Posts: 168
Joined: Sep 2013
(2014-10-02, 13:57)Willem55 Wrote: This is getting religious..
I tend to agree with your viewpoint.
If a product can enhance it's usage in the short term by utilising external and especially free options, it makes for a better experience when it works.
Players already use codecs that are essentially sources created by others, so using the term hack is not relevant.
Posts: 206
Joined: Sep 2014
the Idea is to buy time for kodi developers to come up with a permanent solution as opposed to flooding new xbmc users with a non compliant forked Gotham 13 release that is already 2 updates behind.
Try and read up and understand before you assume anything and go of a rant.
Posts: 206
Joined: Sep 2014
2014-10-02, 21:01
(This post was last modified: 2014-10-02, 21:02 by User 231261.)
you missed the option where the chip manufacturer is working with kodi developers to get support inside the kodi playback engine.
Some fly by night manufactures are shipping with a forked Gotham 13 dead end solution and some others are investigating calling the external playback engine that has proven to playback what kodi now can't.
Stop thinking black or white, this or that. but think timeline: now bad fork...then workaround... then team kodi solution..
Good luck in demanding the market to sit on it's arse... have a good look at what they done to the "hot girl"...... it's not pretty and has nothing to do with having a dance..
But if the manufacturers that want to be compliant can't do "the right thing" with using playercorefactory.xml my guess is we'll see more forked solution until kodi catches up.
And users left in total confusion... on the many faces of xbmc...
Posts: 31,445
Joined: Jan 2011
(2014-10-02, 15:24)Willem55 Wrote: the Idea is to buy time for kodi developers to come up with a permanent solution as opposed to flooding new xbmc users with a non compliant forked Gotham 13 release that is already 2 updates behind.
Try and read up and understand before you assume anything and go of a rant.
There's nothing to buy time for. We spent a hell of a lot of time and effort to trademark a new name to prevent companies from using the name "Kodi" for custom forks. Trademark law exists to prevent such confusion with users. Anyone who makes a custom version of the software and uses the name "Kodi" must have the approval of the XBMC Foundation or they will face legal action.
Posts: 19,982
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
451
nickr
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 19,982
So why aren't the innumerable GPL infringers facing legal action for breach of copyright?
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: 168
Joined: Sep 2013
So does the name change and trademark close the open source nature of the software?
Posts: 19,982
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
451
nickr
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 19,982
To enlarge, a trademark is quite different to copyright. Kodi is still open source, which means anyone can take the source, modify it and release PROVIDED they provide the source code.
However the trademark means that no one can market something as "kodi" without a licence form the foundation.
An example: Redhat is a commercial linux solutions provider. As it is built on the linux kernel and other open source code, people are free to change it, distribute it, etc. However they are not able to use the Redhat name. Hence CentOS - 100% compatible, uses the same source, given away free, but can't call itself Redhat.
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: 206
Joined: Sep 2014
(2014-10-03, 03:12)Ned Scott Wrote: (2014-10-02, 15:24)Willem55 Wrote: the Idea is to buy time for kodi developers to come up with a permanent solution as opposed to flooding new xbmc users with a non compliant forked Gotham 13 release that is already 2 updates behind.
Try and read up and understand before you assume anything and go of a rant.
There's nothing to buy time for. We spent a hell of a lot of time and effort to trademark a new name to prevent companies from using the name "Kodi" for custom forks. Trademark law exists to prevent such confusion with users. Anyone who makes a custom version of the software and uses the name "Kodi" must have the approval of the XBMC Foundation or they will face legal action.
Nobody is using the name kodi here... as to Trademark law the Term "Free" in FOSS automatically excludes a lot of what the Trademark law is about as they can bundle "Free stuff" with their products.
But if you're right that there is nothing to buy time for and you got it all covered then slap an injunction on all player sales that are bundled with with the forked xbmc so that the manufactures who want to be compliant don't lose customers to those fly by night companies and new xbmc users don't get shafted with half baked solutions when they think they are getting the real deal.
Word of advice... Don't burn money on lawyers as that will cost a hundred times the money that using payed developers would cost to solve this issue.
BTW it's not Team kodi that needs to buy time here it's the kodi developers engaged by Rockchip as Rockchip needs to take ownership of this mess.
Now... if they supply their honest manufactures with a working playercorefactory.xml solution calling their Rockchip mediaplayer for HEVC and 4K to work within kodi I think that's a good workaround up and until such time as HEVC and 4K become part of the kodi player.
Posts: 206
Joined: Sep 2014
2014-10-03, 07:32
(This post was last modified: 2014-10-03, 07:37 by User 231261.)
you know what talking shite is:
Saying the law does not allow illicit use....... duh.. sort of obvious
Stop selective out of context quoting please
Posts: 19,982
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
451
nickr
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 19,982
When and where did you get your law degree?
Kodi trademark is owned by XBMC Foundation. The fact that XBMC Foundation provides GPL2 software does not create a trademark license for the name Kodi. Just because Kodi source is release under GPL2 does not just allow the Kodi name to be used by anyone.
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: 206
Joined: Sep 2014
1979 University of Amsterdam and you?
these fork go under the name xbmc..... not kodi... minor detail.
Posts: 19,982
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
451
nickr
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 19,982
1986 University of Canterbury - and been in practice ever since.
And what you say about FOSS excluding trademark law is just bollocks. Ask Redhat.
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.)