21 ms·

I can't bring myself to be bothered by this - and wouldn't be even if I were using these devices. For crying out loud, equipment with unique recorded serial nu

I can't bring myself to be bothered by this - and wouldn't be even if I were using these devices. For crying out loud, equipment with unique recorded serial numbers was stolen, so the company is blocking the specific stolen devices. That makes perfect sense to me. Objecting to how they do it (bulking up software with a list of serials, requiring software to phone home, whatever) is fine and their customers have a legit basis to be unhappy if it's impacting their use, but people with the stolen devices? Those aren't SDRPlay's customers because SDRPlay hasn't been paid for those devices. Quoting from the article: In a PR disaster the manufacturer gives "Because we can" as an explanation to make end user devices worthless. I'll note that this complaint very carefully leaves out a key word: STOLEN. I'm not seeing the PR disaster except that it's going to seriously hurt their image in the community of people who steal stuff from warehouses. tiny violin plays sad music If you've purchased one of these, as I said above you're not a customer of SDRPlay or one of its distributors because payment is part of a vendor-customer relationship. You're someone who bought "Bose" speakers out of the back of a white van in a parking lot. Get your money back from the seller - you may even be able to get the police report from SDRPlay if you need it for a chargeback - and tell SDRPlay where you bought it so they can try to track down the thieves. Edit: reading the original SDRPlay forum posts, they ID the specific ebay sellers, note that this is the third time they've had things stolen like this and sold by the same accounts, and note that "We will NOT penalise innocent people so that assumption that this is our intent is frankly WRONG!!" Basically they're likely looking for anything like saved packaging, shipping return addresses, etc. to be turned over to the police. Also, this whole thing is about (in this case at least) a total of 39 devices. We're not talking about thousands of people affected. SDRPlay: https://www.sdrplay.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3225 https://www.sdrplay.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3225

tinus_hn 8y ago
In other news, try using a stolen iPhone (since the last 6 years). I came across this article: https://www.cultofmac.com/246755/why-ios-7s-activation-lock-is-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen/ https://www.cultofmac.com/246755/why-ios-7s-activation-lock-... Which in typical Apple whining style complains how the sky will fall due to this new feature. And then it didn’t.
sandworm101 8y ago
How far can we take this? Theft is a big deal for manufacturers. They spend good money on preventing it. But will they continue to spend good money on prevention if instead they can just brick any lost devices? The nightmare is a manufacturer turning to a whitelist model, one where post-purchase the consumer must legitimize their purchase before use of the device. That DRM. There is massive overlap between the community of people who purchase SDR products and the group that will riot in the streets in protest of DRM. Anyone who purchases tech devices owns some "pirate" content. When you buy a motherboard you don't know the pedigree of its hundreds of components. Trace each one and you will find a licensing or counterfeit issue somewhere. Should everyone be able to automagically brick counterfeit or stolen devices when those devices have been integrated, resold three times, and are now in the hands of innocent consumers? There are policy-based principals in western law that have long prevented such behavior in other arenas. See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 Not exactly on point, but an example of how we protect good-faith purchasers, even black-market purchase of "stolen" goods.
- gambiting 8y ago
  While I agree with you mostly, this is really a basic issue - devices stolen from the manufacturer are still owned by the manufacturer. They are, and should be, free to do with them however they please. It's a basic question of ownership and control over one's property in here.
  - sandworm101 8y ago
    I'd have to know more about the "theft". I suspect that this wasn't a robbery in the dead of night. UCC § 2-403 states: When goods have been delivered under a transaction of purchase the purchaser has such power even though ... the delivery was procured through fraud punishable as larcenous under the criminal law. https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 Basically, if an employee to other person who was "entrusted" with these goods by the manufacturer sells them, then innocent purchasers take full legal title. The good-faith purchaser is now the legal owner even if they purchased the goods from someone who wasn't a legal owner. The goods don not belong to the manufacturer. This is specifically to protect innocent people from debates between manufacturers and distributors, even where those distributors have stolen goods. The knock-on effect of this is that people who buy things in good faith from distributors don't have to worry about manufacturers (or police) raiding their homes ... which appears to be exactly what this manufacturer is doing by bricking these devices.

tinus_hn 8y ago

In other news, try using a stolen iPhone (since the last 6 years). I came across this article: https://www.cultofmac.com/246755/why-ios-7s-activation-lock-is-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen/ https://www.cultofmac.com/246755/why-ios-7s-activation-lock-... Which in typical Apple whining style complains how the sky will fall due to this new feature. And then it didn’t.

sandworm101 8y ago

How far can we take this? Theft is a big deal for manufacturers. They spend good money on preventing it. But will they continue to spend good money on prevention if instead they can just brick any lost devices? The nightmare is a manufacturer turning to a whitelist model, one where post-purchase the consumer must legitimize their purchase before use of the device. That DRM. There is massive overlap between the community of people who purchase SDR products and the group that will riot in the streets in protest of DRM. Anyone who purchases tech devices owns some "pirate" content. When you buy a motherboard you don't know the pedigree of its hundreds of components. Trace each one and you will find a licensing or counterfeit issue somewhere. Should everyone be able to automagically brick counterfeit or stolen devices when those devices have been integrated, resold three times, and are now in the hands of innocent consumers? There are policy-based principals in western law that have long prevented such behavior in other arenas. See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 Not exactly on point, but an example of how we protect good-faith purchasers, even black-market purchase of "stolen" goods.

gambiting 8y ago
While I agree with you mostly, this is really a basic issue - devices stolen from the manufacturer are still owned by the manufacturer. They are, and should be, free to do with them however they please. It's a basic question of ownership and control over one's property in here.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  I'd have to know more about the "theft". I suspect that this wasn't a robbery in the dead of night. UCC § 2-403 states: When goods have been delivered under a transaction of purchase the purchaser has such power even though ... the delivery was procured through fraud punishable as larcenous under the criminal law. https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-403 Basically, if an employee to other person who was "entrusted" with these goods by the manufacturer sells them, then innocent purchasers take full legal title. The good-faith purchaser is now the legal owner even if they purchased the goods from someone who wasn't a legal owner. The goods don not belong to the manufacturer. This is specifically to protect innocent people from debates between manufacturers and distributors, even where those distributors have stolen goods. The knock-on effect of this is that people who buy things in good faith from distributors don't have to worry about manufacturers (or police) raiding their homes ... which appears to be exactly what this manufacturer is doing by bricking these devices.