[tornicade]

You seem to honestly want to help, so I'm going to try and explain some things one more time..

AS long as Kodi has no control over 3rd party add ons they have no control over their Brand.

Other OSes for the last 30 years, any browser that allowed extensions/add-ons/scripts, Android, tons of games with community content, and countless other things, all are able to control their brand. A walled garden has never been required for that.

Kodi, by it's very nature, is a shell that consumes other content. Trying to control what other people put into Kodi is just not practical. Where would it end? Stopping people from playing back certain videos? Only certain video sources and protocols?

No one wants to prevent users from installing pirate streaming add-ons. That is the user's right to do. In the past when some user did this, they had to manually set it up themselves. They understood that it was their choice to make, so it didn't cause any confusion. The issue is not being able to play pirated media in Kodi. Instead, the issue is Kodi being confused as a source or supporter of pirated content.

Why cause Kodi doesn't want to lose the numbers its drives while still lambasting those users for their success.

No one cares about numbers. The fact that there are about 10 million Android downloads is actually a burden that would be better avoided.

Look at the popularity of the wizards. Kodi could make their own Official wizard as custom packages yet they choose to scorn any user who mentions a wizard.

That doesn't make any sense. The only reason people use "wizards" is to pre-install pirate streaming add-ons. If the default program could be made easier then it would be done in the core program. You might think that there are things that "everyone" wants, but no, not everyone wants the same default. This is why things are the way they are. No one is using a Wizard to install youtube or set up their own private library. A wizard wouldn't even make installing or using those things any easier. If someone does manage to make a "wizard" that isn't related to piracy, they're free to submit that to the add-on repo or talk about it. There's no blank ban on "wizards".

As far as default software. if a full version of kodi with no changes is put in on a box. how is that any different from having Amazon, You tube or any other 3rd party app preinstalled.

It's not. That's is allowed and does not cause any issues. People have been trying to tell you that.

Also if a company specifies hardware instructions specifically for a program they should be able to promote that feature .
Its not always supporting or endorsing piracy

This is also allowed. People have been telling you this as well.

Maintain a list of compatible devices that are authorizes to use the Kodi Trademark.

Anyone is allowed to make simple statements of fact, like "this box will run Kodi". No one is allowed to use Kodi trademarks to imply that their device is better or "more official" than any other. Nvidia is not allowed, Wetek is not allowed, Minix is not allowed, no one. The Kodi project, as a group/entity, does not endorse any specific hardware over other hardware.

Allow Banned authors to submit Unofficial repository Guidelines under an alternate name if the Add on is legit and meets the previously mention program requirements.

That defeats the entire purpose for separating Kodi from those things. It doesn't matter if you call it "unofficial", because that's making a specific official repository. I can't say to someone "I don't bake bread" just because I put a different nametag on when I bake bread. Since I'm not a lying a-hole, if I don't want people to think I bake bread, then I won't bake bread.

Request Manufacturers to rebrand to XBMC if any modifications are made by reseller.

request Kodi be replaced by XBMC for public and internet media cross referencing banned programs

"XBMC" is a name the project wants to protect just as much as "Kodi". Plus, the group is not authorized to use the name XBMC for software. They will be in breach of a legal contract if they use "XBMC" in that way. They are only allowed to use XBMC for the name of the XBMC Foundation, and are authorized to defend the name "XBMC" in relation to both the Foundation and Kodi.

Any of these things would show Business that Kodi has integrity and is willing to commit resources to fend off piracy to the highest degree outside of a few token gestures.

No one is going to kiss the butt of some big companies just to make them like Kodi. Some stuff is reasonable to do, other stuff is not. The Kodi project does not have to prove itself to big companies or show them that they will fight piracy. The Kodi project does not want to fight piracy. The moment you start doing stuff like that is the moment companies start demanding things like closed source, DRM, and other things that are against the spirit of the project.


It's reasonable to ask that people not call Kodi a rapist. It's not reasonable to expect Kodi to spend every day of his life proving to other people that he's not going to rape him.

Except kodis own blog refers to Companies not working them as a point of frustration.
isn't that the real issue?
the same piracy blog that refers to Users with broken software from third party add on codes as a point of frustration.

Another post mentions Kodi is not a company yet the XBMC foundation has a business number. takes donations. goes on business trips. A Not for profit business is a business. If XMBC/Kodi was not a business then there would be no trademark.

None of my suggestions were something that take the foundation out of the scobe of what they are currently doing. XBMC however is it trade marked?

I did not state Kodis Image amongst the industry was a problem. Kodi did it. including a blog on it featured on this website.

Kodi does control the content of its program when it bans programs and refused to even look at any kodi issue where those programs show up on a debug log even if its not related to the issue reported.

Asking people to report sites for trademark violation specifically referencing believed piracy programs is by far not a neutral stance on piracy.


Kodi will continued to be associated with piracy as long as they "don't care" how their users use the software.

When Kodi tells me that these 3rd party programs are viruses and malware how is that not a scare tactic telling me the user how to use the software.


Kodi treats the 3rd party "virus" programs the same way as the 3rd party add on with perfectly legitimate code.

so how is one not to be confused by such an inconsistent stance . Your take doesn't sound anything like the piracy blog that was posted nor the treatment users get on the forums from moderaters and developers.