App refund; navigator app by [email protected] ripped off osmand app

I want to get a refund but also want to expose the Navigator app by objstudio. I downloaded the free the osmand app and found the issue of entering building numbers in offline mode was not possible which made the app useless to me.

I then paid for this navigator app by objstudio thinking it was a completely different app but it is basically the same app as osmand and has the same issue of not being able to enter a building number in offline mode.

So it's pretty messed up someone took a free app and then made it their own and charged 5.99 for it.

I contacted blackberry to get the navigator app by objstudio removed. I guess the next thing is to call my credit card company.

So when trying to get a refund I am now told I need to contact the 3rd party developer to get a refund. That doesn't seem right.

Originally Posted by BlackBerryMamba

I want to get a refund but also want to expose the Navigator app by objstudio. I bought the osmand app and found the issue of entering building numbers in offline mode was not possible which made the app useless to me.

I then paid for this navigator app by objstudio thinking it was a completely different app but it is basically the same app as osmand and has the same issue of not being able to enter a building number in offline mode.

So it's pretty messed up someone took a free app and then made it their own and charged 5.99 for it.

I contacted blackberry to get the navigator app by objstudio removed. I guess the next thing is to call my credit card company.

So when trying to get a refund I am now told I need to contact the 3rd party developer to get a refund. That doesn't seem right.

AOpenSource.com Android Open Source Details: OsmAnd

Osmand is an open source project using OSM map data (which is also open source and depends of contributors like myself and millions of others). As long vendors comply with the open source licence applicable to this project, they are able to download the source code modify it (or not) and distribute it as they please. Nobody is ripping anyone else off unless the terms of the license have been breached. If the vendor is compliant there is nothing RIM can do about "copy-cats" - in fact, this is the whole purpose of the open source community - to encourage sharing and collaborative innovation.

EDIT: I Added the following quote from the above site to clarify the idea behind open source:
"The basic idea behind open source is very simple. When programmers on the Internet can read, redistribute, and modify the source for a piece of software, it evolves. People improve it, people adapt it, people fix bugs. And this can happen at a speed that, if one is used to the slow pace of conventional software development, seems astonishing...
...The Open Source pages exist to make this case to the commercial world."

Originally Posted by BlackBerryMamba

I want to get a refund

Send e-mail to [email protected]
and ask to have the purchase reversed....

include the PIN for your device, your BBiD,
Order number and date,
name of app,
and short description of Why refund is wanted...

You should get through....
and if you don't - just send the request again...

Originally Posted by BuzzStarField

AOpenSource.com Android Open Source Details: OsmAnd

Osmand is an open source project using OSM map data (which is also open source and depends of contributors like myself and millions of others). As long vendors comply with the open source licence applicable to this project, they are able to download the source code (or not) and distribute it as they please. Nobody is ripping anyone else off unless the terms of the license have been breached. If the vendor is compliant there is nothing RIM can do about "copy-cats" - in fact, this is the whole purpose of the open source community - to encourage sharing and collaborative innovation.

So your saying someone can profit off of the free osmand app even if they just change the name from osmand to navigator. That doesn't seem right. So maybe I should download it and call it navchamp and sell it for 5.99? Then blackberry app world will have three navigation programs that are the same just with a different name.

I know ubuntu is open source os.but I don't believe people can change the name on it and charge money for it.

Originally Posted by BlackBerryMamba

So your saying someone can profit off of the free osmand app even if they just change the name from osmand to navigator. That doesn't seem right. So maybe I should download it and call it navchamp and sell it for 5.99? Then blackberry app world will have three navigation programs that are the same just with a different name.

I know ubuntu is open source os.but I don't believe people can change the name on it and charge money for it.

I'm afraid that's how it is. As long as the developer makes the modified code available to everyone else, they can charge whatever the market will bear for their "work". There are other downsides to open source too.

For example, the excellent astronomy app known as "Stellarium" is open source. A vendor has recently modified the code and compiled it for PlayBook and voila you have access to a wonderful "new" app in App World. It's not so good for developers like me, though, who aspire to cut out a niche for themselves and have been struggling with RIM's limited tool-set since PB's launch. I am only one person with limited resources - there's no way that I can compete on a level playing field with the cast of thousands who have contributed to Stellarium. I'll have to be really clever in order to make any money at all going forward. I'll keep trying but it's not easy.

So there you have it. Open Source isn't always "fair" but it is a reality. On the whole the idea has been a boon for both consumers and for developers. Those who have a problem with it will just have to suck it up and work with the cards they are dealt.

Originally Posted by BlackBerryMamba

So your saying someone can profit off of the free osmand app even if they just change the name from osmand to navigator. That doesn't seem right. So maybe I should download it and call it navchamp and sell it for 5.99? Then blackberry app world will have three navigation programs that are the same just with a different name.

I know ubuntu is open source os.but I don't believe people can change the name on it and charge money for it.

Except on some level, they do

Originally Posted by BuzzStarField

I'm afraid that's how it is. As long as the developer makes the modified code available to everyone else, they can charge whatever the market will bear for their "work". There are other downsides to open source too.

For example, the excellent astronomy app known as "Stellarium" is open source. A vendor has recently modified the code and compiled it for PlayBook and voila you have access to a wonderful "new" app in App World. It's not so good for developers like me, though, who aspires to cut out a niche for themselves and have been struggling with RIM's limited tool-set since PB's launch. I am only one person with limited resources - there's no way that I can compete on a level playing field with the cast of thousands who have contributed to Stellarium. I'll have to be really clever in order to make any money at all going forward. I'll keep trying but it's not easy.

So there you have it. Open Source isn't always "fair" but it is a reality. On the whole the idea has been a boon for both consumers and for developers. Those who have a problem with it will just have to suck it up and work with the cards they are dealt.

I have been "burned" by open source code

But you've done quite well with your What's Up app. And the tools are only getting better. At least people can't recompile your app :D

Originally Posted by SlcCorrado

But you've done quite well with your What's Up app. And the tools are only getting better. At least people can't recompile your app :D

This is true. I also have the advantage of knowing my code inside out and I know my customer base. I have been building a relationship that works to my advantage. I can be nibble and adjust my app's capabilities as necessary to meet my customers' needs. It's not going to be easy but who says that life is easy.

To make a go of it though, the customer base needs to grow by quite a lot in order to support several excellent astronomy apps. To this end, I welcome Stellarium. People know and love this app and it presence in App World may make it easier for potential customers to buy a playbook. This is the true beauty of RIM's current BB10 strategy. The more "easy" ports there are, the more customers purchase a playbook. The more playbooks in peoples' hands, the better it is for RIM's bottom line. The better RIM does, the more apps I can sell. The more apps I can sell, the more money i make. It's a simple numbers game.

I'll be getting a refund regardless whether I have to go do a chargeback or not. Osmand which is the same as Navigator doesn't work offline so that I can enter an exact address. I don't mind paying if navigator worked better than osmand but all objstudio did with navigator was change the icons. Otherwise it's the exact same program and no improvements have been made.

Originally Posted by BuzzStarField

I'm afraid that's how it is. As long as the developer makes the modified code available to everyone else, they can charge whatever the market will bear for their "work". There are other downsides to open source too.

For example, the excellent astronomy app known as "Stellarium" is open source. A vendor has recently modified the code and compiled it for PlayBook and voila you have access to a wonderful "new" app in App World. It's not so good for developers like me, though, who aspire to cut out a niche for themselves and have been struggling with RIM's limited tool-set since PB's launch. I am only one person with limited resources - there's no way that I can compete on a level playing field with the cast of thousands who have contributed to Stellarium. I'll have to be really clever in order to make any money at all going forward. I'll keep trying but it's not easy.

So there you have it. Open Source isn't always "fair" but it is a reality. On the whole the idea has been a boon for both consumers and for developers. Those who have a problem with it will just have to suck it up and work with the cards they are dealt.

Or call their credit card company for a chargeback. I'm not paying for a program where the guy just changed a few navigation icons from a free app. I'll probably make a complaint with the Bbb over here against rim as well. Rims customer service wouldn't even direct me to billing support. I swear rims customer service is horrible. They direct you to the 3rd party vendor to get a refund. I feel also that rim is partially responsible for allowing this person to sell the same free app under the guise of a different name. It would be different if this vendor offered some kind of improvement in the app but all he did was change the navigation icons.

Originally Posted by BuzzStarField

This is true. I also have the advantage of knowing my code inside out and I know my customer base. I have been building a relationship that works to my advantage. I can be nibble and adjust my app's capabilities as necessary to meet my customers' needs. It's not going to be easy but who says that life is easy.

To make a go of it though, the customer base needs to grow by quite a lot in order to support several excellent astronomy apps. To this end, I welcome Stellarium. People know and love this app and it presence in App World may make it easier for potential customers to buy a playbook. This is the true beauty of RIM's current BB10 strategy. The more "easy" ports there are, the more customers purchase a playbook. The more playbooks in peoples' hands, the better it is for RIM's bottom line. The better RIM does, the more apps I can sell. The more apps I can sell, the more money i make. It's a simple numbers game.

See what you are doing is different. The guy that made navigator didn't make any improvements. Changing the icon images isn't improving an app. It's like he took a coke bottle, ripped the label off and put his own on and then called it navigator. Maybe there isn't any legal implications for what he did, but ethically and morally it isn't right what he's doing.

Originally Posted by BlackBerryMamba

Or call their credit card company for a chargeback. I'm not paying for a program where the guy just changed a few navigation icons from a free app. I'll probably make a complaint with the Bbb over here against rim as well. Rims customer service wouldn't even direct me to billing support. I swear rims customer service is horrible. They direct you to the 3rd party vendor to get a refund. I feel also that rim is partially responsible for allowing this person to sell the same free app under the guise of a different name. It would be different if this vendor offered some kind of improvement in the app but all he did was change the navigation icons.

IMO you are getting upset over something that you have no control over and that you cannot possibly change. If you want a refund, just send the email to appworldbilling and explain that you are dissatisfied with the app due to misleading description and leave it at that. I have never known RIM to refuse giving a refund even though it is officially not their policy to do so. Just tell them you contacted the developer and you did not get satisfaction. Just don't make a fuss and everything will be okay.

I also think that you did the right thing by bringing this matter to the forum so we could discuss it rationally. Frankly, I agree with you that it is a shady developer indeed who does not add any value to the open source product that they are flogging. On the other hand it happens all the time and there is nothing anybody can do about it. Making RIM into a referee in these matters would be a disaster. I do not want them to be the final arbiter of the content of my app and to decide, at their whim, whether it is "ethical" for me to publish my work. What is the definition of "different enough to be considered an original work" anyway?

Besides, RIM would be in a difficult legal position if they denied apps because they were derivative since, as I explained to you, such derivation is perfectly legal despite your (and my) objections to the practice.

I have navigator and osmand installed and use them for a month or more. Navigator to me is more stable and better maps. For example, Ottawa map where I live. There are broken roads in osmand map but no broken in navigator map, I took a screenshots. The offline feature does work.

Originally Posted by Lindstrom

Send e-mail to [email protected]
and ask to have the purchase reversed....

include the PIN for your device, your BBiD,
Order number and date,
name of app,
and short description of Why refund is wanted...

You should get through....
and if you don't - just send the request again...

Sorry not sure what the PIN is. Are you suggesting I give them my password?

Originally Posted by BlackBerryMamba

Sorry not sure what the PIN is. Are you suggesting I give them my password?

??

The PIN for your Playbook... all BlackBerry devices have a PIN ...

Have a look at How to identify PIN

Originally Posted by ny9900

I have navigator and osmand installed and use them for a month or more. Navigator to me is more stable and better maps. For example, Ottawa map where I live. There are broken roads in osmand map but no broken in navigator map, I took a screenshots. The offline feature does work.

Offline or online ? Are you using the same map source in both applications ?

I dont care if i am charged for opensource apps.
If a person puts in the work to port it to the playbook...
then I see no problem with them charging for it, I do however
expect it to provide some enhancements and for the application to work properly and be stable. as for price... I feel something like this should be a 99 cent app tho.

Depending on which opensource license the original app is published under (like the GPL), then the person porting it must provide source code if changes were made,
in this case.... you can download the source code, compile it and submit it to the app store as a free app.


I just checked, Osmand is licensed under GPL3 :http://code.google.com/p/osmand/

Double post.. ignore.

Originally Posted by Lindstrom

??

The PIN for your Playbook... all BlackBerry devices have a PIN ...

Have a look at How to identify PIN

Thanks for clarifying. Just got this about a week and a half ago and still figuring things out.

Originally Posted by crkeo

I dont care if i am charged for opensource apps.
If a person puts in the work to port it to the playbook...
then I see no problem with them charging for it, I do however
expect it to provide some enhancements and for the application to work properly and be stable. as for price... I feel something like this should be a 99 cent app tho.

Depending on which opensource license the original app is published under (like the GPL), then the person porting it must provide source code if changes were made,
in this case.... you can download the source code, compile it and submit it to the app store as a free app.


I just checked, Osmand is licensed under GPL3 :osmand - Map Viewing & Navigation based on Open Street Maps for mobile devices - Google Project Hosting

Yes but understand that osmand is a free app on the playbook. Navigator is simply a carbon copy of the program osmand and renamed 'navigator.' the image icon for the menus look different. That's the extent of it.

Originally Posted by ny9900

I have navigator and osmand installed and use them for a month or more. Navigator to me is more stable and better maps. For example, Ottawa map where I live. There are broken roads in osmand map but no broken in navigator map, I took a screenshots. The offline feature does work.

Offline feature doesn't work in my opinion if you can't enter a bulding number / house number / address number in offline mode. Both osmand and navigator fail at being able to enter a street address / number in offline mode. In offline mode it will only let you use the nearest intersection. If you are going somewhere you haven't been before and don't have online access, you are not going to be able to know the nearest cross streets.

This is why I tried navigator after using osmand, only to find out that "Navigator" is really the same app as "Osmand" and both fail at being able to enter a physical buildingaddress in offline mode. Test it for yourself. Disconnect from the internet, go to Search, then select offline mode. You can enter everything except the building address. When you select the "Choose building" tab you'll get the "Search building incrementally" box. You can type in the number in this box but there is no way to input the numerical address. It just shows a reset button. You can't input the exact building address in offline mode using an offline vector map which makes this pretty useless in offline mode IMO.

Originally Posted by StanWiz

Offline or online ? Are you using the same map source in both applications ?

Offline maps, I didn't use online map. I had downloaded Magellan Compass, Ottawa tile maps needs 400M comparing with Navigator 20M Ottawa vector map.

if you purchased the app using paypal, you can just use paypal to request for refund, as long as its within the 45 days limit.

Originally Posted by ny9900

Offline maps, I didn't use online map. I had downloaded Magellan Compass, Ottawa tile maps needs 400M comparing with Navigator 20M Ottawa vector map.

You were comparing osmand and navigator ... what has magellan got to do with it ?