I feel like tort reform is a first step to improving the USA.  A case that's just strong enough to be heard can waste everyone's time and money.  Anybody with such a case becomes a threat, so a lot of effort is spent trying to make sure nobody has such a case.  It drives up the cost of doing business in America.  I'm unclear if liability insurance is really protection for the business or a target on their backs.

....I mean I don't know anything about the Ubiquiti vs Cambium case, I'm just kvetching.

On 12/18/2020 4:31 AM, Steve D wrote:
This is probably it.  The settlement is likely just a "go away now" move on both sides.  I recall reading a well written article early on when it was first announced that Ubnt basically didn't have a case, they just wanted the court ordered stop-sell delay long enough to likewise push the AC products and backwards compatibility of their own products.

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:32 AM Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com <mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    Yeah, I think Cambium's goal was probably to just drag it out long
    enough that the product wasn't really needed anymore. I suspect
    that at this point, the majority of the 802.11N based networks
    that are going to be converted to ePMP already have been, and
    Elevate never supported the AC gear anyway and even if it did,
    there would probably be a lot less interest now than there was
    back then. It was a very useful tool at the time, and saved a lot
    of us a ton of work, but it pretty much served its purpose and can
    be left to die at this point.

    On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:17 AM Cameron Crum <cc...@murcevilo.com
    <mailto:cc...@murcevilo.com>> wrote:

        I believe the claim was that Cambium hacked Ubnt's hardware so
        they could figure out how to load Cambium firmware onto Ubnt
        radios. This would save a wisp a ton of money if they decided
        to switch platforms as they would not have to buy new CPEs,
        just APs. They found some technicality in the DMCA, I believe,
        and it looks like either Cambium decided it might go against
        them (highly likely when trying to convince non-technical
        judges)  or they decided it would just be less expensive to
        end it now. What looks to those of us who understand things
        like radio chipsets better than the average joe public like a
        no-brianer, is most likely incomprehensible to a judge or a
        selection of random people in a jury pool. Heck I've seen
        supposed "distinguished trial judges" not be able to tell
        which party is which in a property dispute because one party
        claimed to be the other by filing brand new articles of
        incorporation with the same name. I would expect trying to
        convince them the radio hardware was not proprietary would be
        tantamount to a fat man climbing mount everest without oxygen.
        Maybe "someone" will figure out a way to do this independently
        just in case they don't want to swap thousands of CPEs. I
        can't imagine it would be too difficult, but you might open
        yourself up to a new lawsuit.

        On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 12:21 PM Chuck McCown via AF
        <af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>> wrote:

            So who is who here.  I guess I am UBNT?
            Paint my mounts sounds like flash my radio with the code
            of others.
            So UBNT could legally claim you cannot put Cambium code in
            their radios?
            So were UBNT customers putting Cambium software in UBNT
            radios?
            Or were people putting UBNT software in Cambium radios?
            I remember it happening at the time.  I just don’t
            remember any details.
            The article says that the settlement involved Cambium
            paying UBNT.
            Assuming that is correct, the Cambium must have done
            something wrong.
            *From:* Craig Schmaderer
            *Sent:* Saturday, December 12, 2020 11:02 AM
            *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
            *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google News - Cambium Networks
            settles a lawsuit with Ubiquiti Inc for selling hacking
            firmware

            Chuck, I look at it like, if you said I could not paint
            your mounts after I buy them, and I decide to paint them
            blue using Rustoleum paint, you would sue Rustoleum and I
            for breaking your EUA

            *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com
            <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>> *On Behalf Of *Chuck
            McCown via AF
            *Sent:* Saturday, December 12, 2020 11:33 AM
            *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com
            <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>>
            *Cc:* ch...@go-mtc.com <mailto:ch...@go-mtc.com>
            *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google News - Cambium Networks
            settles a lawsuit with Ubiquiti Inc for selling hacking
            firmware

            I never understood the argument. What exactly did Cambium
            do wrong?

            *From:*Steve Jones

            *Sent:*Saturday, December 12, 2020 10:09 AM

            *To:*AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group

            *Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Google News - Cambium Networks
            settles a lawsuit with Ubiquiti Inc for selling hacking
            firmware

            I hope cambium does it again with something else ubnt now
            just to spite them. Whatever they paid has to be nothing
            compared to the volume of customers they rolled over

            On Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 7:47 AM Jaime Solorza
            <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:

                
https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEFvp2xGH5DLp_0VFw74VGwYqGAgEKg8IACoHCAowjo_YBzCo6Ugwi9XQBg?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen
                
<https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEFvp2xGH5DLp_0VFw74VGwYqGAgEKg8IACoHCAowjo_YBzCo6Ugwi9XQBg?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen>

-- AF mailing list
                AF@af.afmug.com
                http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
                <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>

            
------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- AF mailing list
            AF@af.afmug.com
            http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
            <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>

            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- AF mailing list
            AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
            http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
            <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>
-- AF mailing list
            AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
            http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
            <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>

-- AF mailing list
        AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
        http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
        <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>

-- AF mailing list
    AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
    http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
    <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to