125 replies to this topic

[Henksat]

1. He/she is an employee of xyz.
2. He/she is working for xyz as a privateer.
3. He/she is receiving some sort of incentive from xyz to develop exculively for xyz.
4. He/she is, for some completely ridiculous reasons, thinking that he/she is somehow in debt for xyz because they are so overwhelmingly nice people.
...

5. Or DMM pays him a lot of money to do this.

[OldDeuteronomy]

This possibility is covered by point 3.

[redneck eyeball]

@reichi,

That you don't want your plugins to run on clone boxes is understandable, but Vu+ and CT are not clone receivers as I see them.
So did you write your plugins so as many people can enjoy them ?
You say you don't work for DMM or that they in no way urged you to do this, then I wonder what the problem is with your code running on as many Enigma2 boxes as possible.
If you wrote it for people to enjoy, then it would only make sense that you would be happy if more people can enjoy your plugins.

So far PLi has never done anything specific to make sure that PLi runs on clone boxes. And if you look at the clone boxes available in China you can order them with any software on it you want. Including Gemini.
That means that the clone manufacturers will not be impacted at all by your descision.
The only result will be that it will not be available on Vu+ and CT devices ... so why would you want that if you have no ties with DMM ?

Just a simple question : Would you agree to to have your plugins available on Vu+ and CT if PLi would create and build a security check in their images so that it no longer works on clone receivers ?
This would be very easy to do. All you need to do is check at bootup the version of the dvb drivers. If it's older then the latest version that is defined in the image, it's a clone. The clone receivers all use old drivers that don't have the tmp check. It's as simple as that.

So, do you want the community to enjoy your work ? Or do you just want to support DMM ?

[reichi]

Please read the blog before asking questions... most things are explained well enough there.

Let me say it very short: It's ONLY a matter of principles, a thing lot's of people do not seem to have anymore. I know many won't believe that, but the truth is not about believing, it's about the facts.

[VU+NL]

Let me say it very short: It's ONLY a matter of principles, ....

PMSL........

You really have a very efficient and effective way of making a laugh of yourself /images/smiley/more/002.gif

[andyblac]

has anyone even released that the reverse is also true , they can NOT use GPL plugins on there "closed" licensed version of enigma2. here is a quote from GPL license:

Can I apply the GPL when writing a plug-in for a non-free program?

If the program uses fork and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license for the main program makes no requirements for them. So you can use the GPL for a plug-in, and there are no special requirements.

If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with the non-free main program would violate the GPL. However, you can resolve that legal problem by adding an exception to your plug-in's license, giving permission to link it with the non-free main program.

so GPL plugin maker would have GIVE them the right to use it. but by default there are NOT allowed to.

why can't we all play nice and make everything free and open ?

[redneck eyeball]

Please read the blog before asking questions... most things are explained well enough there.

I've not only read your blog, but also the thread on IHAD.
http://www.i-have-a-...htuser=0&page=1

There you state that you have no problem with the webif running on a kathrein, but you don't want this to run on Vu+ and CT.

Your actions will in no way affect clone boxes.

You also claim that Vu+ and CT have not contributed to the community, I think you are wrong.
Besides, DMM themselves have created Enigma2 with the option for other manufacturers to use Enigma2.

Oh, and just to make a point, I have only genuine Dreamboxes around the house, this doesn't even affect me.
But I can't help but conclude that this is a covert DMM action to stress the competition.

Can you name me a couple of other image builders besides PLi who have everyting open source ?
Is that not contributing to the community ?

[OldDeuteronomy]

@reichi: I think everyone now got your "principle". I have explained it in my post. People can choose between 1-4. At least one of these points is true, and none of them would make you look any good.

Especially by stating that you have no problem with people using your plugins on a Kathrein you are making yourself very clear. You think others have no respect for something, but what you are doing renders you to a person that is not worth giving any respect to either. So it's 1:1.

Go to the court if you think there are any legal obligations others would have to obey. Else, if you cannot live with folks using your software on boxes other than Dreamboxes, then simply stop coding and search yourself a different hobby, because you won't change things anyway, and you will have a much easier life when you don't need to be angry anymore.

[reichi]

Oh... this is not necessarily about PLi, it's about vu+, clarketech & Co. I don't like what they're doing (until today they contributed NOTHING to enigma2, but benefited tremendously).
Look what has happend during the last 5 months to e2, since dream stopped to commit changes.
Did YOU geht ANY not-pli-made improvement?
There was practically nothing but very few small fixes (coming from, wonder what, Dream).
Did VU+ or Clarketech add ANYTHING considerable that's not drivers or otherwise closed source??

Just for the record, someone said "oh they are using Kernel 2.6.31".
Did you know that that's the kernel version the Broadcom Reference drivers are based on? It is!

PLi is basicially the "main provider" (if not almost only) of images AND has a git which contains patches that violate the license of code I own.
Code I wrote to explicitly dissallow running that stuff on non geniune devices.
When it comes to the WebInterface, the code has been added only a few months ago.

Open source is about taking AND giving back.
While PLi is giving back without ANY doubt, the guys making fat money with selling hardware that runs software others made did nothing but take.
I wont accept any "that's not true" without real approval. Show me where vu+, or ct, or etc... did major contributions to e2 (don't go and argue with a browser that only exists on youtube, yet).

Yes, enigma2 CAN be forked under GPL, that's true. But most of the plugins simply can NOT.

Again: I REFUSE to accept that my code is running on hardware of those companies.

The Difference with the Kathrein Community is, that it's a PURE hobby project, and therefore a whole different story.
It is NOT about PLi, it is about the companies behind the non-dreamboxes and how they are acting.

If only 1 or 2 guys more do understand what I actually do mean with "it's only about principles and moral". It may have been worth writing one more pretty long posting...

PS: I am 10000% against clones.... it's silly to say i may not be (that's the reason why DMM introduced tpm-checks) i thought that's obvious and doesn't need to be mentioned.

[Dr.Best]

I can not believe what's happening here...

Of course we respect the wishes of plugin writers.

So, then please do so and show us respect you've spoken of.
Don't change anything related to tpm check or any work-arounds for genuine checks in the source code of schwerkraft plugins. Don't offer the plugins on your feeds for non-dmm-hardware.

Thank you.

By the way:

[...]As we like others to respect our wishes regarding the code that we write, it's the same thing.

I do.

[WanWizard]

@reichi,

you still haven't given an answer to the question of OldDeuteronomy: why do you care?

Principles, I don't believe it for a single minute. Principles have nothing to do with loyalty to a manufacturer. Why would you owe this manufacturer anything?

This is about een open source and GPL'd product, which development happens to be sponsored by a hardware manufacturer. Which is what happens with an awful lot of open source applications. And open source means everyone can use it. And that includes other manufacturers of compatible hardware. Whether or not they have contributed to that development is irrelevant. It's GPL, and can be used.

Now this hardware manufacturer has realised that depending on an open source product is not a very smart business strategy if their sole source of income is hardware, especially since there are others that can produce better, quicker, and cheaper. So they are desperately trying to close the door to keep their business afloat. Which is their good right.

However, independent open source developers don't fit in this picture.

I've been in the development business for over 25 years, both commercially and open source. And I've learned that there are only three reasons that motivate people: fun, money, and status. The mix varies, but it always boils down to these three. Now, for an open source developer, money should not be involved, as you code for free. Leaving fun (you like to code) and status (you like it that others admire you and/or your product). In case of fun, you don't care who uses it. You made it for yourself. In case of status, you want as many people as possible to use your product, as it will increase your status.

None if this can attribute for your decision, unless all of a sudden (or maybe all along?) money has entered the equasion. And if that's the case, be a big boy, and admit it.

[pieterg]

I can not believe what's happening here...

Of course we respect the wishes of plugin writers.

So, then please do so and show us respect you've spoken of.

Respect cannot be forced, it is earned (or lost).
Personally, I am starting to feel uncomfortable with the way you are aproaching us.

I understand you are getting a lot of negative feedback from the community, but you cannot hold us responsible for that.

[reichi]

None if this can attribute for your decision, unless all of a sudden (or maybe all along?) money has entered the equasion. And if that's the case, be a big boy, and admit it.

You've obviously met the wrong people.
I do know the guys (developers of e2) for a quite some time now. Well, even since before the DM7000S was available.
And during development of my stuff they often did help me out. So they

I never received a single cent vor anything I did.

And by the way.
Because of the way the other manufacturers act like, dream stopped adding new features for MONTHS now.
So actually we, as dreambox community, do suffer from their damn ignorance (they basically forced Dream to act the way they do now).

So it IS affecting MY dreambox.
It IS freaking hurting MY hobby (i don't get any GREAT new stuff, except i build it myself).
IT IS B******to say those guys behind VU+ and Co are "not guilty" about how the whole thing is fu**** up now.
THEY caused the situation we're in now!
If they decided to join the development of enigma2, our communities would have come together instead of drifting apart.

THATS THE REASON, nothing else.

It is soooo sad, really, we could have become an incredibly big community, across different products from different companies.
Neither Dream nor the communities fu***d it up, it was the newcomers, and only them.
And if you know the facts, you somehow cannot disagree on that.

Ok, I will not explain myself any time again, cos it's starting to aggravate.
I think I've made my points very very clear, several times. I think everything that has to be said has been said now.
It's sad if you still don't believe me but I can't do any more than this to convince you...

somehow you at least approched that i am really disappointed now, hope you're happy about that.

PS: littlesat, you're a GREAT guy, with an exceptional character! Thank you for your words.

[Jeroensky]

Any silly user can always just remove the check anyway, be it in the plugin's code or elsewhere.

good one, how many users do you think are actually capable of doing things like that? I think it's not a lot, just look at the comments here, most people do not even understand the most essential basics.

I'm one of those silly users.
You underestimate OpenPli users. because we got a great communication with OpenPli team. We get creative.(not as creative as openpli devs and testers, but we get motivated by OpenPli to become creative). Something you don't see with original DMM image /images/smiley/grin.gif

If you experience this forum longer -after all you only started posting in this topic- then you'd know better.
OpenPli is a great community. And we love our OpenPli team & developers, so do respect them.

[Jeroensky]

But what I do not inderstand is why making such big issues here.... before you know in the internet you can find illegal ipk packages and all hours of work and discussions are for nothing. It is only spilling of energy... The IPKs are probably already available via all the other closed source image teams... The users are creative...

Google is your friend, Google please search for "enigma2 webinterface .ipk download" big ROFLMAO. /images/smiley/more_word_slogans/2.gif

[Dr.Best]

I can not believe what's happening here...

Of course we respect the wishes of plugin writers.

So, then please do so and show us respect you've spoken of.

Respect cannot be forced, it is earned (or lost).
Personally, I am starting to feel uncomfortable with the way you are aproaching us.

I understand you are getting a lot of negative feedback from the community, but you cannot hold us responsible for that.

Well pieterg, as you can see here in this thread I did not response to the negative feedback. I'm only responding to you. I do not make you responsible for the toughts or opinions of the other user...
Your posting is weird pieterg. You said you respect the wishes of plugin writers, now I can see you don't....That is sad...now, I know, you don't care. You should have said this in your first post...

[OldDeuteronomy]

PieterG can surely answer for himself, but I think (that's at least what I think) that he and the team originally thought that your only problem are clone boxes. But during the discussion it turned out that your issue are not just clone boxes, but also boxes like VU+ and ET9000, which are no clones, but you hate them anyway. And your oppinion about the Kathreins and similar boxes with E2 as a purely non-commercial thing - come on guys... You cannot be THAT stupid. That's pathetic.

I think I explained quite detailled in my longer posting earlier what your motivations are, and these motivations makes it impossible to have any respect for you.

If you're doing all this just because you are DMM fanboys, then you haven't earned any kind of respect just because of this stupidity. Any other explanation than you being fanboys automatically means that DMM is somehow behind this, and this would again mean that you've earned no respect, not only because you don't confess what the real background is, but also because of that background itself.

Again: You will gain nothing. I have reinstalled the webinterface in no time, and so will almost everyone else who needs it. But stop, there is exactly one thing that you DID gain: I was thinking about getting a 7020HD once it is available, because unlike the DM8000, the 7020HD will have an at least fairly reasonable price point. Now you can rest assured that I will never ever buy a DMM product again. I will continue to use my ET9000, and if I replace it, then only with another non-DMM E2-compatible box. Stupid actions like this will ultimately lead to exactly the opposite of what you are trying to gain.

Congratulations!

[littlesat]

Let's make plugins and improvements to Enigma2 for the community!!! The tmpd check is "a gift from hell" sponsored by DMM... consider about this, good night!!!

[VU+NL]

Let's make plugins and improvements to Enigma2 for the community!

That's exactly what's going to happen from now on (and of course DM has already gained much profit by third-party improvements to E2)

The tmpd check is "a gift from hell"!

As all other forms of DRM. And that have all proven to be counter-productive!

[hemispherical1]

Disclaimer: I'm not a copyright lawyer!

I was under the impression that the CC licenses (all of them) specifically forbade any additional restrictions, not appearing in the license itself, from being added by the licensor (although any other rights they wish to GRANT may be added). i.e. you couldn't just add on an enforceable:

As an exception regarding Modifcations, you are NOT permitted to remove any geniune checks implemented in this Software or change them for means of disabling or working around the genuine checks, unless the change has been explicitly permitted by the original Author(s).

Perhaps the author feels that removing his protections falls under:

You must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation."

I'm not sure if that would apply (see disclaimer), but it would seem to be quite a stretch. Is that the basis for the removal request?

I do know if the author feels that they don't want to be associated with PLi's derivative works, they are within their rights to ask for their name removed from any of the license/copyright notices, but I question whether their "add-on" license restriction is enforceable. Somehow I suspect the wrong license may have been chosen, maybe not...

Then again I may be completely wrong. Good luck figuring it out...


--
hemi