Hondata Sueing Dave Blundell?
So you're demanding you get pretty much control of pgmfi, WITHOUT anyone knowing.
That's going a little bit over board.
And don't act like you or your employee's don't browse pgmfi and look for answers you can't find.
Dave isn't making threats. ANY person could see that this will only bring bad business for you.
Big guy vs little guy is never good.
Dave also isn't doing anything anti-Hondata. He is merely asking for monetary help. if others post something anti-hondata, that is not his responsibility, just like the reason for this lawsuit isn't his responsibility.
after all, it's on both forums user agreements.
The only way this will settle out of court will be if Hondata gets control of pgmfi, as a "ghost" moderator.
But, that is not even up to Dave.
So....why are you going after him again?
That's going a little bit over board.
And don't act like you or your employee's don't browse pgmfi and look for answers you can't find.
Dave isn't making threats. ANY person could see that this will only bring bad business for you.
Big guy vs little guy is never good.
Dave also isn't doing anything anti-Hondata. He is merely asking for monetary help. if others post something anti-hondata, that is not his responsibility, just like the reason for this lawsuit isn't his responsibility.
after all, it's on both forums user agreements.
The only way this will settle out of court will be if Hondata gets control of pgmfi, as a "ghost" moderator.
But, that is not even up to Dave.
So....why are you going after him again?
Ok, how did dave help steal it?Hondata wrote:If you had spent years of your life developing something, and someone was helping people steal it, would you try to stop it? Or do you want our code to be stolen?
If some steals your car (the original poster violated pgmfi.orgs TOS) to rob a bank does that mean you are somehow liable for the robbers actions?
Your arguement and this case are irrational. You will lose. In fact you already are.
I've read thru this thread 3 times, where has dave made a overt or even subtle threat? How do you make this interpertation?
Reference our first post regard Davids actions. Someone posted software which infringed our rights. David allowed this software to remain on the forum, despite having ample opportunity to remove the software. A car analogy doesn't work because a car can only be stolen once.
The law in the matter is well known and clear. Look at the mechanisms that ebay or youtube have for removal of infringing.
All the disclaimer and terms of service do is show that moderators were aware that this type of problem may occur, and therefore they should take extra care.
With regards to threats reference David's response once the S300 was announced - which is pretty clear about encouraging people to 'hack' our systems, also the post 5 days ago here about people attacking our products.
With regard to David being too busy with exams to take any action - the infringing software was left for 48 hours on the forum without any action. David had plenty of time to do something. Also this highlights a distortion or omission of the facts from David - reading his account does not give any indication of the timeframe and opportunity for action was ample. David lied about not being able to remove the post - during the 48 hours the software was up, David posted multiple times to the forum. These posts have since been removed.
The law in the matter is well known and clear. Look at the mechanisms that ebay or youtube have for removal of infringing.
All the disclaimer and terms of service do is show that moderators were aware that this type of problem may occur, and therefore they should take extra care.
With regards to threats reference David's response once the S300 was announced - which is pretty clear about encouraging people to 'hack' our systems, also the post 5 days ago here about people attacking our products.
With regard to David being too busy with exams to take any action - the infringing software was left for 48 hours on the forum without any action. David had plenty of time to do something. Also this highlights a distortion or omission of the facts from David - reading his account does not give any indication of the timeframe and opportunity for action was ample. David lied about not being able to remove the post - during the 48 hours the software was up, David posted multiple times to the forum. These posts have since been removed.
Hondata
Sorry, the car analogy is correct. It's not the number of times something is stolen it is the fact that it was stolen. Further, ebay and utube have very little bearing here. Those are for profit entites with full time monitors. PGMFI is not. Their TOS covers them. What is your ideal of extra care? While the law may be "well known and clear", I have to wonder does the persons conseling hondata know this. Better yet, does hondata know this?Hondata wrote:Reference our first post regard Davids actions. Someone posted software which infringed our rights. David allowed this software to remain on the forum, despite having ample opportunity to remove the software. A car analogy doesn't work because a car can only be stolen once.
The law in the matter is well known and clear. Look at the mechanisms that ebay or youtube have for removal of infringing.
All the disclaimer and terms of service do is show that moderators were aware that this type of problem may occur, and therefore they should take extra care.
With regards to threats reference David's response once the S300 was announced - which is pretty clear about encouraging people to 'hack' our systems, also the post 5 days ago here about people attacking our products.
With regard to David being too busy with exams to take any action - the infringing software was left for 48 hours on the forum without any action. David had plenty of time to do something. Also this highlights a distortion or omission of the facts from David - reading his account does not give any indication of the timeframe and opportunity for action was ample. David lied about not being able to remove the post - during the 48 hours the software was up, David posted multiple times to the forum. These posts have since been removed.
Please post a link where dave encouraged hacking.
Also, where is this "attack" on your products?
Yeah, I quite aware of the time it took for the software to be removed.
If your whole arguement is based upon the time dave took to act then you lose. Based on your thinking, if some illegally posted your code for a second then you would have grounds for a suit. If the site had promoted the type of behavior then maybe you would have a basis but you don't.
Finally, you tried to play the wounded part (badly), but the details of your proposed settlement revealed you true motive.
Honesty, I'm still trying to figure out what sort of damage could have been incurred? I definitely don't see any k-series DIY ecu programmer.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 12:03 pm
You still haven't answered the question why you and your company find it perfectly ok to steal code from Honda without any agreement from Honda or paying for using the code, but do not find it ok when somebody else tries the same to Hondata?
I have learned that you cannot judge someone else on something that you also do yourself. So do not judge the "thief" and also be a thief of the Honda code yourself. Do you tell that to the judge in court? That Hondata is stealing the code and intellectual property of Honda?
I have learned that you cannot judge someone else on something that you also do yourself. So do not judge the "thief" and also be a thief of the Honda code yourself. Do you tell that to the judge in court? That Hondata is stealing the code and intellectual property of Honda?
This is not the issue, and you're making some incorrect assumptions, but what we have done to the ECU was done in a legal fashion. All you are doing is trying to justify the actions of Blundel by obscuring the real issues.
Didier, your questions were answered previously in this thread. Again, I don't think that Crome has anything to do with this.
Didier, your questions were answered previously in this thread. Again, I don't think that Crome has anything to do with this.
Hondata
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 12:03 pm
We are not trying to justify anything. We are trying to explain that what Hondata is doing makes no sense. By the way, what Hondata is doing is also illegal, only if you have the permission of Honda or paying for using it, it may be used or modified, but i will leave that out of the discussion.Hondata wrote:This is not the issue, and you're making some incorrect assumptions, but what we have done to the ECU was done in a legal fashion. All you are doing is trying to justify the actions of Blundel by obscuring the real issues.
Didier, your questions were answered previously in this thread. Again, I don't think that Crome has anything to do with this.
Is Hondata done harm by that software? Are you suffering from big losses and losing customers? You are bringing someone to court that is NOT responsible for this matters. A NON-PROFIT forum has no obligation to remove illegal software in lets say 8 hours. It is run and moderated by people that are voluntarily spend their private time to moderate a forum.
Then something is being posted that is illegal in the eyes of Hondata (lets forget the discussion about it). First of all, the only one that could be held responsible is the poster of the software (that has done the actual "hacking", but Hondata cannot get this person so they sue the website.... easy way out.
Only way i think is that if Hondata is persistent they will lose way MORE customers and money then if they drop charges. If Hondata is going to persist in their way of "justice" they will fail big time and lose much more, i think that a very big part (most of Hondata customers) of the tuners-scene is going to turn their back to Hondata and use other (and better) software to tune their Honda ECU's.
Lets dig into what is Hondata is doing. Is Hondata really think that what Hondata does is legal? The Honda ECU (software and code) is protected by law. If you want to modify this software and use your own to adapt settings or something else on that circuit board you have to readout the original software if you want to know what it is doing. Also you have to readout the original bin and modify the settings. Both are stricly illegal because it is the intellectual property of Honda INC and absolutly NOT free to readout, back-engineer it, modify of use it.