Let’s add to the prior art…
Don’t have a screenshot of the actual messages being scrolled, but let’s say it looks “remarkably similar.” I can provide dated proof if required.
-Max Paperno
2 Likes
@yaapu, we’re not directing your hand, only saying that you should have a layout that is original and significantly different than ours.
Looking at your interface it’s easy to think it’s a version of FlightDeck but with the artificial horizon at the center and a few items moved around. When I look at the FrskySport layout, there’s no question it’s different.
Looking at AQ-OTx-Lua, you’ll see the bar is a different style, and a different location, and the context is completely different. Not my favorite design; that interface doesn’t look at all like FlightDeck.
I’m not saying that the problem is that your bar is horizontal. I’m saying the interface taken as a whole still looks like a derivative work of FlightDeck. Get it fixed.
@tomlauzon Oh now you don’t like it… LOL. You do understand the history here, right? Maybe you weren’t involved yet, I don’t know. The original screenshots posted announcing the product (see below) were close copies, as was a lot of the code (plus the HUD copied from elsewhere)… I have it. Sure it looks like you changed it a lot after that, and whatever support and other extras you provide with your product should stand on their own ground, I have no problem with that. But this… you know what they say about imitation anyway.
Here’s the original version Florent announced:
Copy of the original post before license issues were brought up: Re__[ardupilot]Support_for_native_FrSky_telemetry(#1587).pdf (320.6 KB)
And current version.
@yaapu Personally I’d collect all the prior art you can find and the part where they originally blatantly ripped off unreleased/GPL work given to Florent in confidence, and counter the bogus DMCA. If you need any supporting documents, let me know.
Some good examples posted here already, and another: https://github.com/wolkstein/MavLink_FrSkySPort
From comments in the AQ-Lua code.
Parts inspired by/borrowed from:
- http:// diydrones.com/forum/topics/amp-to-frsky-x8r-sport-converter
- https://github.com/chsw/MavLink_FrSkySPort
- https://github.com/scottflys/mavsky
- https:// github.com/wolkstein/MavLink_FrSkySPort
- and others
EDIT: added PDF of original C&T product announcement post on GitHub.
5 Likes
[quote=“tomlauzon, post:83, topic:21784, full:true”]I’m saying the interface taken as a whole still looks like a derivative work of FlightDeck. Get it fixed.[/quote]given all the available evidence it is your layout which looks like a derivative work and you should get your layout fixed, by your own argument. Or you back off and accept that others may be as close to your layout as you are close to other’s layouts. You are simply not in a position to command anyone to “Get it fixed”.
I can understand that you feel a need to protect your business, but this doesn’t change the facts. So back off. If you think your layout is original, then get a protection of trademarks or however that’s called in your area, and present it to us. Otherwise, back off.
I strongly want to encourage every layouter to design their layout according to their liking, and to ignore whatever C&T thinks it has to say. That’s what we do here and strives the community, to work towards getting things closer to our liking, IMHO at least :).
@mpaperno
thx for bringing in some reality
3 Likes
Well this is turning into an interesting thread!
So first my comment on yaapu copying the look of C&T I still think is a valid comment. Here are a few of the previous screens:
(This is the teensy project that I was one of the developers on)
(more on this one later)
These screen designs are clearly very different. Yes, there are lots of different ways to design a UI.
Here is the C&T screen:
Here is the yaapu screen:
One is clearly a derivative copy of the other. For an opensource developer to copy the look and feel of a commercial project has probably been done hundreds of times before, it’s a natural thing to do. Mostly this is pointed out politely (as I think I did, hopefully), and usually the developer will adapt it so it has it’s own design and is no longer a problem. Which is what yaapu started to do, calmly and politely. This is a good process.
In the meantime however, lots of random handwaving and pitchforks have appeared that have not helped at all, and C&T have waded straight in with a takedown notice and dcma complaint to github and had the project taken down. As someone else pointed out, that’s not the way to make friends and influence people. This is not a good process, and none of this does any good to anyone involved, or the project/ecosystem as a whole.
Where it starts to get really interesting is @mpaperno assertion that the c&t code is a direct derivative of his work, which is GPL, along with documented proof. It sounds like there is enough smoke to suggest a fire, and C&T should answer this one way or another. If this is the case, C&T should release their code under the GPL, as required (note this still doesn’t stop them from charging for it, which is fine and lots of companies do that).
<soap box>
I will note that having read through the github issues, pull requests and related forum threads, I’m surprised C&T ever bothered to get this far. There’s so much negativity against the idea of someone trying to a) add improvements, while b) making money, as if capitalism is the enemy of opensource. There are some absolutely ludicrous statements around that earlier in this thread and in github. For those that believe that, open your eyes and welcome to reality. People need to make a living, and people who make a living are in a far stronger position to contribute to opensource. That’s how successful opensource projects work, that you all consume for free. How do you think this project (Ardupilot) gets paid for? It’s certainly not free to develop and run and C&T are one of the partners that contribute to the development of this amazing autopilot that you all get for nothing (http://ardupilot.org/about/Partners), as well as making a significant improvement to the opensource code. That works by you paying for their commercial offerings (IN AN ENTIRELY OPTIONAL FREE MARKET WAY), in the same way that you pay for any number of the commercial autopilots, gps units, frames, drones, subs etc that contribute to this project and enable you to still build drones yourself for very little money, rather than having to buy an off the shelf DJI unit. If you don’t like the product, don’t buy it, but at the same time don’t try to kill it, as all you’re doing is killing the wider project and community.
</soap box>
ps - I have absolutely no bias or attachment to any of these projects, other than the odd very minor code improvements.
2 Likes
I have no problem with anyone making money from programming, open source or otherwise, in fact I do it myself quite often (for a living). But there are different ways to go about it (esp. with open source)… taking other people’s work, ignorance of GPL/licensing, and stunts like this DMCA notice maybe aren’t the best way. IMHO the code is secondary to what C&T is offering anyway, and the whole proprietary Lua code thing is a bit ridiculous, especially given the history where it all comes from (other people’s code/ideas) and is certainly not in the spirit or OpenTX. Ironically I have been one of the few people at OTX recently who think it’s OK that others may make money off peripheral projects (or e.g. providing support, custom setups, code, whatever). But again, there are different ways to go about it.
The last statement I got from Florent/C&T on the matter in Nov. 2015: “The materials we will distribute does not contain any of your materials or any GPL licensed code.” After that all the original screenshots were taken down, the announcement post was edited, and they moved some things around on screen. They did not send me any new code to review after that. That’s all I know and at the time it didn’t seem worth pursuing further. I knew it was just a matter of time before someone came up with an OS version anyway.
@fnoop let me affirm that FlightDeck contains no GPL code and is different from any other code that is publicly available. When our interface was released we changed our layout upon request to distinguish our design from other layouts and overcome any objection. FlightDeck doesn’t look like that original version of our previous telemetry script posted above. We also reviewed line by line to make sure that every line of code was written by us and not copied from another source. We made changes back then, all we were asking is for @yaapu to do the same regarding the layout (code is fine.)
@yaapu’s original version is already significantly different, and actually brings a bunch of improvements IMO. Please, you can’t say those 2 AHI’s are the same…
3 Likes
Revisionist much? That was NOT the original objection… using proprietary and GPL code was! So you’re saying the code wasn’t changed back in Nov. 2015, just the layout?
Hi to all.
I just wanted to announce that v1.0 of my free script, the one mentioned above, is finally available in my repository.
This is the final layout:
It does cover also the hardware/cable part on the wiki area.
All comments are welcome!
4 Likes
did, now some flights with Yaapu telemetry script on my Taranis Q X7, just perfect ! the quintessence of opensource projects!
1 Like
Hi everybody,
I released a new version of my script with many new features:
-
per model configuration menu
-
dual battery support
-
min/max values display
-
vocal fence with min/max altitude and max distance alerts
-
vocal timer alert every n minutes
-
VFAS,CURR,Alt,VSpd,GAlt,Hdg,GSpd,Fuel,Tmp1,Tmp2 passed to OpenTX
feedback is very welcome!
3 Likes
I just replaced your previous Rev on my Taranis X9D with this version and and have to say it’s very nice. The configurator is a big plus. Thanks for the effort Alex!
You may want to consider posting this in another thread besides Rants&Raves
Incredible work yaapu !
Thanks !
Hi Dave,
thanks for the feedback!
What would be a good place for this kind of posts?
https://discuss.ardupilot.org/c/ground-control-software/other-gcs
how about this one?
a blog post would have been my suggestion too 
fantastic work!
I agree a blog post would be good although your idea of using Ground Control Station is interesting as it serves some of those purposes.
I now want! Well done.
Thanks!
discussion about my telemetry script has moved to blogs:
https://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/an-open-source-frsky-telemetry-script-for-the-taranis-x9d-x9e-and-qx7-radios/26443