Well I asked Asus for the source code.. So we can start dev on it. There reply..
Thank you for contacting ASUS Customer Service.
My name is Carter and it is my pleasure to help you with your problem.
Due to the limitation of the copyright, I am afraid that the source code of the zenwatch 2 isn't separately provided.
Thanks for your understanding and sorry for the inconvenience.
Welcome to refer Troubleshooting & FAQ for ASUS products in ASUS website:
http://support.asus.com/servicehome.aspx?SLanguage=en
If you continue to experience issues in the future, please do not hesitate to contact us.
An email survey will be sent to you within the next 5 days. Please be sure to rate the service I provided to you today.
Best Regards,
Carter
ASUS Product Support Team
Sent from my ASUS_Z00A using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
They are lying. They must at least publish the source code of the modifications in linux which they made in zenwatch, "due to the limitation of the copyright".
danialbehzadi said:
They are lying. They must at least publish the source code of the modifications in linux which they made in zefone, "due to the limitation of the copyright".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am fairly certain Kernel source falls under open source licensing.
They released a kernel source code here: https://www.asus.com/ZenWatch/ASUS_ZenWatch_2_WI501Q/HelpDesk_Download/
direct link: http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/Wearable/ASUS_WI501Q/WI501Q_Kernel_5_20_3_8.zip
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/build/+/android-wear-7.1.1_r1
This what you need?
Related
I started a new petition asking Barnes and Nobles to release the full, compliable source code as required by the GPL. You can join it here. Please share!
Join the petition here: www (dot) publikdemand (dot) com/demands/f09618b0-3ccc-11e1-ad4e-1231381d9028#
Share!
retort
but they did share the source code
also android as system is NOT GPL'd ! it is under the apache license, which is more like the BSD license where it allows business to use their code and improve it, close the souce, sell it, etc.. another product that uses this method is google chrome which takes some work from community (chromium) and improves on it.
the nook tablet as a device has a signed bootloader on it, which shouldn't make the software be classified as closed source.
the only thing under gpl on the android platform as a whole is the kernel
Quote of 12aon's GPL Thread (sticky in Flyer section)
A little introduction
Recently in several Android fora on XDA-Developers, it has come to the attention of the moderator team that there have been issues regarding developers’ compliance with the GPL. This post aims to clarify the position of XDA on the use of GPL sources, particularly in the development of Android kernels.
Without the GPL, the Android operating system would likely never have come about. Through the work of Linus Torvalds, the Linux kernel was made open source for all to use, share and modify. As Android runs on the Linux kernel, and features numerous modifications to these sources, it would not exist in its present state without the Open Source community.
As a result, it is in the interests of everyone who owns an Android phone, who wishes to see further development on the platform, to ensure that they play their part in upholding both the letter and spirit of the GPL.
The GNU General Public Licence (also known as the GPL) is available to read in full at www.gnu.org
To make it easy for everyone to spot a release that complies with the GPL mark the title of your release thread with [GPL]. If you find a ROM which does not comply with the GPL, or the developer does not issue sources, you can report the post as usual, using the report post button next to the post number. Alternatively you may PM your forum specific moderator.
The Rules as they apply on XDA
As XDA has no legal power to uphold the GPL (and frankly we want to stay as far away from doing so as possible), we can’t force any of our users to abide by the GPL. However it is in XDA’s interests as well as the interests of our developer-base to ensure all GPL-derived materials hosted or linked on XDA comply fully with the GPL.
1.GPL-derived materials that do not come with the complete sources used to compile the GPL components are considered warez, and will be treated as such under forum rule 6 and 9.
2.If you use GPL components, but do not make any modifications to them whatsoever, you should provide a link to the original source of your GPL code. (This excludes ROMs using a stock device kernel)
3.Sources accompanying a release should be complete, and contain all the necessary source code for any modules, scripts or definition files. Complete sources will be defined as those which compile correctly and completely against the platform for which the software is distributed, and which contain any and all modifications made to the released General Public Licenced code. The source code supplied should be the exact version for which the source code is being requested, complete with all modifications.
The Very Quick Summary of General Public License (GPL)
The text of the GPL Licence itself will be used to reach any final conclusion regarding any disputes over GPL Licenced materials. The above is a summary of what XDA expects of members using GPL code, and the complete text can be read at the GNU website.
The GPL states that anyone who modifies GPL licenced code is required to make available the sources used to compile it. This is to further improve and encourage collaborative work, as well as to ensure that the best code possible is produced, and to encourage peer-review of all work. This benefits both developers and end users in numerous ways, including:•Allowing anyone to verify the code they are trusting with their data, and its authenticity
•Encouraging community collaboration to produce faster fixes and updates, and better code
•Helping bring new developments from other devices and fields to your own, letting you benefit from new code that wouldn’t have been available without this sharing.
•The GPL imparts great freedom for GPL end users. It ensures innovation is never stifled and no project is dependent upon any single developer.
It is in everyone’s interest for the GPL to be adhered to, as it gives us all better ROMs, better transparency, and a better atmosphere for developers to work together to make great code.
You are aware that even if you didn't build the binaries yourself, you are required by the GPL to distribute your source code just the same as if you had built them yourself, right?
Or at least extend the same offer that was originally passed to you, on to those, to whom you have distributed the binaries.
So, while you may get on yncconsulting's case about missing some files from his kernel source distribution, by TECHNICALITY, you're kind of required to produce that same source yourself, or at least direct people to where they can get the source...
cfoesch said:
So, while you may get on yncconsulting's case about missing some files from his kernel source distribution, by TECHNICALITY, you're kind of required to produce that same source yourself, or at least direct people to where they can get the source...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i am fully aware of the consequences, and you can read previous release in Acer section on that topic, if you doubt anything.
for the flyer section i linked to Leedroid initially, since that was his release i used.. so yes, i know the ruleset and how to redist. the source including my changes.
keynote, i did NOT link to ync's kernel source, since the link did not work intiially, so i could not write anything but info on the binary release.
Dexter_nlb said:
keynote, i did NOT link to ync's kernel source, since the link did not work intiially, so i could not write anything but info on the binary release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you try PMing him about it? When I went looking for the source, and clicked his link and saw it was broken, I PM'ed him, and he said "huh, it must have been deleted while I was cleaning house... oops." and he got it back up the next day...
cfoesch said:
Did you try PMing him about it? When I went looking for the source, and clicked his link and saw it was broken, I PM'ed him, and he said "huh, it must have been deleted while I was cleaning house... oops." and he got it back up the next day...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes. lets just close that one here. i am in no mood to discuss specific cases.
Guidelines are here to be followed and this post was missing in this section.
Not to say this will make it a reality for us to receive an official unlocked boot loader but check out Motorola Mobility's External Idea Submission page here http://eis.motorola.com and let us be heard formally. According to the site, "EIS is the only method by which Motorola Mobility will receive and/or review any unsolicited external idea. Any external idea submitted to Motorola Mobility, Inc. by any other means will not be reviewed and will be promptly returned to the submitter, if physical, or automatically deleted, if electronic."
We can only hope and let's keep this going guys. At least at the moment, unofficially via the Motorola Forums, a Motorola Employee and forum moderator has responded to my questions in reference to our recent response to Soni's announcement and request for an unlocked boot loader and additional drivers necessary to support the devices on our own. This at least shows us in one avenue they are hearing us outside of the social sites.
So let's file our requests formally to get it into their ticketing system as another avenue of hope. Or maybe I am just too optimistic and delirious at this point. :silly:
Cheers,
GP
What does the term external idea mean specifically to the site you reference?
It sounds rather vague and searching for it shows some different meanings.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
hoslayer13 said:
What does the term external idea mean specifically to the site you reference?
It sounds rather vague and searching for it shows some different meanings.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe "external" means outside of Motorola and unsolicited means that they did not pursue or give us a list of ideas or option to choose from that could sway their vetting process. Just another mechanism to possibly be objective in picking or researching the next features or functionality to implement in their devices. Because if they were to conduct internal feedback then it is "internal" and may not be what customers/consumers really want.
Plus, maybe an employee could be voicing an opinion or request from consumers but also receiving requests externally it validates what they have already on their list of topics and ideas for releasing? Just my guess. But at least there is a "formal" way of getting our requests heard.
hoslayer13 said:
What does the term external idea mean specifically to the site you reference?
It sounds rather vague and searching for it shows some different meanings.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I filed my formal request for the idea of having the official bootloader released and here is the general information that they provide, which is an actual EIS ID # to track the request and the following verbiage which I hope shines some more light into your question:
Thank you for providing Motorola Mobility, Inc. with your unsolicited idea.
We have a dedicated team, “External Idea Submissions” that reviews such submissions. Our team will contact you within thirty (30) days to indicate if we are interested in discussing your idea further. (Please note: Only the External Idea Submissions team has access to your submission.)
For your records, below we have reproduced the terms and conditions under which you agreed and provided your submission.
We wish you good luck in your endeavors.
Sincerely,
Motorola Mobility, Inc.
External Idea Submissions
Intellectual Property Section
Law Department
EIS LEGAL NOTICE:
PLEASE BE ADVISED, MOTOROLA MOBILITY INC. IS ONLY WILLING TO RECEIVE YOUR UNSOLICITED IDEA SUBMISSION UPON THE CONDITION THAT YOU AGREE TO ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THE BELOW AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT, CLICK THE "CANCEL" BUTTON AND YOUR INFORMATION WILL NOT BE SUBMITTED TO MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.
MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. -- EIS LEGAL AGREEMENT
Over the years many ideas for improvements have been voluntarily submitted to us by persons outside of Motorola Mobility, Inc. ("Motorola"). We appreciate the confidence in Motorola shown by such persons. We do not require that the submitter obtain, or even to have applied for, a patent on an idea before submitting the idea. If a disclosure is made under the conditions recited herein, and the Motorola is interested thereafter in further considering the idea, negotiations will be undertaken to try to arrive at terms which are equitable to both parties and will take care of the needs of the particular situation.
Motorola is only will to permit Your submission of Your unsolicited idea, if you agree and acknowledge that Your submission hereunder does not imply or create:
1. A confidential relationship for any idea submitted to Motorola.
2. A promise to pay, inasmuch as Motorola's obligations to You, the submitter, under all circumstance shall be only those which are made to You in writing; and
3. A recognition by Motorola of either the novelty or originality of the Your unsolicited idea.
Motorola cannot consider an idea on the condition that it shall return any material submitted if the idea is not found to be of interest. When the material is submitted to Motorola hereunder, You, the submitter, should keep a duplicate for Your own record, and should any controversy unfortunately arise, this material is necessary as evidence of what was disclosed to Motorola.
If a patent has issued, You may simply submit a copy of the same with additional comments that might be helpful.
If an application for patent has been filed, a copy of the same can be submitted to Motorola for its consideration. Otherwise the disclosure should be by written description and sketches, and all should be sufficiently complete and clear so that Your unsolicited idea can be readily understood.
In whatever form an unsolicited idea or a patent invention is submitted to Motorola, it will be helpful if You, the submitter, point out what You believe to be new, and set forth some of the advantages which You think Your unsolicited idea has over known devices or processes.
Motorola will give Your submission such consideration as in the judgment of Motorola it merits, but in reporting its conclusion can assume no obligation further than to say whether or not it is interested in acquiring patent rights or other rights.
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between You and Motorola with respect to Your submission hereunder, and supersedes all previous communications, representations, understandings and agreements, either oral or written, between You and Motorola regarding Your submission. This Agreement may not be modified or waived except in writing and signed by an officer or other authorized representative of each party. If any provision is held invalid, all other provisions shall remain valid, unless such invalidity would frustrate the purpose of our Agreement. The failure of either party to enforce any rights granted hereunder or to take action against the other party in the event of any breach hereunder shall not be deemed a waiver by that party as to subsequent enforcement of rights or subsequent action in the event of future breaches.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Idea submitted. Thanks. Hopefully others will follow suit
I have seven threads across two sites pointing to the Official Support My Moto thread. Would you mind reposting this info there?
Lokifish Marz said:
I have seven threads across two sites pointing to the Official Support My Moto thread. Would you mind reposting this info there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure. Done as requested.
I can't find any source on the Huawei web site. As the kernel is GPL licensed, they are required by law to publish it, but where? Does anyone know?
(Don't want to get into a pointless debate about licenses here, suffice it to say that when challenged in court in various countries, the GPL has always been found to be enforceable, which is all that matters here. We can argue the merits or otherwise of various licenses elsewhere, this forum is quite busy enough already!)
Needless to say, I have searched xda-developers first, without success.
This phone is a dual sim model, one sim is 2G only, the other 2G/3G. I think that this is only a software limitation, and it would be nice to have both usable as 3G. Of course, I also would like a later version of Android.
Thanks in advance for any helpful suggestions or info which people here may be able to contribute towards getting the source code.
I need some advice before lodging an official complaint.
Is Rand McNally violating the GPLv2 Android Open Source Project Apache 2014 license by not supplying their full source code/stock rom when directly requested?
They refuse to supply me flashing files like samsung and other provide to everyone, yet they are using the Android Open Source Project for their devices, atleast 4 of them.
Im interested and more than willing to file a complaint if this is a true violation of the use of the code, and i have experience with legal documents, but i dont want to waste my time if its not.