Dont buy a vesc x then… drama everywhere.
3 Likes
Your being hypocrite, defending chaka’s vesc then going nuclear on onloop? Say rmrf, do you happen to have a link to chaka’s BOM, or a link of you threatening chaka to realease it?
I have a suspicion that onloop developed vesc-x in Regards to chaka’s closed source version of Vedders open source project.
If Vedders Aware then Its up to Vedder. I can understand why onloop has only released the schematic, seems some people here would be ungrateful anyway no matter what he does.
This thread just seems to be about troll feeding, so far has not added anything of value to the forum, not even personal entertainment.
1 Like
I don’t want to get involved in all the arguments of this thread but the way I see it, @onloop is running a business and he can charge what he likes for the VESC-X, if some people deem the price too high then they’ll go elsewhere.
In saying that Jason, I too am curious as to why Jason hasn’t released full documentation for the VESC-X and why he believes he doesn’t need to.
Could you please let us know why do you beleive in this?
Creative Commons: When I release my work under a CC license in one format (e.g., .pdf)… :
Once a CC license is applied to a work in one format or medium, a licensee may use the same work in any other format or medium without violating the licensor’s copyright.
All your sources - Altium project and related files (schematics, PCB, BOM, etc.) - must be shared under the same license as original.
There is a reason why the VESC is open in all other formats - KiCad schematics, Gerber/PCB, BOM list, etc. …because CC license is applied to the work and not to the format or medium the work was shared in/with. This is enforced by the chosen CC license which declares that the same work in any other format or medium must be shared and distributed under the same license.
You should know these as you referred to the CC rules when you told others that they must share changes on components list / BOM.
R, Janos
He can - this freedom is guaranteed by CC - but he can’t violate the license of the product he is changing.
R, Janos
This post by @guyguy helps to explain it. The hardware is not covered by the cc license. In fact, it is generally recommended not to use CC license for hardware. However, we still may consider releasing the source files later.
1 Like
to be honest once released someone somewhere will strip one down and build a copy of it if it works and start to produce it anyway. So weather or not you decide to release it it will get copied once release so you may as well share the files and save your self any hassle for not share in getting into issues with veddar.
Funny how this topic sounds totally different when it is you who wants something published:
And please don’t start telling me that you in fact made the changes public - we both know a PDF is not the same thing.
2 Likes
The circuit design is not the hardware itself. The design is in multiple formats - PDF , Altium - all those formats should be shared under the same license.
That would prove your commitment to the community.
R, J.
2 Likes
Edit maxid didn’t say this quote onloop did maxid just shared it.
I really like this part of that thread he happy to lay the cc license when he is trying to benefit from it but when it’s him withholding things from other he seems to not be as compliment. Think he now changing from being here for the community to being here for his business, the less he shares the less your here for the community as a community work together to get the best results but keeping thing to your self will slow that progress
The truth is Chaka set a precedence by not sharing… he opened the door.
However, there is one simple difference.
-
Chaka makes claims his hardware is upgraded but provides no details about the upgrades when asked for them. Still hasnt. The best he did was refer users to vedders forum to ‘read’
-
I make claims about new upgraded hardware. I provide specific details of changes. I also provide schematics. No one had to ask me once.
1 Like
Before vesc-x was launched there have actually been three seperate cases of vesc hardware changes being made without source files & schematics being shared.
- Chaka components upgrade. http://www.electric-skateboard.builders/t/topic-created-by-onloop-is-the-ollin-vesc-using-upgraded-components/8212
- Spinphi http://spinphi.com/index.php/component/jshopping/product/view/3/27
- Scramboards https://www.scramboards.com/vesc-vedder.html
So why is there a lynch mob targeting vesc-x and not others?
Especially since I have revealed the upgrades and published the diagrams?
4 Likes
Probably because of the layout change and new pcb. Where as upgraded 4.12 look the same so most haven’t seen or know the different upgrades. But by upgrades most are just better quality parts brough over new components.
We are here after your PCB Altium source file. Do not pretend you can not understand this. No one cares about your metal case. Vedder has no metal case at all so you can license it with whatever license you want.
It’s not about whether you like VESC-X or not; it’s not about the price of it. Everyone can be innovative and develop something new. Innovation can be also - as in this case - only enhancement to something already exists. It’s up to an innovator to decide whether to crate something new and define the rules for it or to reuse an existing solution following its rules.
How did you get to this? What if someone would make VESC-X even better? If the proper sources would be shared, it would be far more easier to continue the innovation instead of wasting time redoing from VESC 4.12. So actually those sources would speed up innovation!
R, J.
Wow, I haven’t been notified this many times in a new topic in a long time! I see a lot of accusations and assumptions and I would like to clear a few things up. Anyone wanting to know what components we have changed are welcome to them, we have listed them to several people in emails and forum messages.
Good job to @onloop for switching over to direct fets but at first glance I can see many missing capacitors, most likely due to switching from 15uf 50v caps to 4.7uf 100v. Don’t let the numbers fool you, the higher voltage caps perform better.
In regards to releasing these gerbers for this modified version. I don’t think he needs to "legally " but there is nothing stopping anyone from creating a version of there own using kicad. As vedder has said before, creating the pcb is the easy part. A vesc pcb revision can take as little as a few hours in the hands of an experienced kicad user.
Interesting to hear vedder is not going to open source v6 @onloop . Seems very uncharacteristic of him and highly unlikely. I can see how he might since it now looks like you have not been sending him any support this year judging by your donation policy.
I would ask you to rethink your willingness to send vedder support and to please start sending him donations freely as both @elkick and I do. It is the only ethical thing to do if you are going to use his development and software.
7 Likes
I agree ben needs something out of this, I am working on a more consistent transparent renumeration model through the new affiliate network. However we wanted to move beyond the donation model to something more substantial.
This year we made an offer to vedder to allow him to work full time on the vesc exclusively for the esk8 community. The timing wasnt right and the offer was declined. But the door is still open for us to work together in the future if possible… I am sure Vedder would be happy to work full time on the vesc, but he needs to do it under the right circumstances and of course it’s a big decision for him as he has a job already. However Its likely Ben has other bigger plans that don’t necessarily include esk8 related vesc developments. Plenty of opportunities knocking at his door due to the success of the vesc platform.
Anyway. We decided to move forward and invest in and develop our own hardware version in the meantime whilst Ben decides his path. We will continue to focus our contributions to the esk8 industry and community in the most beneficial ways we can as that is our primary passion.
That sounds like a whole lot of double speak for “I am not going to send him donations”. We send him donations regularly and they are quite substantial. I suggest you do the same if you are going to continue to use the VESC source.
I do commend you for at least being open about your lack of support and donations to Vedder and how you want him to join your crew. I have grown to know Benjamin well and I seriously doubt he will be pulling away from the open source community anytime soon.
10 Likes
@onloop, I hope this is constructive. I think this has just been a bit of a stumble in your marketing practices, not R&D or innovation or other tangential thing. The way it looks on this forum to offer the originator of the VESC an affiliate rewards system in an open-source community, when other vendors have set a precedent of paying a license fee to Veddar, is what has rankled so many folks (personally I’m indifferent, I’m just saying this is how others feel). We’re in an age of marketing by ethics - look at Toms Shoes, Chipotle, Warby Parker (sorry these are all U.S. brands but I assume this trend exists in AU too) and the list goes on, which means that more and more consumers look to their internal ethics when they make a purchasing decisions. So, within the culture/ethics of an open source community this just hasn’t looked great, whereas in other communities offering an affiliate program may look very generous.
Of course you’re not obligated to contribute to Veddar at all (I think all those arguments saying you’re required to fall flat), but if you did it would do a lot for the optics of this situation - even if the license amount is nominal.
So far I think your marketing has been brilliant - full of pluck and openness and I’m impressed with how much penetration you’ve gotten. That being said, no one can expect things to be perfect all the time though and launches are especially difficult. I hope this is helpful.
1 Like
Your retail prices are a tad higher so I suppose you can afford to be more generous. We make very little profit on the current vesc we sell so makes it harder to donate substantial amount like you do.
However I do think the new affiliate model will work well as it will give vedder the ability to earn a direct commission if he chooses. Also other affiliates can choose to donate their comssion, or part of, to the vedder.
I generally think the broader community should directly chip in more if they want more updates and releases. If every forum members paid just $1 per month to vedder he would be very well funded. I would also be willing to promote a fund raising campaign and use this forum as a platform to promote it.
Either vendors charge more and pass it on. Or, Vendors charge less and community pays it forward. Same same.