Hacking Team Xecuter working on 6.2.0

[The Catboy]

You're right. TX should just give up. Not even one person wants their useless CFW. It's just stolen code. I just repeat what angry people say. I can't think for myself. Please HELP ME!

You say that with sarcasm, when that's actually what I want to happen. I detest these cancerous teams and only want to see them out of our community.

 

[Freezerbomb]

You say that with sarcasm, when that's actually what I want to happen. I despise these cancerous teams and only want to see them out of our community.

TX just makes CFWs for games consoles. They have since 2002. If anything is cancerous here, it's being angry at things just because other people are angry at things.

 

[KoKoSchan]

You Guys assume that TX is stealing code while you downloading pirated games. Congrats. You should be the next SJW Superstar!

 

[Nononoki]

You Guys assume that TX is stealing code while you downloading pirated games. Congrats. You should be the next SJW Superstar!

Stealing software and stealing software and sell it for profit are two different things.

 

[Hugopugo]

Stealing software and stealing software and sell it for profit are two different things.

Well... one could argue that by stealing a software, you are profiting whether or not you resell that software. So when you pirate games, you are profiting by not spending any money, while still enjoying the game (which you can consider an emotional profit)

Hehe

 

[noctis90210]

making money for stealing other peoples work... nice...

 

[doofdilla]

Stealing software and stealing software and sell it for profit are two different things.

I never thought i would let me drag into this SX stealing Drama, but when i read a sentence like this i have to say something so here we go:

1) Everyone who uses the term "stealing" or even better "stealing from open source scene":

They are not "stealing", they are violating the GPL, two totally different things.
But i get it, "stealing" sounds so much severe than "violating GPL" and gives so much better opportunity to play the SJW role.

And they are not violating the GPL by making a profit from it but by not making SXOS open source.

From the GPL: "
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
this service if you wish),
"
"
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
rights."

So in conclusion, please everyone, refrain from using the term "stealing" in the future and start talking about "GPL Violation"

2) Very interesting moral code and interpretation of the law you got there. So stealing is ok since you are not selling it for profit?

Yes you are, your "profit" is that you didn't have to pay for the product you are using. So trying to draw a moral line here to duck behind is ridiculous

 

[The Catboy]

TX just makes CFWs for games consoles. They have since 2002. If anything is cancerous here, it's being angry at things just because other people are angry at things.

You act like I wasn't extremely vocal about these teams for years now, even to the point where my hatred of these teams became common knowledge in the 3DS scene and it hasn't changed in the Switch scene. As well I know their history, that doesn't change the fact that they steal code nor change the fact that this is more than likely just going to be another update based on stolen code.

 

[subcon959]

I usually try to avoid responding to bait, but I'm not sure that I actually understand your criticism, here. Atmosphere has been open source and GPL from day 1; it has literally never even had a private branch. Its intent is and has always been to serve as a Switch rendition of Luma, with the design decisions made in Luma's later years in place from the get-go and with a preference for reimplementation over patching whenever possible. I've gone to great effort to ensure that the whole thing is modular and that there's proper support so users can load whatever arbitrary extensions they'd like.

If only your users were as level-headed as you then maybe this would be a more tolerable community.

 

[wurstpistole]

I never thought i would let me drag into this SX stealing Drama, but when i read a sentence like this i have to say something so here we go:

1) Everyone who uses the term "stealing" or even better "stealing from open source scene":

They are not "stealing", they are violating the GPL, two totally different things.
But i get it, "stealing" sounds so much severe than "violating GPL" and gives so much better opportunity to play the SJW role.

And they are not violating the GPL by making a profit from it but by not making SXOS open source.

From the GPL: "
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
this service if you wish),
"
"
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
rights."

So in conclusion, please everyone, refrain from using the term "stealing" in the future and start talking about "GPL Violation"

2) Very interesting moral code and interpretation of the law you got there. So stealing is ok since you are not selling it for profit?

Yes you are, your "profit" is that you didn't have to pay for the product you are using. So trying to draw a moral line here to duck behind is ridiculous

Just dropping in to tell you to take this valuable opinion and shove it in the dedicated thread here. Please stop turning every single TX thread into this GPL-stealing crapshow that no one wants to read.

making money for stealing other peoples work... nice...

i have only now recognized that I made your signature. I am honored

 

[HadesSama94]

I usually try to avoid responding to bait, but I'm not sure that I actually understand your criticism, here. Atmosphere has been open source and GPL from day 1; it has literally never even had a private branch. Its intent is and has always been to serve as a Switch rendition of Luma, with the design decisions made in Luma's later years in place from the get-go and with a preference for reimplementation over patching whenever possible. I've gone to great effort to ensure that the whole thing is modular and that there's proper support so users can load whatever arbitrary extensions they'd like.

nice to hear that, keep up the great job !

 

[linuxares]

I think we all gotten the news now, stop fighting about stealing or not. We know they suck by taking other peoples stuff without proper credits or sourcecode.

 

[Nononoki]

1)
So in conclusion, please everyone, refrain from using the term "stealing" in the future and start talking about "GPL Violation"

2) Very interesting moral code and interpretation of the law you got there. So stealing is ok since you are not selling it for profit?

1) Yes, it's stealing.

"You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the program or its derivative works."

Copying someone else's software without permission sounds like permission sounds like piracy, don't you think?


2) I never said that it was ok, it's wrong no matter how you look at it. I never tried to justify my behavior.
And yes, those two things are very different. Nintendo would not actively go after pirates who let's say downloaded a copy of Smash Bros. But if someone were to create Smash Bros cartridges and sell them for 10 bucks a piece... they would get lawsuits thrown at them faster than they could blink. Why? Because they're different cases.

 

[HadesSama94]

Nothing will change fighting which is better, software development its always in evolution, one create and other make it better an so go on.

 

[alantgw]

Of course they would, they are speedy as always.
With some people already releasing information on how to work on 6.20 already, how could they fall behind?
They have always been showing the ability to instant catch up with the latest scene trend, as soon as the source code is made public by the authors.

Amazing as always, right?

 

[Freezerbomb]

1) Yes, it's stealing.

"You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the program or its derivative works."

Nowhere in there does it mention stealing. And even if it did, it wouldn't matter because that's not a dictionary or a book of law. TX is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If anyone has a problem with them, they should sue and see what the court has to say.

 

[linuxares]

Nowhere in there does it mention stealing. And even if it did, it wouldn't matter because that's not a dictionary or a book of law. TX is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If anyone has a problem with them, they should sue and see what the court has to say.

China? Law? HAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[alantgw]

Nowhere in there does it mention stealing. And even if it did, it wouldn't matter because that's not a dictionary or a book of law. TX is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If anyone has a problem with them, they should sue and see what the court has to say.

So if someone hit you then you cannot claim he did hit you until you go to court and proven guilty? And he is still innocent until then?
Funny enough and thanks for sharing the joke.

 

[Freezerbomb]

China? Law? HAHAHAHAHAHA

That's exactly my point. The "HAHAHAHAHAHA" part.

 

[linuxares]

That's exactly my point. The "HAHAHAHAHAHA" part.

However you like it or not, it's a violation against the GPL. Code has been found over and over that it's stolen, as no credits been given. They claim it as their own, and therefore not only a GPL violation.