Nvidia is caught stealing codes from a ReShade Framework Developer

[Maverick177]

Thinking about it, I'm not so ready to jump on NV, since I could see how this could happen accidentally. Software development is one complicated field and I've never been one to underestimate the ability of people to make mistakes and oversights. So if we have some open source code that made its way to somewhere it shouldn't, was this due to ignorance or malevolence?

You could still argue it's wrong even if it was accidental, but being reasonable there is a world of difference between 'whoops we honestly didn't mean this, someone screwed up sourcing the code and we didn't catch it' or the other extreme of 'we'll just take this code and hope nobody notices even though we know we shouldn't'. I assume we'll get some sort of response from NV which will in itself probably tell us something about what sort of situation we're dealing with. Maybe someone in all honesty thought they could use the code without accreditation etc and now they (and others I hope) will know differently for the future.

I wouldn't be willing to cut NV any slack if there was deception involved though. I'll withhold further judgement for now until the facts become clear.

Read the dev's post again if you want facts.

nVidia is known for lying and getting away with it. It's call convergence of evidence.

 

[linkgoron]

I assume we'll get some sort of response from NV which will in itself probably tell us something about what sort of situation we're dealing with. Maybe someone in all honesty thought they could use the code without accreditation etc and now they (and others I hope) will know differently for the future.

I wouldn't be willing to cut NV any slack if there was deception involved though. I'll withhold further judgement for now until the facts become clear.

Are you joking? Even if it is a "we'll just take this code and hope nobody notices even though we know we shouldn't" situation, do you expect nvidia to say anything except "oops it was an honest mistake"? I'm not saying it is (or isn't), just that there are just two possible options - saying that it was an honest mistake or denying that the whole thing and saying that it's just standard stuff and no copying was actually done.

I don't expect nvidia (or AMD, or any other company) to openly admit to intentional intellectual rights infringement unless it can be 1000% proven in court.

 

[Erithan13]

Are you joking? Even if it is a "we'll just take this code and hope nobody notices even though we know we shouldn't" situation, do you expect nvidia to say anything except "oops it was an honest mistake"? I'm not saying it is (or isn't), just that there are just two possible options - saying that it was an honest mistake or denying that the whole thing and saying that it's just standard stuff and no copying was actually done.

Well, that's kind of my point. If they say it was an honest mistake then that's confirmation the code was copy and pasted without proper permissions. It would be different if they ignored or tried to ignore this thing altogether, or if they spun a story about how it's just a coincidence that the similarities exist, or if they go all in trying to deny anything and everything. No, I don't think they'll admit to doing it deliberately (if that was the case), but admitting they done it accidentally still confirms something in itself even if the argument would then have to shift to if they are lying about having done it accidentally.

If I am appearing inconsistent in my positions it is only because I have seen way too many cases of people getting outraged before all the facts have been established and then subsequently being made to look humbled when something which looked clear cut one way turns out to have been a bit more nuanced. Maybe I'll look stupid trying to devil's advocate for Nvidia by saying it may not be as bad as it first looks if it does get proven to be as bad as it looks.

 

[The Alias]

As someone who's taken tons of cs classes, you don't get the same variables and the exact same methods by accident. Also once again as someone who's taken tons of cs courses, taking someone else's code is strictly prohibited. It's akin to plagiarizing in English.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Thinking about it, I'm not so ready to jump on NV, since I could see how this could happen accidentally. Software development is one complicated field and I've never been one to underestimate the ability of people to make mistakes and oversights. So if we have some open source code that made its way to somewhere it shouldn't, was this due to ignorance or malevolence?

You could still argue it's wrong even if it was accidental, but being reasonable there is a world of difference between 'whoops we honestly didn't mean this, someone screwed up sourcing the code and we didn't catch it' or the other extreme of 'we'll just take this code and hope nobody notices even though we know we shouldn't'. I assume we'll get some sort of response from NV which will in itself probably tell us something about what sort of situation we're dealing with. Maybe someone in all honesty thought they could use the code without accreditation etc and now they (and others I hope) will know differently for the future.

I wouldn't be willing to cut NV any slack if there was deception involved though. I'll withhold further judgement for now until the facts become clear.

I would agree, the thread title "stealing" seems a bit strong until all the facts are known. Seems like from the Facebook post, the person was not really upset that they used the code, but that they didnt give him proper credit. Neither is right, but using open source code without proper credit being given, IMO, is not the same as stealing.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I would agree, the thread title "stealing" seems a bit strong until all the facts are known. Seems like from the Facebook post, the person was not really upset that they used the code, but that they didnt give him proper credit. Neither is right, but using open source code without proper credit being given, IMO, is not the same as stealing.

Yeah it's not stealing right?
Even worse, they will make money from it and the poor guy that spent hours putting it together gets no recognition or compensation... That if his complaint is proven to be true ofcourse.

Sent from my HUAWEI MT7-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yeah it's not stealing right?
Even worse, they will make money from it and the poor guy that spent hours putting it together gets no recognition or compensation... That if his complaint is proven to be true ofcourse.

Sent from my HUAWEI MT7-L09 using Tapatalk

The techincal definition of "stealing" refers to taking the property of another. This seems more like plagerism or copyright violation, and as both of us said, if it holds up when the facts are known.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Are you joking? Even if it is a "we'll just take this code and hope nobody notices even though we know we shouldn't" situation, do you expect nvidia to say anything except "oops it was an honest mistake"?

The sad part is that with most other companies I would believe that it was an honest mistake, but Nvidia is the boy who cried wolf.

 

[amenx]

A company is made of individuals. It cannot be aware of all the actions of all its individuals. This in all likelihood may be someone taking a shortcut without the knowledge of his superiors and possibly copying anothers code.

 

[Elixer]

A company is made of individuals. It cannot be aware of all the actions of all its individuals. This in all likelihood may be someone taking a shortcut without the knowledge of his superiors and possibly copying anothers code.

Um, no, that isn't how a commercial company operates at all.
They got their lawyers going through EVERYTHING they release.
This obviously isn't some 'simple mistake', having 1:1 code is pretty cut & dry, and it seems that Nvidia owes this person a few 1080 cards at the least, and a public apology.

 

[Abwx]

The techincal definition of "stealing" refers to taking the property of another. This seems more like plagerism or copyright violation, and as both of us said, if it holds up when the facts are known.

Because a copyright is not attached to a property..??.

 

[Glo.]

Nobody bothered with checking out again the updated Facebook post from the author?

[EDIT] Update and conclusion on the Ansel thing: I talked with some guys from Nvidia and especially the lead developer of Ansel, it's all sorted out. It was a result of some testing, basically leftover code; the next Ansel update will have some code removed and me credited, so it's all fine now. I have seen that someone posted this on reddit, probably in an attempt to start a shitstorm or something, don't do that. It's not a big thing really and Ansel is no commercial product so case closed then =)

--------------------------------------------------------
Funny thing about Nvidia Ansel, its postprocess shaders contain code from MasterEffect.
Its custom.fx contains almost 1:1 the colormod pass with my original descriptions. Same for the other files, where many variable names, code, comments and defines match MasterEffect code, also my 1D gausian blur solution, 1:1, just DX11 ported. There may be even more Framework code in it, I just recognized my own code, there might be SweetFX/other code in it as well.
While it's an honour to be apprechiated by such a big company, they could at least drop some credits like we do. Like another ReShade Framework contributor said, "if we would do the same their legal army would crush down on us immediately".

 

[Arachnotronic]

Nobody bothered with checking out again the updated Facebook post from the author?

Nice find.

 

[MaxDepth]

Actually this is why code should not be under copyright protection. Learn to write to the metal directly like our forefathers did.

I use the argument that I cannot copyright my recipe for chocolate bourbon pie, even though it is far superior to others. So instead of publishing my code (and let others use it as their own and perhaps for profit), I just let people eat my 'blob.'

 

[Kenmitch]

Nobody bothered with checking out again the updated Facebook post from the author?

???

Date stamps show it was updated roughly twenty minutes before you posted. Most of the replies are from before the update it looks like.

As far as the subject is concerned we really don't know if the changes are because they were called out or if it was already in the works. I could care less
either way.

 

[eddman]

I could care less
either way.

You could? That's odd.

 

[Kenmitch]

You could? That's odd.

As far as their response/excuse goes for clarification....The borrowing/stealing thing isn't nice!

 

[boozzer]

Nobody bothered with checking out again the updated Facebook post from the author?

he got what he wanted, credit.

 

[eddman]

As far as their response/excuse goes for clarification....The borrowing/stealing thing isn't nice!

I should've put in the /s. The word you're looking for is "couldn't".

 

[Rifter]

Yeah the 970 ram lies were an accident, and the 980ti is getting async any day now im sure, and yeah they didnt mean to steal the code.......

Nvidia has done this to many time to play the honest mistake card. Anyone who believe this is a honest mistake is a obvious blinded fanboy.

 

[Bacon1]

Nice find.

Glad to see Nvidia admitted their wrongdoing and will be correcting it.

 

[96Firebird]

Surprised some aren't demanding for an updated title...

 

[happy medium]

Surprised some aren't demanding for an updated title...

Mabe people don't really care?

This is a Tech forum ,not a drama TV show.

 

[Bacon1]

Surprised some aren't demanding for an updated title...

Why would the title be updated? They've admitted it and will be giving the proper credit in a future update.

 

[TheELF]

Yeah the 970 ram lies were an accident, and the 980ti is getting async any day now im sure, and yeah they didnt mean to steal the code.......

Nvidia has done this to many time to play the honest mistake card. Anyone who believe this is a honest mistake is a obvious blinded fanboy.

No I believe it was calculated by nvidia from the start after all drivers are not commercial software,they never charged anybody to use them.
I'm sure their army of lawyers told them so.