Narflex please keep fighting for client licenses

[KeithAbbott]

Just thinking out loud here.

The HD200 and HD300 have licenses built-in. If a change was made to the extender firmware to allow viewing the license number, and a change was made to the SageTV client software to allow entry and use of said license number, an option would exist for us when the hardware fails. Since the server will not allow duplicate clients with the same license to be used within a single network, it's not like we would be getting a free client out of the deal. The server would only allow you to use your extender, OR the software client, at any point in time, not both.

I know, wishful thinking, but I'm just trying to brainstorm other possible options to deal with extender hardware failure. Especially since I own three extenders, and not a single client license.

[GMan78]

Originally Posted by davephan

It's been about 1/2 a month since the last Narflex posting. I think hope is fading for any solutions to the SageTV client licensing problem.

Dave

Stay hopeful Dave...not that I have any more info than others, but I am still placing my bets with Jeff. He clearly want to do this, especially given his advocacy of the STV7 upgrades. I'm thinking it's simply more complicated to create a release mechanism on the client licenses and he needs the time to figure out how to approach a solution. Then again, you may be right...Jeff would care to comment?

[thestig]

Would someone like to take a stab at speculating why it is "more" difficult for Jeff/Google to release a means to distribute client licenses to existing customers than it was to allow those that had not yet upgraded a free upgrade path to V7? Is it a technical matter, business, legal, or some combination thereof?

My view, with some level of detail:
technical matter 0%
business interests 30%
legal obligations 70%

It will take Jeff and the Sagetv team 15 minutes to change and release a way to overcome the client licensing issue. The problem is that Google has its own business interests in this code and it has nothing to do with the "old sagetv" our its user base (us). Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing Google. I consider them saints compared to M$ and Oracle. The problem with licenses is that even if they give them away for free, that implies certain level of support. Google wants to make it clear that sagetv is dead. I don't blame them. Also that doesn't means that I can't use it, as is, for many years to come.
As for client licenses, we will get them one way or another. It's a matter of waiting a month or two to see if Google decides to do something about it. The extenders are the real issue. I really doubt that Google will sell it's current inventory. If we get lucky they will not destroy them, but give them to a third party for resale without any warranty.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Those are one of a kind physical items, that have an intrinsic value, AND a current owner. Theft of them involves removing that property form the control of the current owner. SageTV Clients, on the other hand, are more accurately described as abandonware. US Courts have actually made explicit exemptions to the DMCA for products that are no longer available, allowing the copy protection themes (like sagetv's client licenses) to be bypassed legally.

"Abandonware"? I love it !

A new term. I've herd of vaporware, hostageware, hijackware, etc., but never "Abandonware". Very cool.

[APillowOfClouds]

I find it interesting all of the speculation of people being absolutely sure that Jeff is still advocating for them and paying attention to the current user base during the absolute and complete absence of any comment whatsoever by the aforementioned in the past two weeks or so. I hope their optimism turns out to be well founded.

[GMan78]

jm9843
Sage Advanced User Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 127

Quote:
Originally Posted by aflat
I'm not sure I get it. They are putting search on your TV. It's still not a DVR, ie you still need a back end to search. It's almost like AppleTV. It's not really a DVR it's just a front end on your TV. I think most of us know how well that took off.

aflat, I don't think you're the only one. This may be something that people have to see for themselves before the light bulb goes off. There seems to be a lot of confusion about what it really is.

GoogleTV isn't anything like Apple TV. The big thing that I think people are missing is that this is an open development platform for the TV. It's unprecedented.

* integrates seamlessly with your existing components. Take the Logitech Google TV companion box. It includes all of the universal remote goodness that Harmony users are accustomed to. So you'll be able to route your HDMI-out from your receiver to the HDMI-in of the GTV Logitech box which then outputs to your HDTV. The Logitech GTV box will then handle harmony like functions, ir-blasting to all of your equipment - controllable from an Android phone, iPhone, iPad, or the included remote over RF or wifi. The GTV experience is then an overlay of the signal sent to the TV. It provides cohesion amongst disparate experiences while only being a keystroke away no matter what media you're consuming.

* aggregates video content and makes it all searchable in one place. Whether it's the native applications shipping with the device (Netflix, Amazon VOD, Youtube), your cable/satellite service, locally stored files, or anywhere on the web. OR, from content provided by an application written for the GTV platform that you have installed. This is where SageTV, MythTV, Boxee, XMBC, Vudu, Hulu (?), etc. come in to play.

* open-source. So it will be available to any number of device manufacturers who choose to embrace the platform. TV, Blu-ray players, game consoles, media tank devices, SageTV extender (?). Wouldn't it be great if the next TV you bought had Google TV built-in and all you had to do was spend $30 in the Android marketplace for the SageTV client? Free up that extender you already own for the bathroom!

* leverages the power of the Android platform. They demoed an example where a user spoke into his Nexus One phone and GTV searched and found a matching video to watch. See something on your smartphone that you'd like to share with the family? Push it from your phone to the GTV for everyone to see. And maybe most impressive, they demoed how you can pass the closed captioning information to the Google Translate API and it would show the closed captioning in whatever language you choose. It also supports the 50,000+ apps available now in the Android marketplace.

* SageTV specific benefit - like barney said, this is going to open up a huge market for them to compete in. It will also automatically take care of many of the things people have been clamoring for native support in Sage (Netflix, etc.). If they chose to ship a version 3 extender built on the Google TV platform, it would be a huge value-add for their customers.

Anyone care to disagree? I think this is going to be bigger than the iPad and I'm surprised that more people aren't seeing the potential.

There was a genious amongst us and we didn't even know it...JM9843 wrote the above posting on May 21rst, 2010...a full year ahead of the acquisition. If he is right, this could be extremely exciting for those of us that love our SageTV. So, I find renewed enthusiasm for a potentially stellar future with Google if JM9843 is correct. Just get me some client licenses to cross the chasm and I'll dream sweetly about my future with SaGoogleTV!

Cheers my brethren in SageTV!

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

"Abandonware"? I love it !

A new term. I've herd of vaporware, hostageware, hijackware, etc., but never "Abandonware". Very cool.

It's not MY term, and it isn't all that new. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware. It is most often utilized to describe old video games (think Commodore-64 games and such), but it's definition, as well as legal context, seems to apply here as well.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Those are one of a kind physical items, that have an intrinsic value, AND a current owner. Theft of them involves removing that property form the control of the current owner. SageTV Clients, on the other hand, are more accurately described as abandonware. US Courts have actually made explicit exemptions to the DMCA for products that are no longer available, allowing the copy protection themes (like sagetv's client licenses) to be bypassed legally.

Well, Sage certainly has intrinsic value, even if its code is not inscribed in gold or outlined with gemstones. I read a little further - Sage is definitely not even remotely close to Abandonware or the legal protections such a statute might provide.

It runs on the most modern platforms out there that together comprise about 95-98% of operating systems - Linux, Windows in many flavors, and Mac OS. This is not Commodore 64 stuff, or some old compiler, and the licenses and extenders can be sold on places like Ebay.

Its copyrights are held by a viable, working company that has not given it away or let its copyrights lapse.

It does not need to be copied for archival purposes. It does not need an archival repository.

Archival purposes aren't the same as shareware or freeware or adding to the base of owners. You aren't talking about an ancient piece of software that only runs on an old Lisa system that no one codes for or supports anymore except a tiny number of antique computer enthusiasts.

No way does Sage, after merely being acquired by Gargle, count as being abandoned 3 weeks later.

I'm still with GMan - let anyone who either owns a copy of Sage or has shown a legitimate interest in Sage, as defined by downloading the 21-day trial and being within 30 days of expiration of the trial as of the date of sale, for example, have access to a reasonable number of servers, clients and preferably a reasonable number of extenders and spare remotes to finish a system and have a backup or two of extenders and remotes.

This would also allow Google to be done with the geeks and hardware side once and for all, if that is their ultimate goal, and they could do it evil-free. Indeed, they would be viewed in a positive light as a company if they allowed that, and then said, well, we've done our part on the hardware side. You are on your own, now. Anything we do in the future may or may not work with your last-chance purchase.

Then others on this board could form support forums and plugin repositories and charge a nominal fee for membership, much like some EPG services do. The Sage customers who chose to do this would have to know that, yes, one day their HW extenders will physically fail. The they would have to fall back on a small Atom cpu with a client license. And someday, a long time from now, Win 7 will go away.

My more immediate concern is a version of Java or a MSFT-required codec or some such thing that breaks Sage, including video codecs from the card makers as well. Or that MSFT does something funky like only allow 64-bit Java on 64-bit Win 7 or gosh knows what else.

Businesses keep tax records for 7 years at least. They know who bought Sage products and whose IP addresses and emails downloaded trials. It would be easy. Give us a 30-day window to complete our systems.

An option such as this would also be at least a small step to defining Sage as Abandonware.

Everyone knows what the ugly alternatives are to this. And I am not advocating those venues to get licenses. Not at all. But in situations like this you CAN end up with that old scuba diver's saying about people who pee in wet suits - that their are 2 kinds - those who say they do, and those who lie and say they don't. :-)

[Fuzzy]

My point wasn't that no one owned it anymore, just that if it is not available being sold for a profit anymore, there aren't any financial damages to 'duplicating' it. Sage/Google would likely not be even ABLE to obtain any damages from the breach of copyright, as they have forgone the pursuit of income from the product. At most, the risk would be statutory penalties, but I don't see any federal court pursuing it.

Look, I'm not saying we should all start swapping all our keys around. I'm just saying that this ability to do so is why I am in no way even looking to other inferior products right now. EPG is taken care of with XMLTV, the plugin repository is being backed up, the only thing left to make sage a viable system for the next 5 years is the ability to expand, and I'm certain that if sage doesn't come up with a solution (new client licenses available, or checks bypassed), the community will (shared client licenses available, or checks bypassed).

[graywolf]

and the licenses and extenders can be sold on places like Ebay.

Just an FYI. Ebay has "pulled/cancelled" the auctions for Licenses.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by graywolf

Just an FYI. Ebay has "pulled/cancelled" the auctions for Licenses.

Yes, I noticed that this morning as well.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

My point wasn't that no one owned it anymore, just that if it is not available being sold for a profit anymore, there aren't any financial damages to 'duplicating' it. Sage/Google would likely not be even ABLE to obtain any damages from the breach of copyright, as they have forgone the pursuit of income from the product. At most, the risk would be statutory penalties, but I don't see any federal court pursuing it.

Look, I'm not saying we should all start swapping all our keys around. I'm just saying that this ability to do so is why I am in no way even looking to other inferior products right now. EPG is taken care of with XMLTV, the plugin repository is being backed up, the only thing left to make sage a viable system for the next 5 years is the ability to expand, and I'm certain that if sage doesn't come up with a solution (new client licenses available, or checks bypassed), the community will (shared client licenses available, or checks bypassed).

I agree with you. For example, unless Ebay knew it was a fraud, they should not have pulled licenses. They wink and nod at all sorts of weirdo versions of DVD player software. And I very much doubt those folks in China all pay their royalties to Apple for all the iPod accessories they sell.

[adone36]

eBay did not "pull" the auctions. Someone filed a complaint (Google/Sage) and per eBay's terms they immediately terminated the auctions.

[Savage1701]

I'm not following - how do you know a complaint was filed? Is there a forum on Ebay for that sort of thing? From my point of view I can't tell if the listing was pulled by the seller or Ebay, unless I was bidding and the auction was ended early by the person auctioning it. Were you a bidder? That would be the only way you would have first-hand knowledge, right?

I'm asking you that in all seriousness, because to me the only reason Ebay would stop those auctions is if they were for keygen phonies (not, of course, that Ebay ever sullies itself allowing that sort of thing to go on...).

Just curious, because that's an honest option for me if I decide to dump Sage - I own 2 client licenses, a Server license, and an HD200, all legit and bought from the Sage store with the receipts to prove it.

[herrdude]

He could have been watching it. And it could have been cancelled because Google/Sage complained and Ebay complied as per their VeRO policy. Or it could be because it seems like Ebay is cutting down on/eliminating transactions that don't result in something being shipped. For example, AppleCare products were plentiful on E-bay and the sellers would just send the code. Now, the few that are there send the whole AppleCare box (blech).

In your case, you might want to sell something tangible with the licenses like the remote or user's manual. You could say: Buy the remote and get the licenses for free

Originally Posted by Savage1701

I'm not following - how do you know a complaint was filed? Is there a forum on Ebay for that sort of thing? From my point of view I can't tell if the listing was pulled by the seller or Ebay, unless I was bidding and the auction was ended early by the person auctioning it. Were you a bidder? That would be the only way you would have first-hand knowledge, right?

I'm asking you that in all seriousness, because to me the only reason Ebay would stop those auctions is if they were for keygen phonies (not, of course, that Ebay ever sullies itself allowing that sort of thing to go on...).

Just curious, because that's an honest option for me if I decide to dump Sage - I own 2 client licenses, a Server license, and an HD200, all legit and bought from the Sage store with the receipts to prove it.

[thestig]

Taken from the bid list of one of the cancelled auctions:
Explanation: Sorry, apparently I'm not allowed to sell the software so I updated the listing.

I'm also curious to know how anyone can know for sure this was the result of Google's action.

[Monedeath]

Originally Posted by davephan

It's been about 1/2 a month since the last Narflex posting. I think hope is fading for any solutions to the SageTV client licensing problem.

Considering they've probably closed down their old office after the purchase, as well as packed up their old homes so they could move to where Google wants them, they're still in the "getting settled" stage at their new locale.

Further, it is entirely possible Google said "Sure you can do that, but don't use our time on it(or make it a 20% project)." So with all the move related and "welcome to Google" orientation stuff they're probably going through, a slow response is probably to be expected right now.

That people saw the fast turn around they did on the servers is remarkable, IMO.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by herrdude

He could have been watching it. And it could have been cancelled because Google/Sage complained and Ebay complied as per their VeRO policy. Or it could be because it seems like Ebay is cutting down on/eliminating transactions that don't result in something being shipped. For example, AppleCare products were plentiful on E-bay and the sellers would just send the code. Now, the few that are there send the whole AppleCare box (blech).

In your case, you might want to sell something tangible with the licenses like the remote or user's manual. You could say: Buy the remote and get the licenses for free

Good point.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by thestig

Taken from the bid list of one of the cancelled auctions:
Explanation: Sorry, apparently I'm not allowed to sell the software so I updated the listing.

I'm also curious to know how anyone can know for sure this was the result of Google's action.

I am curious as well. But we know it can't be Gargle because they do no evil...

[graywolf]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

I'm not following - how do you know a complaint was filed? Is there a forum on Ebay for that sort of thing? From my point of view I can't tell if the listing was pulled by the seller or Ebay, unless I was bidding and the auction was ended early by the person auctioning it. Were you a bidder? That would be the only way you would have first-hand knowledge, right?

I'm asking you that in all seriousness, because to me the only reason Ebay would stop those auctions is if they were for keygen phonies (not, of course, that Ebay ever sullies itself allowing that sort of thing to go on...).

Just curious, because that's an honest option for me if I decide to dump Sage - I own 2 client licenses, a Server license, and an HD200, all legit and bought from the Sage store with the receipts to prove it.

Do not know the WHY but it was EBay that pulled it.

We're sorry to tell you that the item isn't available for purchase anymore. We removed the listing because it likely fell into one of these three categories:

-- The listing doesn't follow eBay guidelines.
-- The item isn't allowed on eBay or can only be listed under certain conditions.
-- The listing contains pictures or words that may have violated copyright or trademark rights.

blah blah blah