of lawyers, and we're lacking the Brand Management department that a corporation would have; as such, more voluntary efforts are always appreciated as there are more eyes out there than there are Team members, and that gives us far better capability to protect ourselves from the constant "Kodi == piracy" mantra that we see in the press.
Posts: 25
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation:
0
Question, why not make Kodi.tv a company and license Kodi would not that stop trademark infringement and addon violators.
Posts: 19,982
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
451
nickr
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 19,982
And the code would still be open source. So anyone can fork it and add add-ons and call it pirati if they want to, wouldn't matter if we were a company or not.
If I have helped you or increased your knowledge, click the 'thumbs up' button to give thanks :) (People with less than 20 posts won't see the "thumbs up" button.)
Posts: 25
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation:
0
What would be the results if it was no longer open source but a product that could be purchases with approved addon, similar to roku? Who actually runs Kodi, is their a CEO head dog, who negotiates with sponsors, is there a board, is Kodi trademark legally, and can company x take Kodi, redo some of the code and call it XYZ media server? If you can point me to the legal organization chart, the whos who that would be helpful. Thanks
Posts: 2,858
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
108
As Pro Yaffle stated, you can't make Kodi closed source because no one person or one group owns the code. It will always be open-source.
You really seem to have no understanding about what a open-source community driven project is. Even if someone was to take the code and call it something else (which is allowed) they would still have to adhere to GPL.
Posts: 6,252
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
115
da-anda
Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 6,252
2017-02-22, 00:38
(This post was last modified: 2017-02-22, 09:57 by da-anda.)
you can't make Kodi closed source as it's GPL and you would need the approval of EVERY developer ever contributed just a single line to this project to change that license. You can use it commercially and provide commercial support for a custom fork or whatever (which again would have to rebrand as it's not stock Kodi anymore), but Kodi itself will always be open sourced. So if we'd decide to rip out our add-on system or remove ZIP-install and other repos, it would only take a couple days to spawn a Kodi fork with all this stuff back in. While this would help our brand, it won't fix anything, only move the piracy industry to a fork (which they already could do and use this very moment if they would care at all about Kodi this project).
Next thing is, one of our fundamental principels for Kodi is user freedom, so giving the user the freedom to use and customize this app in the way he likes to and not become another closed Apple thingy. The very second we would ever attempt to do this, we likely won't have any devs left, as they would just quit the "job" and work on a fork that has the free open source spirit again that keeps us moving forward.
