Thread off

DaniPhii · Jan 27, 2014

fedevd said:
'cus STE didn't made it public. The fact that STE doesn't exist anymore doesn't let you share it or open it.

Are you insinuating that as STE is dead our phones should be dead too? I totally disagree. How do we ask (again and again) STE to release the code if there's no more STE? I bought a phone, and I wanna use and improve MY phone. Because now it's MY phone and I'm not gonna commit any crime if I want it improved and up to date. I deserve that. We all deserve that. Since when is anything that we deserve illegal? Isn't anyone going to fight that unfair fact?

Please, come on. Your words are useless, not worthwhile.

iiD4x · Jan 27, 2014

fedevd said:
'cus STE didn't made it public. The fact that STE doesn't exist anymore doesn't let you share it or open it. In example, if I buy a house and I let it get old without geting in even in 10 years doesn't make it of the people. That code is property of Ericsson and the other one enterprise.

If Diego or Maclaw or any one are playing with the code without making it public is ok, if any of them share the sources or make it public then the proprietary of that code are able to make a demand. Is easy, if that code is closed and the proprietary doesn't make it public, then nobody except them can share it and trust me, somebody own it..

Enviado desde mi C6603 mediante Tapatalk

OK But what about if we text OEM's "sam , sony" about it and they release it , without permission from STE ! .
cmon your example In real life , this company is no more .. why we not ask ST for permission or Ericssson !

EDIT: There is nothing gonna happen if we make it public bcuz the company Gone , they will sue us ? they are no more to do it .. its not logical !
EDIT 2 : we bought the phone , we have the right ! thats logic .. no one would do anything about it bcuz nothing called "STE" we dont know about Maclaw Code and we want him to release his sources .. its the same in this condtion , consider this "MACLAW Source Code" i think its the same in Logic .

owlwood · Jan 27, 2014

So even with the sources, it still won't make any difference for our devices because of a legal uncertainty, eh? So much for nothing.

DaniPhii · Jan 27, 2014

owlwood said:
So even with the sources, it still won't make any difference for our devices because of a legal uncertainty, eh? So much for nothing.

Don't worry. That's not going to happen. We all deserve it. Whether some people like it or not.

fedevd · Jan 27, 2014

DaniPhii said:
Are you insinuating that as STE is dead our phones should be dead too? I totally disagree. How do we ask (again and again) STE to release the code if there's no more STE? I bought a phone, and I wanna use and improve MY phone. Because now it's MY phone and I'm not gonna commit any crime if I want it improved and up to date. I deserve that. We all deserve that. Since when is anything that we deserve illegal? Isn't anyone going to fight that unfair fact?

Please, come on. Your words are useless, not worthwhile.

Do I really need to answer you? Please buddy, your point of view is out of discussion in any way. Do you wanna improvise your device? Then code for it. NovaThor scene have CM, Omni, PA, AOKP, AOSP, PAC, MIUI, every kind of rom and was made without sources.

iiD4x said:
OK But what about if we text OEM's "sam , sony" about it and they release it , without permission from STE ! .
cmon your example In real life , this company is no more .. why we not ask ST for permission or Ericssson !

EDIT: There is nothing gonna happen if we make it public bcuz the company Gone , they will sue us ? they are no more to do it .. its not logical !

Think, why Sammy and Sony never released the sources? Mate, is private code and that's all, nobody except the proprietary can make decisions of it, that's how this thing works, i'm sorry but that is.. You don't know who is the proprietary but if that code have a proprietary and he doesn't want his source public, then, i'm sorry, nobody can share it or make it public.. And yes, the proprietary can sue you in any way if you share to the public his source without his rigths..

Enviado desde mi C6603 mediante Tapatalk

---------- Post added at 08:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 PM ----------

owlwood said:
So even with the sources, it still won't make any difference for our devices because of a legal uncertainty, eh? So much for nothing.

If you build a rom, CM in example, without sharing the sources it's ok, if not, then is not ok..

Enviado desde mi C6603 mediante Tapatalk

DaniPhii · Jan 27, 2014

fedevd said:
Please buddy, your point of view is out of discussion in any way.

You're such a nice and smart guy. I didn't realize that, sorry.

Thanks for your kindness and open attention.

fedevd · Jan 27, 2014

iiD4x said:
OK But what about if we text OEM's "sam , sony" about it and they release it , without permission from STE ! .
cmon your example In real life , this company is no more .. why we not ask ST for permission or Ericssson !

EDIT: There is nothing gonna happen if we make it public bcuz the company Gone , they will sue us ? they are no more to do it .. its not logical !
EDIT 2 : we bought the phone , we have the right ! thats logic .. no one would do anything about it bcuz nothing called "STE" we dont know about Maclaw Code and we want him to release his sources .. its the same in this condtion , consider this "MACLAW Source Code" i think its the same in Logic .

C'mon, how hard can it be understand this? You have the rigths on your device, you can do wathever you want with it, not with the code!! If you buy a Coke you are the owner of your Coke, not the owner of the company!!

Enviado desde mi C6603 mediante Tapatalk

akkufix · Jan 27, 2014

Well... in some file you find this.
For ex.

/*****************************************************************************/
/**
* Copyright ST-Ericsson, 2009 - All rights reserved
* Reproduction and Communication of this document is strictly prohibited
* unless specifically authorized in writing by ST-Ericsson
*
* \brief This module provides routines to manage power
* \author ST-Ericsson
*/
/*****************************************************************************/

But..how you could ask a "dead company", which was resolved for any permissions?
ST-E wanted to sell their production, but nobody wanted to buy it.
No cowboy would saddle a dead horse ... :cowboy:

Only thing i found out is, that ST-Electronic has got the rights to produce the chips furthermore for customers, which have had existing contracts with ST-E. Ericcson itself took LTE and other modem parts and ran away...
Also, this JV-company (ST-E) has left a lot of employees on the street - engineers, programmers, workers - people like us.
The costs of resolving the company was shared by both and deducted as a loss from their taxes. Also our money.

So, it is a a question of conscience...on both sides.

Also they have lot of other problems atm. as to run after some rights of "death-products"...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/10/us-stmicroelectronics-st-ericsson-idUSBRE8B90N520121210
My decision - i use them with all consequences...as the author (see in box) "ST-E" is dead. Long live ST-E.

Sorry for spamming with OT, but i think we should close the discussion about this. Everbody should decide it by himself.

fedevd · Jan 27, 2014

Yep, better finish this discussion here 'cus they are arguing without knowledge about it..

Enviado desde mi C6603 mediante Tapatalk

iiD4x · Jan 27, 2014

akkufix said:
Well... in some file you find this.
For ex.

But..how you could ask a "dead company", which was resolved for any permissions?
ST-E wanted to sell their production, but nobody wanted to buy it.
No cowboy would saddle a dead horse ...
Only thing i found out is, that ST-Electronic has got the rights to produce the chips furthermore for customers, which have had existing contracts with ST-E. Ericcson itself took LTE and other modem parts and ran away...
Also, this JV-company (ST-E) has left a lot of employees on the street - engineers, programmers, workers - people like us.
The costs of resolving the company was shared by both and deducted as a loss from their taxes. Also our money.

So, it is a a question of conscience...on both sides.

Also they have lot of other problems atm. as to run after some rights of "death-products"...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/10/us-stmicroelectronics-st-ericsson-idUSBRE8B90N520121210
My decision - i use them with all consequences...as the author (see in box) "ST-E" is dead. Long live ST-E.

Sorry for spamming with OT, but i think we should close the discussion about this. Everbody should decide it by himself.

+1 im with u in this point ST-E is Dead , and i think if im a developer .. i'll make the code public ..
we have the right to get an Open Source device like any (Sammy or sony phones)
and this is our chance , dead company , leaked code ..

DaniPhii · Jan 27, 2014

fedevd said:
If you buy a Coke you are the owner of your Coke, not the owner of the company!!

Sorry if I bother you… If I buy a Coke, I just have a Coke, right. But if we have got the code, we only have got the ingredients, not the whole company. The company may cook Coke Zero (for example, Xperia Z), but I don't want a Coke Zero, I want just a Coke. I just want have more of my Coke, but they just don't support it anymore.

Do you get it or not? We have only the ingredients, we haven't stolen any of them. CM, AOSP and so are incomplete recipes without those ingredients. Just saying, ok? Don't get mad because today I see things clearly than you.

Oh, and one more thing: let the developers decide. This is a good advice that I give you for free, as a kind person that I am. Just like you, you see?

Kindly regards.

iiD4x · Jan 27, 2014

Again , u have been asking maclaw for the sources ..
what if maclaw has been using this long time ago ?
u'll see it like maclaw manually wrote the code , but actually he used this .

(THIS IS AN EXAMPLE)

mirhl · Jan 27, 2014

@fedevd
yes, but sony and samsung still exist.. on the other hand STE is no more, dead, kia, kaput..
if we were talking about music, for example, copyright would expire between 80 years and the gains would belong to the author's sons
but there's no descent, no press office which could officialy state: yes, this sources are released

A quick search on wikipedia seems to claim that fair use is allowed, but maybe EU law would be more appropriate since ST-E was an European society

EDIT: man. They STILL HAVE a media relations service
EDIT2: what remains of novathor platform should now be STMicroelectronics responsibility

iiD4x · Jan 27, 2014

mirhl said:
@fedevd
yes, but sony and samsung still exist.. on the other hand STE is no more, dead, kia, kaput..
if we were talking about music, for example, copyright would expire between 80 years and the gains would belong to the author's sons
but there's no descent, no press office which could officialy state: yes, this sources are released

A quick search on wikipedia seems to claim that fair use is allowed, but maybe EU law would be more appropriate since ST-E was an European society

LOL , that exactly what i want to say .. Still learning english so my english is not that good

fedevd · Jan 27, 2014

Mate, you have a private code, that's it, nobody, except the proprietary, can make it public, that is the base of private rigths. No one here owns that cose so no one here have the rigths to make it public, is so simple. Is like the movies, if you watch it on cinema or you have a private copy is ok, it's legal, if you download a copy and you share that copy ro everybody, you are breaking the law. In fact, in the code says that is private and nobody can share it without perms.. Forget it, XDA admins will tell to everyone if is legal or not here on XDA but keep in mind that is not legal share it without the rigths..

Enviado desde mi C6603 mediante Tapatalk

DaniPhii · Jan 27, 2014

fedevd said:
Mate, you have a private code, that's it, nobody, except the proprietary, can make it public, that is the base of private rigths.

I find more moral and legal using the code and giving enormous credits to STE than asking again, but now a dead company, for sources. Let that company RIP, please. Let's enjoy its work and let's be proud of the whole STE, can't we?

What a crime, huh?

s513 · Jan 27, 2014

the problem itself seems to be more moral than legal though it seems that consultation with a lawyer could resolve this stalemate. other option could be writing to STE legacy companies asking them either to make the sources public (which already happened) or asking them whether devs can use the sources for non profit rom/kernel/etc developing or not. in any case first option would solve moral problem but IF (its probably never going to happen because who would sue ? dead company?) STE or some other company would want to sue someone the words from lawyer would become useless (they wouldnt protect anyones butt). writing to STE/other company/ies seems pointless because probably noone is going to answer and even if we would receive answer from another company it would probably start a new discusion "is it legal to use sources if some company allowed devs to use them BUT it wasnt STE so did they have right to do so" and the paranoia begins again. imho devs should use sources indirectly - to help them fix the problems but not using directly the code they were given (learn how things work and rewrite sources on their own maybe with some tweaks).

tl;dr version: imho devs should use sources indirectly - to help them fix the problems but not using directly the code they were given (learn how things work and rewrite sources on their own maybe with some tweaks).

EDIT:
as mirhl said STE still have some communication office maybe someone should try to talk with them and ask them to make an official statement about the sources.

AIRIS_T620 · Jan 27, 2014

munjeni said:
Is that true? Are you sure source is not for Samsung u8500 or Huawei u8500 or Snowball u8500 ? If you are sure than these source maybe will work

...I begin to revise the eyes of the tiger!

owlwood · Jan 27, 2014

Isn't this discussion getting out of hand?

DaniPhii · Jan 27, 2014

iiD4x said:
lets stop OT , its developers Decision

Exactly.

Thread off

Senior Member

Inactive Recognized Contributor

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Inactive Recognized Contributor

Senior Member

Inactive Recognized Contributor

Senior Member

Inactive Recognized Contributor

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Top Liked Posts