A Plan For A Brighter Android Future

[WugFresh]

@czerdrill, I know my rights, note that I stated it wasn't illegal multiple times in that post. You are protected by your first amendment right to tell people how to root because you are allowed to distribute information as long as it doesn't put anyone at risk of death or in harms way, and as long as it is legal. Your warranty can be voided, but it is not criminal activity to discuss rooting. I haven't participated in any threads discussing how to commit insurance fraud, because that is illegal and isn't condoned discussion on these sites for that reason. I think that you are well. aware that I didn't think I could just say "freedom of speech" in court... so I don't even know why you are making that point..? Just for the sake of doing so...? Or did you actually thinks what I was saying?

{{ WugFresh }}

no not at all. haha, i think you think i have some vendetta against you. tbh i think you are one of the more smarter people who post in this thread, and i'm sure you're well aware of what's right and wrong (although you did try to justify tethering at one point...so who knows).

my point is these devs that you praise for their hard work etc, are also the ones who give information about tethering and how to unroot when you brick your phone, etc. so while the actual printing of "this is how you root" isn't wrong, it's not like it's a whole different subset of posters are telling you how to tether and unroot when you brick your phone and need to send it in for service. it's the same devs, and its the same people posting in those threads.

my point was, you can say "i just told people how to root so that's my first amendment right" which is fine, but if you're also creating apps to help people tether, or creating throttle mods (which to this day makes me laugh that so many people just bought that crap hook line and sinker no questions asked), your credibility as some freedom fighting first amendment upholder goes out the door. Just saying...and no...this is not an attack on you (I feel like I have to keep reassuring you of this haha).

Then by those criteria, I am in violation numerous times, but I still don't think it would be in their intrest to come after me, nor do I think that they would. Information regarding Sbf'ing and doing so before bringing devices to verizon is something that is widely available on the Internet. A more logical approach would be to...

Edit:
Actually.. I don't think I am going to say that.. lol, don't want to give anyone new ideas on how they could lock us down more effectively.
---
I also would agree that developing the tethering apps and patches probably is in the grey zone regarding the legal spectrum. Still not sure though about the app though due to the way google set up the market and the open nature of devs publishing rights (just as long as the apps aren't built for malicious intent), but either way.. yeah, certainly not protected by just the first amendment in that regard... but quite possibly through some clever legal tactics.

But again, I certainly don't think that a service provider would ever take that approach, it just not a logical way to deal with the problem especially considering the nature of the business. It's just not good form to start suing your customers... usually doesn't help the company image to much... lol.

{{ WugFresh }}

 

[Doulandroid]

Verizon has every right to deny service, for Any reason, and terms and conditions may change without notice. That doesn't mean they are going to start legal action against devs, or putting tetherers to 5years hard labor in Verizon prison. Just called my lawyer to see if non notarized consumer contracts were actionable. Check out the consumer protection agency please. Glad you assume I do not own a business, i get $78 per American Kobe ribeye I serve in my club, i don't mind if contrarians, such as yourself, walk in. Obnoxious people usually have embarassed friends who overcompensate on tips.

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

 

[czerdrill]

@czerdrill, I know my rights, note that I stated it wasn't illegal multiple times in that post. You are protected by your first amendment right to tell people how to root because you are allowed to distribute information as long as it doesn't put anyone at risk of death or in harms way, and as long as it is legal. Your warranty can be voided, but it is not criminal activity to discuss rooting. I haven't participated in any threads discussing how to commit insurance fraud, because that is illegal and isn't condoned discussion on these sites for that reason. I think that you are well. aware that I didn't think I could just say "freedom of speech" in court... so I don't even know why you are making that point..? Just for the sake of doing so...? Or did you actually thinks what I was saying?

{{ WugFresh }}

no not at all. haha, i think you think i have some vendetta against you. tbh i think you are one of the more smarter people who post in this thread, and i'm sure you're well aware of what's right and wrong (although you did try to justify tethering at one point...so who knows).

my point is these devs that you praise for their hard work etc, are also the ones who give information about tethering and how to unroot when you brick your phone, etc. so while the actual printing of "this is how you root" isn't wrong, it's not like it's a whole different subset of posters are telling you how to tether and unroot when you brick your phone and need to send it in for service. it's the same devs, and its the same people posting in those threads.

my point was, you can say "i just told people how to root so that's my first amendment right" which is fine, but if you're also creating apps to help people tether, or creating throttle mods (which to this day makes me laugh that so many people just bought that crap hook line and sinker no questions asked), your credibility as some freedom fighting first amendment upholder goes out the door. Just saying...and no...this is not an attack on you (I feel like I have to keep reassuring you of this haha).

Then by those criteria, I am in violation numerous times, but I still don't think it would be in their intrest to come after me, nor do I think that they would. Information regarding Sbf'ing and doing so before bringing devices to verizon is something that is widely available on the Internet. A more logical approach would be to...

Edit:
Actually.. I don't think I am going to say that.. lol, don't want to give anyone new ideas on how they could lock us down more effectively.
---
I also would agree that developing the tethering apps and patches probably is in the grey zone regarding the legal spectrum. Still not sure though about the app though due to the way google set up the market and the open nature of devs publishing rights (just as long as the apps aren't built for malicious intent), but either way.. yeah, certainly not protected by just the first amendment in that regard... but quite possibly through some clever legal tactics.

But again, I certainly don't think that a service provider would ever take that approach, it just not a logical way to deal with the problem especially considering the nature of the business. It's just not good form to start suing your customers... usually doesn't help the company image to much... lol.

{{ WugFresh }}

i'm not talking about providing an sbf file, although i guess an oem can send a C&D for that if they wanted to (don't know). i've already explained what it is i'm talking about. if you're providing mods and hacks to circumvent a paid service, or take advantage of a paid service that's illegal, and just because on another portion of your website or forum you say "this is how you root", doesn't mean you're protected by first amendment rights. there is no gray area. if they wanted to take you to court, they could and they'd win, and you'd settle. believe me.

and yes, i already agreed with you that verizon is not going to take people to court for things like that. wouldn't make sense. if you can save millions by not going to court why wouldn't you?

 

[czerdrill]

Verizon has every right to deny service, for Any reason, and terms and conditions may change without notice. That doesn't mean they are going to start legal action against devs, or putting tetherers to 5years hard labor in Verizon prison. Just called my lawyer to see if non notarized consumer contracts were actionable. Check out the consumer protection agency please. Glad you assume I do not own a business, i get $78 per American Kobe ribeye I serve in my club, i don't mind if contrarians, such as yourself, walk in. Obnoxious people usually have embarassed friends who overcompensate on tips.

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

...seriously, why are you posting irrelevant things? i dont get it. you are arguing just to argue. did i say "everyone start hiring lawyers, verizon is going to start taking people to court and sentencing you to prison!! be very afraid!!"...no i did not. in fact, i've been saying that there is no point in them doing that, because no one is going to try to battle them. you're the one who is implying that companies should take useless things to trial to prove a point.

and you do own a business?? WOW. yeah sorry about assuming, now i just think it's amazing you're still in business. so if someone blatantly steals from you, and you know it'll cost you more to take that person to trial for stealing, even though you'll clearly win, you would rather spend the thousands on a lawyer then just offer a settlement for the $78 ribeye? LOL...k. Good luck.

 

[WugFresh]

no not at all. haha, i think you think i have some vendetta against you. tbh i think you are one of the more smarter people who post in this thread, and i'm sure you're well aware of what's right and wrong (although you did try to justify tethering at one point...so who knows).

my point is these devs that you praise for their hard work etc, are also the ones who give information about tethering and how to unroot when you brick your phone, etc. so while the actual printing of "this is how you root" isn't wrong, it's not like it's a whole different subset of posters are telling you how to tether and unroot when you brick your phone and need to send it in for service. it's the same devs, and its the same people posting in those threads.

my point was, you can say "i just told people how to root so that's my first amendment right" which is fine, but if you're also creating apps to help people tether, or creating throttle mods (which to this day makes me laugh that so many people just bought that crap hook line and sinker no questions asked), your credibility as some freedom fighting first amendment upholder goes out the door. Just saying...and no...this is not an attack on you (I feel like I have to keep reassuring you of this haha).

Then by those criteria, I am in violation numerous times, but I still don't think it would be in their intrest to come after me, nor do I think that they would. Information regarding Sbf'ing and doing so before bringing devices to verizon is something that is widely available on the Internet. A more logical approach would be to...

Edit:
Actually.. I don't think I am going to say that.. lol, don't want to give anyone new ideas on how they could lock us down more effectively.
---
I also would agree that developing the tethering apps and patches probably is in the grey zone regarding the legal spectrum. Still not sure though about the app though due to the way google set up the market and the open nature of devs publishing rights (just as long as the apps aren't built for malicious intent), but either way.. yeah, certainly not protected by just the first amendment in that regard... but quite possibly through some clever legal tactics.

But again, I certainly don't think that a service provider would ever take that approach, it just not a logical way to deal with the problem especially considering the nature of the business. It's just not good form to start suing your customers... usually doesn't help the company image to much... lol.

{{ WugFresh }}

i'm not talking about providing an sbf file, although i guess an oem can send a C&D for that if they wanted to (don't know). i've already explained what it is i'm talking about. if you're providing mods and hacks to circumvent a paid service, or take advantage of a paid service that's illegal, and just because on another portion of your website or forum you say "this is how you root", doesn't mean you're protected by first amendment rights. there is no gray area. if they wanted to take you to court, they could and they'd win, and you'd settle. believe me.

and yes, i already agreed with you that verizon is not going to take people to court for things like that. wouldn't make sense. if you can save millions by not going to court why wouldn't you?

I agree with a lot of what you stated. But I don't think that you can say with 100% certainty that making a tethering app and publishing it for free is illegal without investigating the publishing rights of the devs on the google market. Probably patching the proprietary 3Ghotspot to work without a tethering plan wouldn't be something that you could really defend in court. However in all circumstances, the first step would always be a timely warning or a C&D.

{{ WugFresh }}

 

[czerdrill]

I agree with a lot of what you stated. But I don't think that you can say with 100% certainty that making a tethering app and publishing it for free is illegal without investigating the publishing rights of the devs on the google market. Probably patching the proprietary 3Ghotspot to work without a tethering plan wouldn't be something that you could really defend in court. However in all circumstances, the first step would always be a timely warning or a C&D.

{{ WugFresh }}

if i wanted to i could publish an app for free on the market that asks you for credit card info to get a product that doesnt exist and then commit identity theft, and google wouldn't block it because they dont filter their apps (until someone complains). that doesn't make it legal.

tethering is stealing service. if its billed as a separate service, and you agree that its a separate service by signing your customer agreement, and you then circumvent paying for it that is illegal. it doesn't mean that they're going to start loading up the syringes for your lethal injection, or that they're going to start clearing out a cell for you in rikers, or that your mug shot is going to be plasterd on the 6 oclock news, but it is illegal.

and yes...you would be notified first. you wouldn't be sent to jail, or have the FBI banging on your door.

 

[bplewis24]

I honestly don't know what the discussion is about anymore, but I think we should attempt to make distinctions between what is unauthorized or breaking a contract term and "illegal" which implies it is against the law of the land. The latter is way too complex to be a black and white issue. If a contract term is void or voidable in a court of law, then it's a misnomer to say it is illegal. And I definitely think that is in play in this situation.

Brandon

 

[czerdrill]

I honestly don't know what the discussion is about anymore, but I think we should attempt to make distinctions between what is unauthorized or breaking a contract term and "illegal" which implies it is against the law of the land. The latter is way too complex to be a black and white issue. If a contract term is void or voidable in a court of law, then it's a misnomer to say it is illegal. And I definitely think that is in play in this situation.

Brandon

rooting is not illegal in terms of breaking the law of the land but is a violation of the warranty. Tethering is illegal and a violation of the TOS and if it was taken to court it would be upheld. the thing is, we'll never know if that's true or not because (1) the people who swear that they have every right under the sun to tether are going to be the first ones to cry about it if caught and give in, and (2) it would never go to trial or be proven one way or the another if some fool did decide to fight VZW, because it would be settled out of court without any resolution as to the legality of it.

 

[WugFresh]

I agree with a lot of what you stated. But I don't think that you can say with 100% certainty that making a tethering app and publishing it for free is illegal without investigating the publishing rights of the devs on the google market. Probably patching the proprietary 3Ghotspot to work without a tethering plan wouldn't be something that you could really defend in court. However in all circumstances, the first step would always be a timely warning or a C&D.

{{ WugFresh }}

if i wanted to i could publish an app for free on the market that asks you for credit card info to get a product that doesnt exist and then commit identity theft, and google wouldn't block it because they dont filter their apps (until someone complains). that doesn't make it legal.

tethering is stealing service. if its billed as a separate service, and you agree that its a separate service by signing your customer agreement, and you then circumvent paying for it that is illegal. it doesn't mean that they're going to start loading up the syringes for your lethal injection, or that they're going to start clearing out a cell for you in rikers, or that your mug shot is going to be plasterd on the 6 oclock news, but it is illegal.

and yes...you would be notified first. you wouldn't be sent to jail, or have the FBI banging on your door.

Right, but in your example the dev is clearly at fault because the app is designed for malicious intent. But in the case of tethering, I think that the responsibility would fall solely on the end user and not the dev. Providing the means isn't always grounds for punishment especially when it's distributed freely and without ads. The dev isn't benefiting from their own work in anyway. Actively utilizing an app to steal credit card information and exploit customers cannot be used as a comparison.

{{ WugFresh }}

 

[czerdrill]

I agree with a lot of what you stated. But I don't think that you can say with 100% certainty that making a tethering app and publishing it for free is illegal without investigating the publishing rights of the devs on the google market. Probably patching the proprietary 3Ghotspot to work without a tethering plan wouldn't be something that you could really defend in court. However in all circumstances, the first step would always be a timely warning or a C&D.

{{ WugFresh }}

if i wanted to i could publish an app for free on the market that asks you for credit card info to get a product that doesnt exist and then commit identity theft, and google wouldn't block it because they dont filter their apps (until someone complains). that doesn't make it legal.

tethering is stealing service. if its billed as a separate service, and you agree that its a separate service by signing your customer agreement, and you then circumvent paying for it that is illegal. it doesn't mean that they're going to start loading up the syringes for your lethal injection, or that they're going to start clearing out a cell for you in rikers, or that your mug shot is going to be plasterd on the 6 oclock news, but it is illegal.

and yes...you would be notified first. you wouldn't be sent to jail, or have the FBI banging on your door.

Right, but in your example the dev is clearly at fault because the app is designed for malicious intent. But in the case of tethering, I think that the responsibility would fall solely on the end user and not the dev. Providing the means isn't always grounds for punishment especially when it's distributed freely and without ads. The dev isn't benefiting from their own work in anyway. Actively utilizing an app to steal credit card information and exploit customers cannot be used as a comparison.

{{ WugFresh }}

so if i give drugs to someone, and that person, while high, commits a crime, i have done no wrong because i was merely providing the means? if i never use those drugs, and only openly give them away for free in the streets, i'd be immune from prosecution because i'm just providing the means for someone to break the law but not breaking it myself?

or are you going to say drugs are illegal, but tethering is not? haha...if i'm providing people a way to break the law, how can the thing that i'm providing be legal?

 

[WugFresh]

if i wanted to i could publish an app for free on the market that asks you for credit card info to get a product that doesnt exist and then commit identity theft, and google wouldn't block it because they dont filter their apps (until someone complains). that doesn't make it legal.

tethering is stealing service. if its billed as a separate service, and you agree that its a separate service by signing your customer agreement, and you then circumvent paying for it that is illegal. it doesn't mean that they're going to start loading up the syringes for your lethal injection, or that they're going to start clearing out a cell for you in rikers, or that your mug shot is going to be plasterd on the 6 oclock news, but it is illegal.

and yes...you would be notified first. you wouldn't be sent to jail, or have the FBI banging on your door.

Right, but in your example the dev is clearly at fault because the app is designed for malicious intent. But in the case of tethering, I think that the responsibility would fall solely on the end user and not the dev. Providing the means isn't always grounds for punishment especially when it's distributed freely and without ads. The dev isn't benefiting from their own work in anyway. Actively utilizing an app to steal credit card information and exploit customers cannot be used as a comparison.

{{ WugFresh }}

so if i give drugs to someone, and that person, while high, commits a crime, i have done no wrong because i was merely providing the means? if i never use those drugs, and only openly give them away for free in the streets, i'd be immune from prosecution because i'm just providing the means for someone to break the law but not breaking it myself?

or are you going to say drugs are illegal, but tethering is not? haha...if i'm providing people a way to break the law, how can the thing that i'm providing be legal?

No, but close...
I am going to say drugs are illegal and an app is not. The dev isn't the one tethering, which is the illegal activity. Publishing an app is lawful as long as there is no malicious intent.

There called loopholes... as in, flaws in the legal system. Very few things are black and white, that is why settlements happen so often.

{{ WugFresh }}

 

[czerdrill]

Right, but in your example the dev is clearly at fault because the app is designed for malicious intent. But in the case of tethering, I think that the responsibility would fall solely on the end user and not the dev. Providing the means isn't always grounds for punishment especially when it's distributed freely and without ads. The dev isn't benefiting from their own work in anyway. Actively utilizing an app to steal credit card information and exploit customers cannot be used as a comparison.

{{ WugFresh }}

so if i give drugs to someone, and that person, while high, commits a crime, i have done no wrong because i was merely providing the means? if i never use those drugs, and only openly give them away for free in the streets, i'd be immune from prosecution because i'm just providing the means for someone to break the law but not breaking it myself?

or are you going to say drugs are illegal, but tethering is not? haha...if i'm providing people a way to break the law, how can the thing that i'm providing be legal?

I am going to say drugs are illegal and an app is not.

{{ WugFresh }}

lol k. sounds like your just picking and choosing what works for you to justify what you know is wrong, which is precisely what those who argue that tethering is ok do.

Ok so let's say my app doesn't collect credit card info, it merely provides a way for people to steal credit card info if they wanted to, even though i don't do it myself. In essence, it tells you how to commit identity theft, provides you with the items you need to do so and also asks for donations if it works for you. i'm just providing the means if people choose to do it. that's legal to you? LOL.

 

[WugFresh]

so if i give drugs to someone, and that person, while high, commits a crime, i have done no wrong because i was merely providing the means? if i never use those drugs, and only openly give them away for free in the streets, i'd be immune from prosecution because i'm just providing the means for someone to break the law but not breaking it myself?

or are you going to say drugs are illegal, but tethering is not? haha...if i'm providing people a way to break the law, how can the thing that i'm providing be legal?

I am going to say drugs are illegal and an app is not.

{{ WugFresh }}

lol k. sounds like your just picking and choosing what works for you to justify what you know is wrong, which is precisely what those who argue that tethering is ok do.

Ok so let's say my app doesn't collect credit card info, it merely provides a way for people to steal credit card info if they wanted to, even though i don't do it myself. In essence, it tells you how to commit identity theft, provides you with the items you need to do so and also asks for donations if it works for you. i'm just providing the means if people choose to do it. that's legal to you? LOL.

Right, but in your example the dev is clearly at fault because the app is designed for malicious intent. But in the case of tethering, I think that the responsibility would fall solely on the end user and not the dev. Providing the means isn't always grounds for punishment especially when it's distributed freely and without ads. The dev isn't benefiting from their own work in anyway. Actively utilizing an app to steal credit card information and exploit customers cannot be used as a comparison.

{{ WugFresh }}

so if i give drugs to someone, and that person, while high, commits a crime, i have done no wrong because i was merely providing the means? if i never use those drugs, and only openly give them away for free in the streets, i'd be immune from prosecution because i'm just providing the means for someone to break the law but not breaking it myself?

or are you going to say drugs are illegal, but tethering is not? haha...if i'm providing people a way to break the law, how can the thing that i'm providing be legal?

No, but close...
I am going to say drugs are illegal and an app is not. The dev isn't the one tethering, which is the illegal activity. Publishing an app is lawful as long as there is no malicious intent.

There called loopholes... as in, flaws in the legal system. Very few things are black and white, that is why settlements happen so often.

{{ WugFresh }}

Here is my updated response. ^

In your example its a federal crime and providing the means to commit identity theft is still malicious intent. Notice how I previously stated that it doesn't hold true for all circumstances.

In that circumstance, the dev would undoubtedly go under criminal investigation because the very nature of the information indicates experience, but to the same extent, if that were to happen, I bet that the feds would be more interested in finding out who downloaded and used it then busting the dev.

{{ WugFresh }}

 

[czerdrill]

I am going to say drugs are illegal and an app is not.

{{ WugFresh }}

lol k. sounds like your just picking and choosing what works for you to justify what you know is wrong, which is precisely what those who argue that tethering is ok do.

Ok so let's say my app doesn't collect credit card info, it merely provides a way for people to steal credit card info if they wanted to, even though i don't do it myself. In essence, it tells you how to commit identity theft, provides you with the items you need to do so and also asks for donations if it works for you. i'm just providing the means if people choose to do it. that's legal to you? LOL.

so if i give drugs to someone, and that person, while high, commits a crime, i have done no wrong because i was merely providing the means? if i never use those drugs, and only openly give them away for free in the streets, i'd be immune from prosecution because i'm just providing the means for someone to break the law but not breaking it myself?

or are you going to say drugs are illegal, but tethering is not? haha...if i'm providing people a way to break the law, how can the thing that i'm providing be legal?

No, but close...
I am going to say drugs are illegal and an app is not. The dev isn't the one tethering, which is the illegal activity. Publishing an app is lawful as long as there is no malicious intent.

There called loopholes... as in, flaws in the legal system. Very few things are black and white, that is why settlements happen so often.

{{ WugFresh }}

Here is my updated response. ^

In your example its a federal crime and providing the means to commit identity theft is still malicious intent. Notice how I previously stated that it doesn't hold true for all circumstances.

In that circumstance, the dev would undoubtedly go under criminal investigation because the very nature of the information indicates experience, but to the same extent, if that were to happen, I bet that the feds would be more interested in finding out who downloaded and used it then busting the dev.

{{ WugFresh }}

not exactly. people don't get in trouble for downloading pirated music, they get in trouble for uploading it and sharing it. the person who is providing the means to break the law is the one who's held more responsible. that's why the case is against geohot and not against the countless people who've hacked their ps3s because of the info he provided.

that doesn't make what the end user is doing right, but if you're suggesting that the devs are providing the means and are not tethering themselves...well...LOL.

that's why limewire was shut down...and napster...and kazaa...and need i go on? you go after the source, not after the people that download what the source provides.

again, you're saying "gray area" because you want to believe that what you're doing is not completely wrong and there may be some justification for it. the truth is...there is not. there is no gray area when it comes to tethering. it's against the contract, and its theft of service. doesn't matter if you think it's unfair. there is no justification for tethering. if they decide to take you to court, you will lose. and if you're foolish enough to try to take it to trial, you'll lose even more.

 

[WugFresh]

I am not trying to justify it at all. The policies would have to be changed to take away this problem.

I think that they can bring anyone to court and scare them into a settlement. But making a tethering app and publishing it is not illegal by my judgment. If the service provider contacted the dev first, issued a C&D because they believe the app was being used to steal service, and then the dev told them to screw off, then yes... there would be no legal recourse. This debate is rather pointless, because there is no section of my plan aimed to convince the carriers that tethering without a plan is legal.

{{ WugFresh }}