chrisdglong

ty_ger07
Is functionality copyrighted even if you use 100% original code to obtain the desired results? If you could copyright 2+2=4 (that's a function), we would have an even more defunct legal system than we already have.

Like Unwinder, I do not believe this line of BS from EVGA. Besides EVGA and Unwinder, I don't think any of us ever will know. 

How does EVGA 'copy and paste' the source code (original Unwinder quote which he since redacted by admitting that actually EVGA never once had a copy of his source code) if EVGA never had the source code in the first place? If Unwinder changes his opinion from 'copy / paste' to 'same functionality' it is Unwinder who I don't trust because he changed his story and is backpedalling.

Oh, and chris, you should be ashamed of yourself for all of the wrong forum section Precision 'copy and paste' forum spamming you did.

Don't quote this text. I don't want to be plagiarized.

sk2play
Can some programmers explain the difference in layman's terms (I a programmer retard) in how variations of OFFICE can have different code yet be MS compatible.  So we have CorelOffice, OpenOffice Apache OpenOffice, LibreOffice (part of Ubuntu Linux) and NeoOffice all with claims of excellence and up to date compatibility with MS Office variations.
 
Is this the same situation with PrecisionX 15 vs RivaTuner programming?

Exactly! Right on the mark.

In regards to the driver corruption debate which started this whole mess with the EVGA community versus Unwinder versus EVGA the company, isn't the whole 'uninstall Precion, select not to save profiles, reboot, and reinstall graphics drivers' -- a solution which has solved so many people's driver issues -- a form of substantiating evidence that maybe Precision does corrupt people's drivers in some way for some reason?

Yeah, I don't see how EVGA copied the code when the functionality is less, there are bugs that didn't exist, AND even Unwinder himself said EVGA does not have the code. People need to spread lies. There are those who blatantly hate EVGA and apparently they're riding on this incident to spread their hate and bash EVGA.

What EVGA did wrong was to use the same UI, which does not require any copy-pasting. They just replicated it. They either thought (short-sightedly) that UI elements / visuals cannot be copyrighted, so why not use them. Now that's up to debate. My issue with EVGA's decision is "why take the risk?" "Why put a stick inside a bees nest?" Whether they're right or wrong, it's academic, especially at this point. From a managerial point of view, this was a terrible decision.

On top of that, it seems the programmers they hired/used did a lazy job and embarrassed EVGA further. I'm not at a position to say what exactly those programmers did but there may be some attempts to reverse engineer the hardware monitoring bits from previous Precision. I'd like to see EVGA coming forward with it, now that it's all over the place, and because this spread of rumors/misinformation is hurting EVGA more.

candle_86
Well I'm inclined to trust evga on the fact the own the UI as they stated, and if the own the UI, unwinder has no legal claim to it, and if he releases software with it, EVGA could send a cease and desist letter to any company hosting it.

That's a very interesting point.

ty_ger07
Look at it this way: Unwinder made back-room deals to purposely upset EVGA and refused to support his software for EVGA (refuses to answer people's questions on this forum, doesn't fix bugs, and doesn't release updates for many months). The reasons he chose to do so may or may not good; that is only opinion. But that situation forced EVGA to find another team of individuals to design and support a piece of software to fill the same niche from now and into the future.

Unwinder refused to support the software. The software was in danger of becoming dead. Unwinder threatened to terminate his contract. What was EVGA supposed to do? Just let the project die? Why wouldn't a piece of software designed to fill the same niche have the same functionality? Is functionality copyrighted (even if you use totally different code to obtain similar results)? Why does Unwinder care now if he didn't care about the software before? Is Unwinder just trying to cause a fight?

We don't know whether EVGA owned the UI. If EVGA did own the UI, then I don't see that EVGA did much wrong. Clearly the backend was original code created by EVGA's team and not copied from Unwinder. Only the front-end (UI) is in question.

Now, why would Unwinder be upset? This has been his pet project for decades and very likely he would become jealous or upset if someone else came along to replace him.

EVGA claims that they own the UI. Assuming that is true, the majority of their work was associated with creating the backend. They made the backend to overclock and monitor video cards (a function which is copyrighted?) and then made sure that the backend would use the same resource IDs to work with their existing front-end. Then, to get the product out the door, they copied the EULA (are EULAs copyrighted?) but forgot to edit the irrelevant information. Egg on the face for not polishing the product more, sure, but illegal?

This is an absolute fallacy.
 
You claim to be of the community and then, lie to the community directly following. (There's a tremendous amount of supporting evidence proving EVGA in one way or another, copied a great deal of the code)
 
Unwinder had an EXISTING CONTRACT with another company before the EVGA contract and thus, supplied EVGA with his current progress.
 
EVGA then stopped the $$$. 
MSI did NOT stop the $$$.
 
MSI got updates.
Precision did not.
 
EVGA got upset and then replicated (Copied) the source code and built from that copy.
 
That my friend, is stealing. There is no justification, he refused to support the software because the $$$$ ended from EVGA.
 
The UI WAS a direct copy. The EULA, a direct copy. The code that we CAN SEE, copies and attempts to reverse-engineer code that is not theirs to reverse-engineer.
 
NOBODY came along to replace him or has because if there was, they wouldn't be reverse-engineering every single update Afterburner has and failing miserably to do so.
 
And according to Ragin (Which I said this yesterday that Ragin may not be correct...): http://www.overclock.net/.../300_100#post_22588511
 

You are absolutely in the right to call them out, for having code that is obviously in both programs (whether it is in use or not). You deserve full credit, and let's face it, your work is the entire inspiration of what they are doing.

 
It is what it is. 
 
Clearly you've made this into a personal crusade when the ordeal is rather simple (@Ty_ger07).
 
It was never EVGA's IP, it was never EVGA's original programming...It was never EVGA's period. Done. End.
 
I don't even like Unwinder but, his Intellectual Property was stolen and bastardized -- He's deserves credit in the very least for this bastardization.
 
 

theGryphon
Yeah, I don't see how EVGA copied the code when the functionality is less, there are bugs that didn't exist, AND even Unwinder himself said EVGA does not have the code. People need to spread lies. There are those who blatantly hate EVGA and apparently they're riding on this incident to spread their hate and bash EVGA.

What EVGA did wrong was to use the same UI, which does not require any copy-pasting. They just replicated it. They either thought (short-sightedly) that UI elements / visuals cannot be copyrighted, so why not use them. Now that's up to debate. My issue with EVGA's decision is "why take the risk?" "Why put a stick inside a bees nest?" Whether they're right or wrong, it's academic, especially at this point. From a managerial point of view, this was a terrible decision.

On top of that, it seems the programmers they hired/used did a lazy job and embarrassed EVGA further. I'm not at a position to say what exactly those programmers did but there may be some attempts to reverse engineer the hardware monitoring bits from previous Precision. I'd like to see EVGA coming forward with it, now that it's all over the place, and because this spread of rumors/misinformation is hurting EVGA more.

 
This was proven incorrect at large, fyi.
 
Most of the information is found on Guru.
 
 

kram36

maskedmenace
Most of the information is found on Guru.

On this (non) issue, you should go there and stay there about it.
 
You're not going to convince this community that has been treated above and beyond of any computer parts manufacture on the planet, that it's a bad company, not going to happen. EVGA bends over backwards for it's customers. EVGA is the most fair company I have ever seen.
 
I'm sure EVGA gave Alex every chance to do the right thing and in the end EVGA had to part ways with him. Every time I saw that cat on here he was crying over members here having issues with the software he put out. Heck he acted like he did this for free and everyone could kiss his butt.
 
To be honest I'm glad EVGA is done with him. EVGA is a great company to it's customers, that's the bottom line and this little tiff with Alex isn't going to change that fact.
 
 

Fair?
 
X79 Classifieds. Z77's...P67's...
 
LOL you call that FAIR?
 
You can even read about the hundreds of people that got screwed over, STILL IN THE FORUM.
 
Jacob's lie about compensation of the X79 classifieds (because they were still broken 2 years after launch) is still there as well.
 
Just because they bend over for a minority of you, doesn't mean they don't leave the rest of us to the wolves.
 
Afterburner is actually extremely familiar with those situations which, ironically, was our last discussion.
 
Talk about blind faith -- I laid out the real timeline above. EVGA was supplied with a nearly finished product because Alex had been designing it with MSI LONG BEFORE Evga ever paid a $.
 
When EVGA stopped the $$$$ and MSI didn't, that's when EVGA parted ways.
 
I'd suggest you educate yourself on the real timeline -- Not the coolaid that EVGA constantly feeds you.
 
Since then Precision has become a dung pile. A horrible waste-of programming space -- Why? They ditched the only one that could make it work.
 
I've been here since Beta -- A product that was clearly never theirs.
 
Time to get some fresh air bro -- You need it! 

@ Masked Menace: I believe EVGA Precision was first, meaning previous to MSI AfterBurner, which if true pokes some holes in your argument.. you're the first person I've noticed say otherwise. I was here when Unwinder walked away from EVGA, not the other way around, and that was because some users were blaming his RTSS for damaging their GPUs.. EVGA never made such a claim, but Unwinder had a hissyfit and off he went. EVGA did not dump him. From your last 2 posts, you appear to have issues with EVGA beyond this current issue though, so what's really up? Bringing up X79 is just putting forth a straw man argument, and it's kind of hard to respect anything said once that starts.  
 
The GUI was certainly EVGA and users. I use one that was designed for KingPin - looks like a brick wall with graffiti. 
 

Nereus
@ Masked Menace: I believe EVGA Precision was first, meaning previous to MSI AfterBurner, which if true pokes some holes in your argument.. you're the first person I've noticed say otherwise. I was here when Unwinder walked away from EVGA, not the other way around, and that was because some users were blaming his RTSS for damaging their GPUs.. EVGA never made such a claim, but Unwinder had a hissyfit and off he went. EVGA did not dump him. From your last 2 posts, you appear to have issues with EVGA beyond this current issue though, so what's really up? Bringing up X79 is just putting forth a straw man argument, and it's kind of hard to respect anything said once that starts.  
 
The GUI was certainly EVGA and users. I use one that was designed for KingPin - looks like a brick wall with graffiti. 
 

Bringing up an example by which EVGA dissapointed customers at mass, lied about it and then never came through is putting forth a straw man argument?
 
I think there are a couple thousand users that would instantaniously disagree with you. 
 
The X79 was the biggest catastrophe EVGA has ever had...And the Dark actually functioning...Was their only saving grace.
 
That being said, Guru3d paints a very different picture and according to Unwinder, development began long before the EVGA contract entered the waters.
 
When it comes to who to believe...I can side with Unwinder, which again, I beta tested precision and it was pretty much a direct copy of Afterburner (Why this current situation, to me, isn't at all surprising) or I can side with EVGA who has fundamentally screwed over their motherboard customer base in the past.
 
Not expecting a whole lot from the fanboys but, straw man? LOL, they didn't even delete the 100+ page post of broken X79's from the forums when they swapped formats -- Might be worth the read.
 
Dirty is dirty is dirty. - Quickly find myself reminded why I don't post here anymore -- Oh, that's right -- Fanboys don't think with their big heads!

maskedmenace

Nereus
@ Masked Menace: I believe EVGA Precision was first, meaning previous to MSI AfterBurner, which if true pokes some holes in your argument.. you're the first person I've noticed say otherwise. I was here when Unwinder walked away from EVGA, not the other way around, and that was because some users were blaming his RTSS for damaging their GPUs.. EVGA never made such a claim, but Unwinder had a hissyfit and off he went. EVGA did not dump him. From your last 2 posts, you appear to have issues with EVGA beyond this current issue though, so what's really up? Bringing up X79 is just putting forth a straw man argument, and it's kind of hard to respect anything said once that starts.  
 
The GUI was certainly EVGA and users. I use one that was designed for KingPin - looks like a brick wall with graffiti. 
 

Bringing up an example by which EVGA dissapointed customers at mass, lied about it and then never came through is putting forth a straw man argument?
 
I think there are a couple thousand users that would instantaniously disagree with you. 
 
The X79 was the biggest catastrophe EVGA has ever had...And the Dark actually functioning...Was their only saving grace.
 
That being said, Guru3d paints a very different picture and according to Unwinder, development began long before the EVGA contract entered the waters.
 
When it comes to who to believe...I can side with Unwinder, which again, I beta tested precision and it was pretty much a direct copy of Afterburner (Why this current situation, to me, isn't at all surprising) or I can side with EVGA who has fundamentally screwed over their motherboard customer base in the past.
 
Not expecting a whole lot from the fanboys but, straw man? LOL, they didn't even delete the 100+ page post of broken X79's from the forums when they swapped formats -- Might be worth the read.
 
Dirty is dirty is dirty. - Quickly find myself reminded why I don't post here anymore -- Oh, that's right -- Fanboys don't think with their big heads!

Yep, definitely see ulterior motives with this cat to go on and on and on stoking the flame about a (non) issue.
 
EVGA has given two responses now. Bottom line, they didn't steal from Alex.

EVGA_JacobF
Important announcement:
 

We understand that there is a lot of confusion and misinformation in the internet community about Guru3D’s article titled “Did EVGA just Steal the Rivatuner RTSS design concept into PrecisionX 15 ?”. We would like to clarify the following:

1. Precision’s original main GUI concept was designed and provided to the community by EVGA in 2008.
2. The RivaTuner control panel and backend code in prior versions of Precision were developed and is owned by the RivaTuner developer. EVGA does not own the source code for any RivaTuner code. EVGA paid for the development and distribution rights per the contract.
3. The new EVGA PrecisionX 15 was coded from scratch by EVGA without copying any of the RivaTuner code.
4. Both RivaTuner and EVGA PrecisionX 15 make use of the NVIDIA NVAPI to communicate with NVIDIA graphics cards and drivers, which is owned and provided by NVIDIA.

Some people mentioned that the file structure in EVGA PrecisionX 15 is similar to the previous version of Precision. During development, we referenced the USF skin format (which has been published by RivaTuner developer at Guru3D forums in 2009 http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=3316361&postcount=8 to allow the community to create their own skins). The above mentioned feature would make it simple to allow users to recompile any previous skins to work with the new version of PrecisionX 15. However, we do understand the confusion caused by trying to maintain this feature and we will change it in the next release.
 
Next, it was also mentioned that the code contains text references (not code) to the word “RivaTuner” and the word “RTTSH.dll”, a RivaTuner file. This actually came from the user interface localization / help (wording). During the original Precision development, EVGA worked with several outside firms to help translate user interface help files into various languages, unfortunately this is a misprint in the translation files and will be fixed. Again, no RivaTuner code was ever used in EVGA PrecisionX 15. We apologize to the RivaTuner developer for this error.
 
Originally our goal was to add more features such as 64bit OSD, Steam, updated voltage controls, and more to a new version without changing the Precision user’s experience that they were already familiar with. Unfortunately, the “similarities” between the two programs have led people to believe that EVGA might have copied the code and design from RivaTuner, which is not the case. Given the circumstances, in order to remove any questions and to further differentiate it visually from the previous versions of EVGA Precision, EVGA has decided to listen to the community and suspend the downloading of EVGA PrecisionX 15 temporarily while these updates are being implemented.
 
Please remember, Precision was and is built for the community and without the community EVGA Precision and many other overclocking utilities would not be where they are today. It is EVGA’s commitment to continue investing in the development of PrecisionX by adding the features the community asks for while providing it free of charge!
 
Thank You,
EVGA

This is why i choose to not believe what i read on guru3d, because it smelled more like blind rage than anything else. I used to go to guru3d all the time for my computer news, and i had lots of respect for hilbert, but how he made a front page article with little to no facts in it.... i did not know hilbert was trying to compete with charlie over at semi accurate. Ah well, there will always be people with too much time on their hands...

jerzeeloon
Shameless thiefs

I wouldn't call guru3d thieves, shameless slanderers, yes.

^Yep. I'm with you all the way. It's crazy- far worse situations happen with other things like schools, cable providers, grocers, insurance companies, car companies and the such yet no one blacklists them or refuses to do business with them because of it. This is planet earth, and last time I checked, it wasn't a perfect place.

 
I'll still buy EVGA in the future.

kram36

Drerex
EVGA Precision X 15 is a different animal on the backend.  There is no reason to be pointing blame at EVGA or even Alex.  Just because the gui shows similarities doesn't mean its a copy/paste on the code level.  Even the compiling and decompiling  is different.  I had to have Jacob bring me up to speed when giving it a test run on the skin.  This is something that has been blown way out of proportion.  Time to give it a rest and move on.  There is know need to call anyone thieves because both Alex and EVGA as well as guru3d are good people.   

Well I highly respect you Drerex. I have to say though it's hard to see people in a good light when guru3d post such an article probably without conferring with EVGA about it first, then Alex stoking the fire when he has to know the code is EVGA's.

I stoped going to them years ago, when they banned me for being as the ban says, Right Wingeg

so you got banned lol you should have said that in your response on this subject . but as it was I gave you no cred what so ever -- got love those gut feeling.