321–330 of 344 posts
the real goal here as Louis stated himself is this https://consumerrights.wiki/w/DMCA_Section_1201
It's maddening that quite a few people are jumping to defend Bambu here. Principally if you sell a device with a certain functionality and you later modify that device later to remove that functionality that is called theft. It does not matter the slightest bit whether you break into someone's house to physically alter the device or whether you remotely install a malicious software update to do that. But what's even…
So the C&D was stupid, and so is how their network works apparently. Fundamentally, what Bambu are saying is that they have a right to restrict what software accesses their network. The C&D was allegedly sent to stop distribution of software that was written to access their network in an unauthorized fashion (Allegedly according to their ToS). AGPL covers source code. It does not cover who can access what network wit…
Figure I should explain:
Lie #1: “Access their network in an unauthorized fashion.”
The perfectly legal use of public AGPL code does not constitute “unauthorized access”. If they allow their AGPL product to connect, and publish that method of connection, they are not permitted to add additional restrictions on the use of said code. They are permitted to require additive code to be make itself appear unique — but that must follow the license and be part of the license as an addendum, not a retroactive afterthought.
Lie #2: Pawel “specifically modified” BambuStudio [sic.] to look like Studio.
A patently false and outright lie. Pawel used AGPL licensed code. End of story.
Assertion: “Bambu has the right to limit the software that connects to their network.”
Yes! They do! They don’t, however, get to publish the code to do so under AGPL and then claim no one else can use it. Copying and executing that code is an explicit right in AGPL. Bambu is not required to continue operating their cloud or allowing those connection. They absolutely have that right to refuse all connections and correct their mistake.
Bambu also absolutely had the right to keep their cloud access private and to provide a system library to handle the connection to their cloud without it being AGPL. That is literally the specific purpose of AGPL.
“A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be included in conveying the object code work.”
Bambu chose to open up access to their cloud when they published the connection method under AGPL code. They can shut down that service, issue a new firmware, and release their revised non-AGPL system library for Bambu Studio to use their cloud at any time.
What they don’t get to do, and why everyone is giving them the finger, is retroactively decide “whoopsie, I didn’t intend that” and then abuse laws to violate the license they agreed to.
Listen, you can believe what you like, but there is a reason Louis Rossman had no hesitation to host this code. That’s because anyone less afraid and with at least a little technical and legal knowledge probably would have just as high degree of certainty that Bambu will be paying their legal fees. (Louis has the added benefit of living in an Anti-SLAPP state…intentionally.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They will just fine them into oblivion; they are known to fine companies AUD10M to AUD50M for this sort of thing, and from 1st April this year they can now fine up to AUD100M. Will this mean that Bambu will withdraw from the Australian market? Possibly maybe probably, but the ACCC takes a very hard stance against bait and switch.
It's a whole lot better than the US, but AUD100M isn't enough to scare a lot of companies. A law with real teeth would go after an increasing percentage of their revenue for each offense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However, if you want your pictures to last 10+ years under the sun Ah yes, the standard usecase for a printer. putting pictures outside for a decade.
Printing a family picture on 4"x6" photo paper, framing it and putting in a living room exposes it to copious amount of UV light over a decade. It's one of the exact reasons inkjet printers and blank, inkjet-compatible photo paper exists. HP was bundling them with their printers when I last opened mine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Printing a family picture on 4"x6" photo paper, framing it and putting in a living room exposes it to copious amount of UV light over a decade. It's one of the exact reasons inkjet printers and blank, inkjet-compatible photo paper exists. HP was bundling them with their printers when I last opened mine.
I think it would make perfect sense to print another photo in 10 years and stop giving us a hard time with this ridiculous argument.
I'm an amateur photographer. I print way more photos than you assume.
Here's a selection: https://bayindirh.vsco.site/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it would make perfect sense to print another photo in 10 years and stop giving us a hard time with this ridiculous argument.
Thanks for the laugh. No, seriously (not in a derogatory manner. I really laughed it when I read your comment). I'm an amateur photographer. I print way more photos than you assume. Here's a selection: https://bayindirh.vsco.site/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the laugh. No, seriously (not in a derogatory manner. I really laughed it when I read your comment). I'm an amateur photographer. I print way more photos than you assume. Here's a selection: https://bayindirh.vsco.site/
Good for you I guess?
Maybe you should try some.
;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "spoof" as you call it is literally just using their unmodified code. You make it sound like he went in and deliberately changed it so that it would connect. He did not. That part of the code was left unchanged from Bambu's own publicly available source code. I agree that they might possibly have a case to go after individual users. They don't have a case to go after this guy for distributing a fork of their soft…
He copied the code from BambuStudio into an Orca fork to make it connect to Bambu's cloud. That is A) deliberate and B) easily meets the definition of spoofing. It is embarrassing that copying that one little thing made a third party fork able to connect to their cloud because A) that would be embarrassing for smaller IoT devices and we're talking about thousand-dollar printers and B) it's highly regarded to be sayin…
Again, abuse is different from violation. I agree that they're not violating the AGPL merely by threatening legal action. They would be if they actually took legal action. The fact that they're threatening to violate the license in order to get what they want but still take advantage of what the license grants them is IMO abuse of that license.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting question. In the first case, where you install your own build from unmodified source code, although AGPLv3.0 still allows discontinuing support, I see no explicit carve-out in the licence to restrict network access. However, the AGPL comes with no right to such network access to begin with. Permission to access the network would usually come separately from the AGPL; I suppose you could potentially bundle…
But they had no access control in the first place. If I built their repo without modifications, I automatically have access. I would need to make modifications not to get that access. > [...] they can still refuse you access to their network. Sure, they can and yes, AGPL doesn't give users right to just access services, I have said before that they may enforce their EULA upon individual users. They are however not do…
I agree. I think the argument they are going for is similar to that from Google against yt-dl, but unlike in that case, Bambu is obligated to allow this codebase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Synology works with any hard drive. I bought a new unit and installed WD drives in it. No issues.
The point is that Synology tried to vendor-lock their customers for profit, and even though they didn't follow through, they told us what they stand for, and it is now considered ill-advised to buy their hardware because of that.