Trampa Trademark & VESC Tool Discussions (serious)

Vendor Corner (SERIOUS) Vendor Issues (Serious)
#722

In order to avoid any confusion in future, Vedder updated the README file. I hope that it becomes more clear now why things are the way they are and what the does and don’ts are.

VESC® Tool

This is the source code of VESC Tool. A pre-compiled binary of both the stable release as well as the development release packaged with all the matching firmware for all supported hardware can be downloaded at http://vesc-project.com/

The stable binary is available for Linux, Windows, MacOS, Android and iOS. The development binary is available for Linux, Windows and Android and is updated every few days.

All binaries can also be downloaded free-of-charge for all platforms except for iOS, which only is available via the Apple App Store as they do not allow any other distribution channel.

## Code Contribution, Distribution and Trademark Usage

VESC is a registered trademark of Benjamin Vedder. Read the trademark policies for more information.

The “official” binary release of VESC Tool is done via VESC Project only, as that gives users a way to verify that releases, that use the registered VESC trademark, originate from the VESC Project. It is not ok to host a binary release on a different channel and use the VESC trademark for that release.

It is ok to use the github fork function to make contributions to the code. That is because 1) it is the most convenient way to make contributions and 2) the forked repository states clearly that it is a fork and points back to the main repository where the original code can be found. Further, it is easy to see what the code changes are from the forked repository compared to the main repository via github, but that information is lost in a binary release.

Forks of VESC Tool on github are not encouraged to provide a binary release in the repository. That is because there is no way to tell the final binary apart from the official release once downloaded. Further, packaging the firmware, which has to be done as an additional step from a different repository, also cannot be verified whether it is done correctly.

## Add Your Hardware to the Binary Release

If you have custom hardware and you want to add support for it in the official release of VESC Tool, you can use the following steps:

1. Go to GitHub - vedderb/bldc: The VESC motor control firmware and use the github fork function.
2. Make your changes, test them and make a pull request to the main repository.
3. If the pull request gets accepted your hardware will become part of the next official release. It will show up in the binary beta typically after a few days and in the stable version the next time a stable release is made.

1 Like
#723

Agree. I just fork the repository and want to make a small change and make it available for everyone interested. I have no evil plans. I don’t claim any trademark rights.

If Vedder wants to protect the branding, one suggestion is to remove the branding from the main branch. Keep it in a separate branch and make official releases from it. Even better, make that branch private.

9 Likes
#724

It is not Vedder’s duty to provide easy to fork content. He is generous enough to share his work under the conditions he defines and there are many people that are very grateful for that. Vedder also compiles his releases from the Git repository and in consequence the branding needs to be part of it.
As long as it is a source code Git repository (you want to work with the code base) there is no issue for Vedder to allow forks that actually link back to his repository. But offering binaries and executable code requires a re-branding. Best practice is making the change and send a pull-request. Currently there are more than 200 members in the VESC-devellopment discord with sometimes 50-60 being online simultaneously. So currently there is a lot going on and things move forward quite a bit.

#725

@rpasichnyk I hope you can see the problem now: Multiple versions of a thing that looks identical to the user but is not identical. How should users know which version to trust and how to tell them apart?
They can’t!
That is why trademarks exist. They allow users to clearly identify a source or product. That is why VESC-Tool can only be published by Vedder under the VESC-brand.

Vedder probably also wants his users to come to his place and maybe make a donation. The work on VESC-Tool is only possible if there are income streams. And donations are definitely part of that.

1 Like
#726

open source project

only capable of being published by original creator :thinking:

8 Likes
#727

Verifying the binary is exactly the same bit by bit is trivially accomplished by using checksums which would avoid all this discussion and spending money on a trademark…@rpasichnyk could provide a convenient way of downloading precompiled binaries on GitHub while Vedder uses different (or additional) forms of distribution. That argument is weak at best.

Going further, a code signing certificate is A LOT cheaper than a trademark and would also enable the original author to provide untampered binaries to their users, while “unofficial” builds would show a warning to users that download it elsewhere.

Just my 2c.

9 Likes
#728

It’s a good thing Trampa has chosen to suck the fun out of something fun like skateboarding. There is a baseline level of enjoyment here that at least makes people like him survivable.

If he worked at an auditing firm or grocery store or something he’d literally suck the life out of people. People would die.

6 Likes
#729

I respect the developer and the choices he made to protect his project and work against bad faith (which unfortunately exists) and I typically look how other projects handle things. And they do it for good reasons pretty much in the same way how Vedder handles his stuff. In the end he puts a lot of work into this software and he probably has any right to write up policies and handle things the way he handles things.

I see it this way:
In the end a lot of people benefit from the fact that the sources are open and not closed and these sources are a given horse. If you open yourself up you have to protect yourself in the same breath. Otherwise someone can grab the code and the identity and screw the original author over, or do other bad things, confuse customers, drive customers away from the authors distribution channels, or do things that are simply not in the interest of the project or authors. Since Vedder is a very very clever guy you can be sure that he thoroughly thought about all pros and cons and got in touch with a legal advisor being experts in the field of the GPL and representing other major Open Source projects.

Tldr: Vedder is a nice and exceptionally clever guy, he wrote up TM policies and a Readme and he has very good reasons. And he is not the kind of guy who does things without reasons or to annoy others but rather out of very legitimate interests.

This is the last post from me on this topic. The relevant things are written up and published on Github and on www.vesc-project.com

VESC 6 EDU, the new little brother of the VESC 6
#730

Because obviously, as we were all saying, it was ambiguous. His terms were not clear enough on this. I concede you were right but only because you have a direct line to him and we all read the TnC’s.

“I benefit financially from locking this up as much as possible”

100% he does. Its his baby and he is in control. I don’t see anyone here trying to do anything to circumnavigate this and certainly nothing that warrants your aggressive behaviour.

Nobody cares, honestly.

100% they do, and every single trademark issue you have jumped on here is just hobbyists trying to enjoy their project and not being malicious yet you treat them as if they are. That is the crux of this - these conversations should be private for your sake and theirs.

This is bullshit. According to you I could (of course I wouldn’t) take Bens code, change nothing and put my own brand on it but I couldn’t (like @rpasichnyk) provide a service that’s obviously needed for the community without breaking the TM rules?

Lets clarify something, its not Vedder being like this is it? its you. Vedder isn’t on here aggressively policing minor infractions, that’s you.

Doubt.

20 Likes
#731

Really hope this is true.

These forums are not yours to dominate with legal enforcement of a trademark you don’t even own. Reminder: you are a licensee.

This has been said before- the forums are the wrong venue for anyone to try to enforce such things. You don’t see Mozilla’s legal team arguing with people on Reddit for hours on end- it’s completely unprofessional and inappropriate.

17 Likes
#732

If your going to name drop someone then at least have the decency to tag them so they know.

.

Firstly, don’t be bringing me into your shitshow. I’m not in any way involved in anything vesc related.

Secondly, don’t be name dropping me and implying that I in any way agree with or understand your view point in this topic. I think your a delusional narcissist and generally shitty person.

.

I have spoken with vedder more than once on many topics. Much respect for him and his work. In my experience he’s a reasonable guy.

Honestly, if I got an issue with something vesc related (be it code or trademark) I would just go talk to him about it. And if he ever has a code or trademark related issue with something im working on then he knows where to find me. There’s absolutely no need for your involvement in these conversations.

You are not the author of the vesc project.
You are not the owner of the vesc software licence.
You are not the owner of the vesc trademarks.

I could not give fewer shits about your opinions on any of this.

Hope I’ve made my opinions clear. Don’t involve me in this further.

27 Likes
#733

Cool. Every post made by this account about vesc trademarks shall be flagged as “off topic” for now on.

13 Likes
#734

I’m confused here. Those are the original, unmodified vesc tool releases. That means including the vesc tool name & logo cannot count as a trademark infringement. (It’s literally the same product, consumers aren’t being misled.)

So distributing such binaries should be completely fine, as the GPL license explicitly allows it! (granted you link people back to the source code / provide it)

What’s next, I can’t copy vesc tool to a thumb drive to give to a friend because it includes the trademark?
This is like Mozilla asking all Linux package repositories to stop hosting the Firefox binaries because it contains their trademark. Completely insane!

13 Likes
#735

What if we add checksums to the binaries?

1 Like
#736

Or just move away from Trampa entirely

2 Likes
#737

You mean moving away from Vesc based ESCs?

1 Like
#738

Trampa ≠ VESC

2 Likes
#739

I know this. I’m just trying to understand what you mean. How should we move away from trampa ? Block him on here? I don’t get it.

3 Likes
#740

@b264 don’t like it ! Answer me lol

2 Likes
#741

I don’t have an answer to put right here.

1 Like