blackenedwings

As much as I would love unlocked tunes, I don't blame any of the tune vendors for locking them. The fact is that tunes were already being stolen and re-sold, locking them gives some level of protection. Getting in constant legal battles over the tunes is absolutely not worth the money for a tuner. If Jeff had unlocked tunes and someone did a data dump and then "re-made the tune" using the software basically copy pasting the settings it would be damn near impossible to prove they had stolen them, especially if one or two items were "tweaked" slightly to appear different. This happens with software code ALL the time. Given the opportunity people steal stuff. It isn't a moral dilema any more than software keys are for a software company.

Also for the posters going on about people "ganging up" on Fluid are ridiculous. Most of the comments made in the previous thread were asking legitimate questions about a service we were interested in. In my case I gave some advice on what I think would actually make the service really work well. I've given the same advice to Jeff and god knows I have torn Jeff a new ******* over issues with his service at times. I don't give a rats *** about the politics between the vendors on here, but Fluids lack of transparency is not to his credit and won't win him customers. I hope he does get the service working and well, because the more good vendors and options available for our little niche the better. For that to happen though he has a lot of steps to take.

It does muddy the waters though when there are other vendors on the forum that are participating in the questions about Fluids service. It would help matters if the conversation included more people who don't have that conflict of interest.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

And we all see how well that works.

But I do give them away.
I sell the AP for the required retail price and nothing more.
The calibration service comes with the device at no extra charge.
And, it is a service that produces a product.
Think of it as commissioned music.
If someone commissions me to write a soundtrack for their movie, who do you think owns that work when I'm done?
I do.
One has to specifically give away their rights to the composition through "work for hire" rules, which I refuse to do.
That is how so many artists over the years got ripped off by record labels, producers, management, etc.

I retain the rights to my work and you are licensed to use it by me.

If you don't like it, go elsewhere. Its that simple.
I maintain that my level of competency places me in such a position that my work is worth more than that of the competition, and this is one of the ways in which I maintain it value.

Not how I do it, nor is it how the pros do it.
They will evaluate how the vehicle is performing based on how it comes in, tune and all, but they will "zero" everything, install their preferred "tweaks" and start from scratch.
Its part regimen and part ego.

But then you are REQUIRED to cease and desist from using it yourself after "giving it away".
You are no longer entitled to use that intellectual property.

When you buy a CD, you aren't buying the music on it.
You are only buying the physical disk.
You are purchasing a license to the music contained on it.
You have no rights or claim to the music itself, in either its effect (the sound) or its content (the actual composition).

My calibrations are protected in both effect (resultant engine behavior) and content (the actual values in the tables).

zoom44

thats what i dont agree with - the whole comparison to music and intellectual property. you're changing the way my car works- i want to know what those changes are and what they do. I dont even like Mazda's flashes not coming with a description of what they have changed. I went so far as to get the AG of Oregon to say so and you're right that's the way you do it- i was pointing out the locked nature of the tunes from fluid and expressing that as long as the tunes from fluid are locked i wont be buying them no matter who the tuner is

dillsrotary

Do you purchase the AP for the same price as you sell it for? Or do you receive a discount for buying large amounts of them?

Jedi54

iTrader: (7)

I would imagine he buys it for less. Why sell them without making a few bucks in the process. Although it's my understanding that the price he sells themf or is the lowest price allowed by Cobb.
What are you getting at Dills?

neXib

I think I'd rather wait 2 weeks and get a map from someone I know have a lot of insight about our cars than get one after 48 hours from some mystery man.

The secrecy/deleting threads/lack of details make me think Fluid just look to release as much products as possible and earn a lot of money. He's got great customer feedback, why keep shooting himself in the foot. People are concerned about their cars when it comes to alterations to their "brain", is that so odd?

Also, the way of advertising 48 hours is a pretty obvious play on people's complaining about turnaround time for MM. I guess that's somewhat deserved (though it's not my experience). Let's just see if they can uphold the 48 hours when they start to handle customers who can't follow simple instructions

Kane

iTrader: (1)

Providing the service for "free" and making your profit on the AP itself is a nice way to avoid taxes. +1 for not letting Uncle Sam get you down.

Using the Music as an example - while you have copyright over the material and the creativity; the information is open; anyone can determine what notes are in what order and play the song at their home. It is not until they seek to make income from that combination of sounds that they must get permission / liscense the work from the composer.

We are merely arguing the same point about tuning - I don't want to copy your tune and then try to sell it; I want to know what the notes are.

While the source code (the HOW) has been ruled to be protected material; the data (output and results; the WHAT) of the code is not. If I am asked to consult on an ERP development project; the client has the right to a full functional disclosure. As well as typically unlimited use liscense to the finished product (and for an extra fee the source itself); while I also retain the right to modify my developments and resell the same product again and again.

Ultimately you are right; it is a free country so people can stipulate (to an exent) how they choose to do business; and everyone can vote with their wallet... but it doesn't change the fact that your only "competitive advantage" is reputation; there has been no peer review and any innovations made are not going to better the community. While 90+% are buying the service for the convienience and therefore would contnue to utilize your service even if you published every tune you have made; you are opening yourself up to (in this case Fluid) competing with you on your timelines; customer service, etc... you will both not be in a position to compete on the scientific points made; because you are both saying "it is cool; trust me".

dillsrotary

I was wondering because MM said he gives away his personal AP maps for free. I assumed that wasn't the case because of the amount that he sells that he could definitely make a profit through buying them in bulk from Cobb.



Also before anyone decides to throw me under the bus for even questioning it (which is what I think you were getting at Jedi), I would do the same if I was in his shoes.

alienRX8

Completely agree. Right now I only trust Jeff with my tuning. And I dont see that changing in the forseeable future.

elysium19

iTrader: (1)

He has "great customer feedback" because 1) he deletes any thread that he can that has negative feedback and 2) he has very quick and good service most of the time, if there are no issues or problems. The truth is, most people are only going to give who they buy parts from a quick look, and most will completely miss the sketchy patterns that have been described.

05rx8mazda

iTrader: (4)

ive dealt this fluid and they seemed really upfront and helpful =]

im gonna have to keep track of this thread

Flashwing

This may or may not be aimed at myself but I'd like the opportunity to clarify my position on all this. I don't have any stake whether with my involvement in BHR or MazdaManiac in the tuning situation so there is no conflict of interest. I don't stand to profit one way or another.

That being said, there's no rules against any vendor inquiring about another vendors product or service. It's only been with the introduction of new rules here on RX8 club that posing questions about products has become difficult because it would require opening a new thread just as Paul did.

Either way, I feel it's my job to ask the hard questions. I've not posed any questions which are out of the ordinary. In the end, the answers will benefit the whole community.

MazdaManiac's process of tuning has been clearly documented as I was the one who wrote it. All anyone is asking for is the same kind of information.

There's no rule that says any vendor has to release any information about their products or services. There are, however, consequences for that as well.

blackenedwings

First, I think Jeff relates the tunes to musical terms because he has experience in that area and there is some overlap in protecting yourself with both types of intellectual property. I view it more like software (as a software engineer it makes sense to me).

If I write a software program that calculates banking numbers and sell it and someone else comes along and makes a program that provides the same numbers, its competition. If they took a copy of my source code and altered the comments and then sold it, its theft. With the tunes there is almost no way to prove a particular person stole the numbers from Jeff if he openly publishes his tunes. There is no legal protection over those numerical values, and you have almost zero chance of proving they got those numbers from his work. If they make a tiny modification to those numbers and resell the product they can make money without doing any work whatsoever and he cannot stop them.

Also I strongly disagree in the comparison between Fluids lack of disclosure and MMs. Jeff is saying, "I won't give the product to you, but I will be the one providing the service, this is my skill level, and here are a dozen places you can read up on the quality of my tunes and what people say about me as a tuner." He is asking you only to trust his abilities as far as his known reputation. He also specifies how many tunes you get and the timeline associated with those tunes and has a documented way to log the data, submit it, and get the data and tunes back and forth. A lot of people are willing to take that leap.

Fluid is saying, "I won't tell you who is doing the tune, what his experience is, how I'm going to handle customer support, how many tunes you are going to get or the timeline you can make changes to them, or who you should talk to if the tune blows your motor AND I'm not going to give you the product." That isn't a leap, thats insane.