|
Post by Meeou on May 20, 2019 8:25:41 GMT
|
|
|
Maps
May 20, 2019 9:41:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by ozmoto on May 20, 2019 9:41:23 GMT
Hopefully we will soon see subforums, and custom maps too. ๐
|
|
|
Maps
May 20, 2019 9:54:16 GMT
Post by Meeou on May 20, 2019 9:54:16 GMT
It's tricky to share custom maps because in general they have been made by tuners and unless I have his permission I can't share his work for free. Hopefully we will soon see subforums, and custom maps too. ๐
|
|
|
Maps
May 20, 2019 12:09:06 GMT
Post by ozmoto on May 20, 2019 12:09:06 GMT
It's tricky to share custom maps because in general they have been made by tuners and unless I have his permission I can't share his work for free. Hopefully we will soon see subforums, and custom maps too. ๐ Technically, you aren't sharing custom tunes though. If I get my bike dyno'd, go home and download the tune I don't believe there's anything stopping me from "sharing" it at all? For myself, I started with horras' tune from the custom list on the site, then had a look at some other custom tunes, and made my own anyway. Would be nice to compare custom tunes (if people host them somewhere), or even if they posted "Hey, this is my setup <blah> and can PM for tune".
|
|
|
Maps
May 22, 2019 11:16:20 GMT
one9 likes this
Post by johndynostar on May 22, 2019 11:16:20 GMT
tricky one this one. in my view the customer has spent the money paying the tuner so he owns the map and can share it as he paid for it. I have spent a few hours learning how not to do and how to do Tune ecu and still consider myself a novice. I have a Dyno and use it to the best of my capabilities. can/should I/ share/keep secret. My customers information. My maps may not be perfect but are made on a timescale at a cost so are possibly functional but not pretty to look at. Ozmoto probably has it right when he studies the maps and makes a choice on what he uses from them. I always start with the stock read map and develop from the read map. it sometimes takes me as long to fashion a download tune (of sometimes 3 options) to suit the particular bike I am working on. so I prefer to work with the original map I am new to the Android system. I think been able to work the tablet has been/is more difficult than using tune ecu but I think that is an age thing hope this makes sense . nice forum
|
|
|
Maps
May 25, 2019 7:17:28 GMT
Post by magwych on May 25, 2019 7:17:28 GMT
I am not aware of any copyright law on chnages made to the mapping in an ECU. I know that some tuners like to insist their customers do not reveal their "trade secrets"; and, some customers might feel that they paid for the work why sould they share it for free.
The Facebook page has had may requests from people asking for the work of others, and I am sure this forum will have them too. Personally, I am more than happy to share the maps that I have derived. Someone lse may be able to refine them further, or adapt them to their own purposes. I developed mine based on the information that people were willing to share without profit, and a lot of time tsting small changes with the equipment available to me.
In among the arguments for and against proprietary ownership there is a more important factor, that of adaptability. A specific map from a manufacturer shoudl match all of the machines that it is installed into. Each machine, however, has tolerances of fit, size, and component characteristics. The OEM maps must suit a range of possibilities. Put the bike into the hands of a skilled tuner, or even a home tuner with the right equipment, and the mapping can be tweaked to suit that particular motor, and its current state. It may not necessarily be pefect for another machine, even one built at the same time on the production line.
Throwing in someone else' map is not a safe venture, much better to develop one suited to ones own needs. The information about how maps have been chnaged is probably more important. Maufacturers must, by law, meet certain standards. That meas their maps are suited to meet emmissions standards. Much like "dieselgate", they have been known to target their maps to meet the tests. Pre-EURO4 an adaptation program was included inside many ECUs to take feedback from the O2 sensor and to adjust the maps. Many bikes were terrible off the showroom floor, with hesitant and jerky throttle responses. Salespeoples' reaction to that was advise customers give it some time to settle down. The ECU would learn and adapt the maps to suit the way the motor was used. Tuning can pre-empt that adaptation, but does require the adaptation tables be cleared. If they are not, then again one custom map may not suit another bike.
The key knwoledge that we should all be happy to share, without commercial concerns, is what has been noted about the state of the factory mapping and how it was adapated to suit a particular machine. That allows informed deosions to be made about taking on a map. Better still, read up on the subject and adapt your own maps.
Many years ago many of us would chnage th ejets in our carbs, remove cylinder base gaskets and adjust the timing from the set marks based on littl more than the previous night's pub table discussion. What we now have is the equivalent of several hundred jets that can be almost infinitely changed.
|
|
|
Post by ozmoto on May 25, 2019 7:20:20 GMT
tricky one this one. in my view the customer has spent the money paying the tuner so he owns the map and can share it as he paid for it. I have spent a few hours learning how not to do and how to do Tune ecu and still consider myself a novice. I have a Dyno and use it to the best of my capabilities. can/should I/ share/keep secret. My customers information. My maps may not be perfect but are made on a timescale at a cost so are possibly functional but not pretty to look at. Ozmoto probably has it right when he studies the maps and makes a choice on what he uses from them. I always start with the stock read map and develop from the read map. it sometimes takes me as long to fashion a download tune (of sometimes 3 options) to suit the particular bike I am working on. so I prefer to work with the original map I am new to the Android system. I think been able to work the tablet has been/is more difficult than using tune ecu but I think that is an age thing hope this makes sense . nice forum That is my view too. If I take my bike in and I pay the ~$400AUD to have it custom dyno tuned then at the end of the day, I paid for it and I can download that map of my bike and share it if need be. For my S3R, I started with the stock Triumph 20589 map, then looked at another map that was dyno'd by someone that lives further South who shared theirs and compared the two and tweaked the stock map to my liking. It isn't perfect, but would be an improvement over a baseline stock map from Triumph.
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 26, 2019 12:24:33 GMT
It's tricky to share custom maps because in general they have been made by tuners and unless I have his permission I can't share his work for free. Hopefully we will soon see subforums, and custom maps too. ๐ Hello Alaine, I see no problems there, the maps belong to the one who paid for them.
And if this owner makes his map available, the tuner has nothing more to do with it.
|
|
|
Maps
Jun 9, 2019 10:01:48 GMT
Post by lee337 on Jun 9, 2019 10:01:48 GMT
Copyright laws differ from country to country and is always a complex issue.
I work in a profession where I have to be mindful of using/sharing others work, even where that work is published on the internet for all to see.
My (very) simplistic view is that if someone else has put in time/money to develop, write or design something, whether that is electronic or a physical item, they effectively own the copyright & have a say in what happens to it.
So unless the author has specifically said it's free to distribute, copy or use a s a basis for change, I would need permission from the author to do so to avoid any potential copyright issues.
Even if someone creates a product specifically for you, in this case a map for your ECU, then that product is for your use only unless the person who created it has given you permission to share it.
As for the argument, 'you paid for it therefore you own it', that doesn't hold water. I own and have paid for many electronic books and I can read them, even move them from my Kobo to my PC, or a storage device, but I don't own the content, I can't copy it for sale or distribution, I can't quote it in a piece of my own work or plagiarise it & pass it off as my own work.
In the world of copyright, there's no distinction made between an item created and distributed electronically, in physical form or even an idea, as long as it can be proved that the original thinker/author came up with it.
|
|
|
Maps
Jun 11, 2019 5:47:42 GMT
Post by Meeou on Jun 11, 2019 5:47:42 GMT
I totally agree with you lee337
|
|
|
Maps
Jun 15, 2019 5:58:20 GMT
via mobile
Post by infamous on Jun 15, 2019 5:58:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by decosse on Jun 24, 2019 7:33:52 GMT
... I own and have paid for many electronic books and I can read them, even move them from my Kobo to my PC, or a storage device, but I don't own the content, I can't copy it for sale or distribution, I can't quote it in a piece of my own work or plagiarise it & pass it off as my own work. ... I don't think that is an apples to apples comparison: Those books - or music - or movies - are all created by the authors/owners/creators of that media with specific intent of mass-market sale and you are sold a single 'copy' of that work with the full understanding of what your 'ownership' rights of that 'copy' are - I completely agree that these media are copyright protected. But if I am Michael Jackson and buy the Entire Beatles works and the copyright that accompanies them, then the Beatles have no further claim on those works use, even as the entities who actually produced these unique works. The same applies to companies who develop maps, off their own investment, for mass-market sale - at least one prominent UK supplier comes to mind here and I'm sure many of you will recognize who that is. I wholly support that those maps are covered by the same governance (and frankly ethically deserves to be respected for what they are) However I disagree wholeheartedly when a tuner is "commissioned" to develop a custom tune for an individual - in that case, I would argue that the individual owns the entity and the creator was paid for their work in full and has no further ownership. That is, for example, similar to someone who commissions a portrait of themselves - the artist is paid for that work and has no over-riding ownership of its work, should the owner choose to replicate it. Or I pay a composer to write me a ditty for my birthday - that is not the same as a composer creating a work that they invested their un-commissioned time to create something that is expressly for mass resale. Just like the Beatles who were paid at one time for their output under a specific contract, to which they had no legal claim with it subsequently being auctioned to the higher bidder (Jackson in this case) SO I would argue that if I pay for a 'service' - which is to produce a map for my bike, then just the same as I can give/donate/sell copies of that same painting/music, I own it and is mine to do as I please - I bought a SERVICE not a licensed product. Now ........ if the tuner states in his contract that the product he is about to create remains the proprietary ownership of the developer and is given to customer under LICENSE for their sole use, that is a different proposition. Conversely, however, I would feel aggrieved if I paid the developer for a custom tune for which I paid a handsome hourly rate, working on MY bike, who then subsequently sold that same tune to another party when I paid for the work! I would say the same argument applies - I own the resultant product, not the person who was paid for that body of work in full. At the end of the day it matters not what we as individuals feel about this - Meeou's forum and his own interpretation of what to host is for him & him alone to decide and I respect that judgment
|
|
|
Post by ozmoto on Jun 24, 2019 9:17:59 GMT
... I own and have paid for many electronic books and I can read them, even move them from my Kobo to my PC, or a storage device, but I don't own the content, I can't copy it for sale or distribution, I can't quote it in a piece of my own work or plagiarise it & pass it off as my own work. ... I don't think that is an apples to apples comparison: Those books - or music - or movies - are all created by the authors/owners/creators of that media with specific intent of mass-market sale and you are sold a single 'copy' of that work with the full understanding of what your 'ownership' rights of that 'copy' are - I completely agree that these media are copyright protected. But if I am Michael Jackson and buy the Entire Beatles works and the copyright that accompanies them, then the Beatles have no further claim on those works use, even as the entities who actually produced these unique works. The same applies to companies who develop maps, off their own investment, for mass-market sale - at least one prominent UK supplier comes to mind here and I'm sure many of you will recognize who that is. I wholly support that those maps are covered by the same governance (and frankly ethically deserves to be respected for what they are) However I disagree wholeheartedly when a tuner is "commissioned" to develop a custom tune for an individual - in that case, I would argue that the individual owns the entity and the creator was paid for their work in full and has no further ownership. That is, for example, similar to someone who commissions a portrait of themselves - the artist is paid for that work and has no over-riding ownership of its work, should the owner choose to replicate it. Or I pay a composer to write me a ditty for my birthday - that is not the same as a composer creating a work that they invested their un-commissioned time to create something that is expressly for mass resale. Just like the Beatles who were paid at one time for their output under a specific contract, to which they had no legal claim with it subsequently being auctioned to the higher bidder (Jackson in this case) SO I would argue that if I pay for a 'service' - which is to produce a map for my bike, then just the same as I can give/donate/sell copies of that same painting/music, I own it and is mine to do as I please - I bought a SERVICE not a licensed product. Now ........ if the tuner states in his contract that the product he is about to create remains the proprietary ownership of the developer and is given to customer under LICENSE for their sole use, that is a different proposition. Conversely, however, I would feel aggrieved if I paid the developer for a custom tune for which I paid a handsome hourly rate, working on MY bike, who then subsequently sold that same tune to another party when I paid for the work! I would say the same argument applies - I own the resultant product, not the person who was paid for that body of work in full. At the end of the day it matters not what we as individuals feel about this - Meeou's forum and his own interpretation of what to host is for him & him alone to decide and I respect that judgment You're right. My view would be if I paid someone to do a custom tune for my bike then it is free to share however I want. Otherwise, when I sell my bike I would have to flash an OEM tune back on the bike - as I don't "own" that tune, which I can't see happening.
|
|
|
Maps
Jul 1, 2019 21:16:38 GMT
Post by sassodrift on Jul 1, 2019 21:16:38 GMT
Hi Alain, I have see on app box that there is the map for dorsoduro 900, is the full power map (95hp)? My motorbike is restricted at 48hp, it is possible to do a backup of my original map? Thanks..
|
|
|
Post by Meeou on Jul 2, 2019 7:44:15 GMT
No, it's the 48HP map
|
|