1. patches152's Avatar
    this NDA thing is getting pretty shady....i have my own set of questions, i'll prolly have to start a different topic about it...but thanks for clarifying CX...
    05-13-09 02:14 PM
  2. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    how much does a VZW CSR get paid to spend an hour on the phone with a customer running a leaked OS that is causing the problem (as in doesn't exist on .75)

    How does this imapct VZW's satisfaction rate for all the other customers in que to speak to the enxt availabel CSR?

    How does one calcualte the imapct when a leaked OS revela to the competition a direction RIM is headed in [For Example Oh look RIM is including all 3 different portrait Keybaords]
    Here is another prime example. Very good point.
    05-13-09 02:16 PM
  3. Valace2's Avatar
    Here is another prime example. Very good point.
    How do you think that compares to the money they save thanks to places like this?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-13-09 02:32 PM
  4. Valace2's Avatar
    Better yet how many people would have given up an taken it back if not for CB or places like it

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-13-09 02:37 PM
  5. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    How do you think that compares to the money they save thanks to places like this?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

    That doesn't make it right. So RIM should say hey since CB and the other forums are there, screw you NDA because they can help them. Makes no sense. Yes I will agree that CB and other forums help plenty who would otherwise take the device back, there are still those who just don't get it, and still take it back. Which costs money.

    There's a difference between supported software and unreleased illegal software. That's what they get paid to do. What they don't get paid to do is help people who have unreleased unsupported software on their device.

    The fact remains that people should honor the agreement they signed. Again, yes it's about the money, but it's also about people breaking the law.
    05-13-09 03:21 PM
  6. patches152's Avatar
    epic judas priest reference, CX...did you just date yourself?
    05-13-09 03:33 PM
  7. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    epic judas priest reference, CX...did you just date yourself?
    Lol, not quite that old Patches... lol. Early 30's.
    05-13-09 03:39 PM
  8. patches152's Avatar
    old enough to know how to ROCK!!!
    05-13-09 03:40 PM
  9. Valace2's Avatar
    That doesn't make it right. So RIM should say hey since CB and the other forums are there, screw you NDA because they can help them. Makes no sense. Yes I will agree that CB and other forums help plenty who would otherwise take the device back, there are still those who just don't get it, and still take it back. Which costs money.

    There's a difference between supported software and unreleased illegal software. That's what they get paid to do. What they don't get paid to do is help people who have unreleased unsupported software on their device.

    The fact remains that people should honor the agreement they signed. Again, yes it's about the money, but it's also about people breaking the law.
    Most companies allow for a certain amount of stock loss, the way you put it sometimes makes it sound like it is affecting their bottom line and not a very minor annoyance.

    If your problem is the right and wrong of it, I can respect you more.

    Not that you prolly care about that.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-13-09 03:56 PM
  10. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    Most companies allow for a certain amount of stock loss, the way you put it sometimes makes it sound like it is affecting their bottom line and not a very minor annoyance.
    Sure they do, but at the same time companies have to reel it in. I'm relatively confident RIM knows they can't prevent it altogether, but they can at least keep it to a trickle by not opening the floodgates.
    05-13-09 04:03 PM
  11. Valace2's Avatar
    Sure they do, but at the same time companies have to reel it in. I'm relatively confident RIM knows they can't prevent it altogether, but they can at least keep it to a trickle by not opening the floodgates.
    But in this instance its not even a total loss because when RIM gets it back they reload the software an sell it as a refurb

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-13-09 04:12 PM
  12. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    Most companies allow for a certain amount of stock loss, the way you put it sometimes makes it sound like it is affecting their bottom line and not a very minor annoyance.

    If your problem is the right and wrong of it, I can respect you more.

    Not that you prolly care about that.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    You keep trying to justify the leaks by saying it doesn't cost them much, or they allow for some loss, when in reality theres no justification for software leaking out. It's wrong plain and simple. And those that leak this software have signed an agreement saying that would specifically not do so. So no matter how you look at it or try and get around it, it's wrong and shouldn't happen. Whether it costs them a dollar or a million dollars, it shouldn't happen, and it shouldn't end up costing them anything. Again, if people would have some integrity and do what they said and signed that they would do there wouldn't be a problem. But theres no justifying someone breaking their agreement much less the law.
    05-13-09 04:53 PM
  13. Valace2's Avatar
    You keep trying to justify the leaks by saying it doesn't cost them much, or they allow for some loss, when in reality theres no justification for software leaking out. It's wrong plain and simple. And those that leak this software have signed an agreement saying that would specifically not do so. So no matter how you look at it or try and get around it, it's wrong and shouldn't happen. Whether it costs them a dollar or a million dollars, it shouldn't happen, and it shouldn't end up costing them anything. Again, if people would have some integrity and do what they said and signed that they would do there wouldn't be a problem. But theres no justifying someone breaking their agreement much less the law.
    Again with the moral high ground. You say its illegal fine its illegal. I won't argue that fact.

    How about false advertising?

    How about the reason I was given an almost permanent ban for.

    I apologize for the way I acted that night an for some of things I said about you that night, but what about that.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-13-09 05:11 PM
  14. patches152's Avatar
    You keep trying to justify the leaks by saying it doesn't cost them much, or they allow for some loss, when in reality theres no justification for software leaking out. It's wrong plain and simple. And those that leak this software have signed an agreement saying that would specifically not do so. So no matter how you look at it or try and get around it, it's wrong and shouldn't happen. Whether it costs them a dollar or a million dollars, it shouldn't happen, and it shouldn't end up costing them anything. Again, if people would have some integrity and do what they said and signed that they would do there wouldn't be a problem. But theres no justifying someone breaking their agreement much less the law.
    The mere existence of a user name and traffic on a site like this would be a direct breach of the NDA I had as an employee in the wireless industry. Idk why anyone who's an employee of RIM, or any carrier would think posting here isn't. So to say that NDA breach is leaking, what about the discussion?

    Your position within the company makes you privy to info that normal people wouldn't be, so any opinions you form and share about industry topics are basically a breach of NDA, no matter how vague you make the response or statement. Plain and simple. To pick on leaks and use the NDA as your position is hypocrisy.

    With that said, everyone appreciates the leaks, the discussion, and the clarification. But donít think that it isnít a breach of NDA one way or the other. It all is a breach.

    Why isn't that a topic of discussion while we're at it?
    05-13-09 05:34 PM
  15. 05Midnight's Avatar
    So what they load a new OS and then give that phone out as a referb phone. I would say thatís better than someone that just flat out returned the phone because itís a piece of crap with .75. I myself would have returned this phone if it wasn't for leaks. The real problem is people today are willing to accept crap and let these companies walk all over them. I'm talking about everything in general. In the old days you got a good product for your money. Now they raise the price and give you a piece of crap that should have NEVER been released in the first place!! Why was it released? We all know because these Azzholes wanted their money more. Do you think they give a sh*t about us? Heck NO so why would I care if they lose money because they screwed us over! LOL they deserve to lose money they are the ones that put out a bad product...NOT US!!! We are making them rich!!!



    Yes it costs money. But it's more of an issue because if people honored their agreement it wouldn't happen in the first place. So it's particular annoying that said company not only pays these employees on a regular basis, but also loses money because of these same employees.
    Just look around at the threads. Theres plenty of them that have said they bricked their device trying to upgrade, and just took it back and got another because they couldn't recover it.
    Because that device is still under warranty, the carrier is required to send it back to the manufacturer. Which then gets the device, hands it off to forensics, who then in turn finds out it only has no device software loaded, but the manufacturer has already honored the warranty and sent out a new device when it should not have. That's how it costs money. And it happens plenty.
    Yeah it's about the money. But it's also about the fact people are violating a legally binding agreement. Why can't people just do what they said they would???
    05-13-09 05:38 PM
  16. 05Midnight's Avatar
    Again who gives a crap how much money Verizon has to spend because they are the ones that released this phone in the first place. I'm so sick and tired of people thinking they have to accept crap. You people sit here and put the blame on the consumer LOL that blows my mind. All these people want is a phone that is suppose to work like the ad they put out. What they should do is run an ad with that crap OS so the consumer can really see how the phone works. Oh wait if they did that then people wouldn't buy it.



    how much does a VZW CSR get paid to spend an hour on the phone with a customer running a leaked OS that is causing the problem (as in doesn't exist on .75)

    How does this imapct VZW's satisfaction rate for all the other customers in que to speak to the enxt availabel CSR?

    How does one calcualte the imapct when a leaked OS revela to the competition a direction RIM is headed in [For Example Oh look RIM is including all 3 different portrait Keybaords]
    05-13-09 05:46 PM
  17. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    Again with the moral high ground. You say its illegal fine its illegal. I won't argue that fact.

    How about false advertising?

    How about the reason I was given an almost permanent ban for.

    I apologize for the way I acted that night an for some of things I said about you that night, but what about that.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I'm not taking any high moral ground. The fact remains that people signed an agreement to not leak it period. Where does false advertising come into play??

    The mere existence of a user name and traffic on a site like this would be a direct breach of the NDA I had as an employee in the wireless industry. Idk why anyone who's an employee of RIM, or any carrier would think posting here isn't. So to say that NDA breach is leaking, what about the discussion?

    Your position within the company makes you privy to info that normal people wouldn't be, so any opinions you form and share about industry topics are basically a breach of NDA, no matter how vague you make the response or statement. Plain and simple. To pick on leaks and use the NDA as your position is hypocrisy.

    With that said, everyone appreciates the leaks, the discussion, and the clarification. But donít think that it isnít a breach of NDA one way or the other. It all is a breach.

    Why isn't that a topic of discussion while we're at it?
    This is 110% incorrect. just an FYI for you, the Head of Developmental Relations of said company has an account on a few different websites such as these. So your assertion that having a mere account is a breach in totally inaccurate. Furthermore, I didn't start the subject only replied. All I said was people that leak software are in violation. Where you get hypocrisy from that I'm not quite sure, but it's apparent from your previous comments that you're not fully aware of the boundaries of an NDA and certainly not aware of the clauses in the agreement we are currently discussing. Until this time it would probably be best if you didn't assert you opinions as fact when in reality they're incorrect and just that, your opinion. So when/if you get your hands on the agreement we're speaking of, you and I can continue this discussion, until then you're speaking about things of which you have no knowledge so it's not much of a discussion, especially when post inaccuracies like what's above.
    05-13-09 05:48 PM
  18. patches152's Avatar
    This is 110% incorrect. just an FYI for you, the Head of Developmental Relations of said company has an account on a few different websites such as these. So your assertion that having a mere account is a breach in totally inaccurate. Furthermore, I didn't start the subject only replied. All I said was people that leak software are in violation. Where you get hypocrisy from that I'm not quite sure, but it's apparent from your previous comments that you're not fully aware of the boundaries of an NDA and certainly not aware of the clauses in the agreement we are currently discussing. Until this time it would probably be best if you didn't assert you opinions as fact when in reality they're incorrect and just that, your opinion. So when/if you get your hands on the agreement we're speaking of, you and I can continue this discussion, until then you're speaking about things of which you have no knowledge so it's not much of a discussion, especially when post inaccuracies like what's above.
    i'm speaking based on the NDA that i was part of, if yours allows you to discuss stuff, then awesome. the fact that companies create user accounts on sites is technically controlled by the company, and therefore could be monitored, so yeah...idk if that's a big concern. my point was that people hide behind NDAs like its some grey area. you can either discuss everything, or you can't discuss everything. that is the hypocricy i'm speaking of. it seems like people pull the NDA card when they feel like not answering, or flexing some sort of authority. NDAs aren't some flexible, living document. they're hard written in a way where they can be turned against you, for the writer's benefit. and i could get you an NDA, but i can speculate that each company uses a different one, depending on your position. i seem to remember us doing a copy/paste job awhile ago discussing NDAs and their content, etc...

    anyway, you're the authority. guess we'll leave it at that.
    05-13-09 05:55 PM
  19. xblack5dahliax's Avatar
    Just curious about this because I am sick of hearing it. If someone could get me the number of returned Storms due to people bricking phones because of leaks I would be very grateful.

    I would also like to see how much higher the initial number of returns would be if those that have upgraded could not have.

    I would also like to know the percentage of Storm users that know they can use leaks to upgrade their phone on their own
    I don't think it cost RIM a penny with leaks being out and if someone bricks there phone from installing a leak off cb than they don't know how to read or ask for help on unbricking it. So the things you want to know are pointless

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

    Also I think rim could benefit from us tiny percent of leak users with our input on it
    05-13-09 05:55 PM
  20. Valace2's Avatar
    [QUOTE=Crucial_Xtreme;2548439]I'm not taking any high moral ground. The fact remains that people signed an agreement to not leak it period. Where does false advertising come into play??[QUOTE]

    You talk about people breaking the law. VZW missleading hundreds of thousands of people with commercials showing a device that does not existis not false advertising?

    Oh wait... If you are too stupid to not realize that its only a commercial its your own fault. Forgot that.

    What about the second half of my questions? I am not getting mad here, not gonna blow up. Just talking.

    What about it?
    05-13-09 05:57 PM
  21. 05Midnight's Avatar
    Exactly my point!! Who do these companies think they are? The problem is they have been doing that for so long and getting away with it because people are being programed to accept a crappy product. If you're going to sell a product that isn't ready for release then don't charge so much money for it. They want there cake and eat it too.




    [QUOTE=Valace2;2548504][QUOTE=Crucial_Xtreme;2548439]I'm not taking any high moral ground. The fact remains that people signed an agreement to not leak it period. Where does false advertising come into play??

    You talk about people breaking the law. VZW missleading hundreds of thousands of people with commercials showing a device that does not existis not false advertising?

    Oh wait... If you are too stupid to not realize that its only a commercial its your own fault. Forgot that.

    What about the second half of my questions? I am not getting mad here, not gonna blow up. Just talking.

    What about it?
    Last edited by 05Midnight; 05-13-09 at 06:07 PM.
    05-13-09 06:01 PM
  22. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    i'm speaking based on the NDA that i was part of, if yours allows you to discuss stuff, then awesome. the fact that companies create user accounts on sites is technically controlled by the company, and therefore could be monitored, so yeah...idk if that's a big concern. my point was that people hide behind NDAs like its some grey area. you can either discuss everything, or you can't discuss everything. that is the hypocricy i'm speaking of. it seems like people pull the NDA card when they feel like not answering, or flexing some sort of authority. NDAs aren't some flexible, living document. they're hard written in a way where they can be turned against you, for the writer's benefit. and i could get you an NDA, but i can speculate that each company uses a different one, depending on your position. i seem to remember us doing a copy/paste job awhile ago discussing NDAs and their content, etc...

    anyway, you're the authority. guess we'll leave it at that.
    I see what you're saying. I'm not sure exactly who you're referring to with the hiding behind it. It's not as simple as you can discuss everything or nothing. But in other areas it's black and white I will agree.
    If you could give me an example I would explain.

    But let's get back on the topic. Which obviously from your previous post, you agree. The leaking of unofficial software is a breach. Illegal. Most people who frequent CB now, don't remember the days of links to betas being posted and that person getting PM'd by a RIM official and being told to take it down, or this and other sites getting C&D's because of content they had up on the site. But the fact remains it's a breach and illegal. It's not about high moral ground or low moral ground. It's about the facts. And I given at least one example of how it costs money and Devlyn has given another to answer the OP's question to a point.
    05-13-09 06:05 PM
  23. patches152's Avatar
    Non-disclosure agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    A non-disclosure agreement (NDA), also known as a confidentiality agreement, confidential disclosure agreement (CDA), proprietary information agreement (PIA), or secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between at least two parties that outlines confidential materials or knowledge the parties wish to share with one another for certain purposes, but wish to restrict access to. It is a contract through which the parties agree not to disclose information covered by the agreement. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of confidential and proprietary information or a trade secret. As such, an NDA protects non-public business information.
    NDAs are commonly signed when two companies or individuals are considering doing business and need to understand the processes used in each otherís business for the purpose of evaluating the potential business relationship. NDAs can be "mutual", meaning both parties are restricted in their use of the materials provided, or they can restrict the use of material by a single party.
    It is also possible for an employee to sign an NDA or NDA-like agreement with an employer. In fact, some employment agreements will include a clause restricting employees use and dissemination of company-owned "confidential information." NDAs are used in the IT field, and are often given directly prior to taking a certification exam.
    In rare cases, the contract may state that the existence of the NDA itself cannot be disclosed
    05-13-09 06:06 PM
  24. Crucial_Xtreme's Avatar
    [QUOTE=Valace2;2548504][QUOTE=Crucial_Xtreme;2548439]I'm not taking any high moral ground. The fact remains that people signed an agreement to not leak it period. Where does false advertising come into play??

    You talk about people breaking the law. VZW missleading hundreds of thousands of people with commercials showing a device that does not existis not false advertising?

    Oh wait... If you are too stupid to not realize that its only a commercial its your own fault. Forgot that.

    What about the second half of my questions? I am not getting mad here, not gonna blow up. Just talking.

    What about it?
    You would have to contact Verizon about that. I don't work for them. If I remember correctly, on the commercials, it says a simulated image. But again, I don't know what Verizon does or why they do it. The OP was about how leaks cost money.
    I will agree that Verizon makes the Storm out to be better than it is. But that's on them.

    The number of returns would be something a Verizon person could give you, I wouldn't know.
    In regards to the number of people who know they can upgrade on their own, would be pretty low relative to the number of Storm owners.

    Edit: that's been posted before Patches. Except the content is not known by average people, so unless you had one in front of you, you wouldn't know what constitutes a breach or not. I will confirm that you may disclose that you cannot disclose.
    05-13-09 06:09 PM
  25. patches152's Avatar
    my point is NDA = non-disclosure, the leak part is only a portion of the agreement...so if you're arguing that leaks are a breach of NDA, then you're only arguing part of the agreement. the whole agreement needs to be enforced, if you're going to enforce it that is. that is what i meant by hypocricy. my point is general, not pointed at any one person in particular, because everyone who has an NDA has used pulled the card, based on their decision vs. following the agreement they legally signed and not discussing anything.
    05-13-09 06:09 PM
101 12345
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD