# Legality of TPU Hosting DLSS DLLs



## W1zzard (Jul 5, 2021)

I moved the comments from the news thread here, so you can continue the discussion


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 5, 2021)

isnt this illegally redistributing licensed code?


----------



## btarunr (Jul 5, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> isnt this illegally redistributing licensed code?


We're not distributing code.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

btarunr said:


> We're not distributing code.


You're redistributing DLLs produced by nVidia. I don't see the difference. nVidia forces developers to agree to some terms before making the DLLs available.

Also, their license specifically says:


> b. Except as expressly provided in this license, you may not copy, sell, rent, sublicense, transfer, distribute, modify, or create derivative works of any portion of the SDK. For clarity, you may not distribute or sublicense the SDK as a stand-alone product.





			https://developer.nvidia.com/gameworks/nvidia_rtx_sdks_license_12apr2021.pdf
		


You're also not shipping it with an application.

Case and point:


> 2. DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS. These are the distribution requirements for you to exercise the grants above
> a. An application must have material additional functionality, beyond the included portions of the SDK.



I hate to say it, but this is a blatant violation of nVidia's terms.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You're redistributing DLLs produced by nVidia. I don't see the difference. nVidia forces developers to agree to some terms before making the DLLs available.
> 
> Also, their license specifically says:
> 
> ...


you quote the license, but the DLL is not the SDK. a DLL is a *binary* file, SDK is a *software* *development kit*, which usually contains some sort of source code. a DLL is *not* user-readable and *is not* source code.
take this cancel-tier shit to twitter where it belongs


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

spnidel said:


> you quote the license, but the DLL is not the SDK. a DLL is a *binary* file, SDK is a *software* *development kit*, which usually contains some sort of source code. a DLL is *not* user-readable and does not contain source code.
> take this cancel-tier shit to twitter where it belongs


This one DLL is part of the SDK and they say specifically the included portions of the SDK, because not all applications are going to use all of it. Also yes, it does. You can use a DLL in Visual Studio and interact with the APIs it provides. That's why nVidia provides them for developers to use *after accepting this license*. The only valid reason to redistribute these files is when it's shipped with an application using it and that application does something more than what the DLLs provide.

Simply put, your take is bad and you should feel bad.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You're redistributing DLLs produced by nVidia. I don't see the difference. nVidia forces developers to agree to some terms before making the DLLs available.
> 
> Also, their license specifically says:
> 
> ...


While you are absolutely right in your interpretation of this agreement. Neither this DLL nor the games they came from have this license agreement to accompany with them. This Agreement that you quote, is for those who chose specifically to use nVidia SDK, which I dont think is the case here. Furthermore, Techpowerup didn't agree to any of those terms anywhere in the process of receiving this file, because they weren't extracted from SDK.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> This one DLL is part of the SDK and they say specifically the included portions of the SDK, because not all applications are going to use all of it. Also yes, it does. You can use a DLL in Visual Studio and interact with the APIs it provides. That's why nVidia provides them to developers to use. The only valid reason to redistribute these files is when it's shipped with an application using it.
> 
> Simply put, your take is bad and you should feel bad.


I think your take is bad and you should feel bad until nvidia takes some kind of action, which they wont; now what?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

spnidel said:


> I think your take is bad and you should feel bad until nvidia takes some kind of action, which they wont; now what?


We'll see about that, now won't we. This post was from an hour ago, it takes time for a company to take action.


Soul_ said:


> While you are absolutely right in your interpretation of this agreement. Neither this DLL nor the games they came from have this license agreement to accompany with them. This Agreement that you quote, is for those who chose specifically to use nVidia SDK, which I dont think is the case here. Furthermore, Techpowerup didn't agree to any of those terms anywhere in the process of receiving this file.


Then where did they get the DLLs from? Your kind of splitting hairs and I don't think a business will see it that way.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Then where did they get the DLLs from? Your kind of splitting hairs and I don't think a business will see it that way.



Game folders. Not splitting hair. Agreements apply where provided. They don't apply where not provided or agreed to.

This is similar TechPowerUp hosting BIOS files. The BIOS is property of nVidia provided to manufacturers under strict Agreements and Conditions. However, extracting a BIOS from a GPU that you purchase, and posting file does not in turn hold you accountable, as you did not agree to BIOS terms and conditions.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Game folders. Not splitting hair. Agreements apply where provided. They don't apply where not provided or agreed to.


That's because you've moved away from authorized users and into the realm of unauthorized users. So instead of being a license violation, it's a copyright violation. Once again, businesses aren't going to stop in their tracks because some armchair warrior thinks they understand how the law works. Either the DLL was copyrighted material that was copied or W1zz agreed to nVidia's terms and is in violation of the license. Either way, it doesn't sound good.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's because you've moved away from authorized users and into the realm of unauthorized users. So instead of being a license violation, it's a copyright violation. Once again, businesses aren't going to stop in their tracks because some armchair warrior thinks they understand how the law works.



Nope. Again not true. Authorized and Unauthorized specifically applies if unauthorized is defined as such in the agreement and universally applied to everyone who hasn't even read that agreement. Which is not true here.

This is similar TechPowerUp hosting BIOS files. The BIOS is property of nVidia provided to manufacturers under strict Agreements and Conditions. However, extracting a BIOS from a GPU that you purchase, and posting file does not in turn hold you accountable, as you did not agree to BIOS terms and conditions.

Additionally, you retorting and calling others "arm chair warrior" doesn't give you any credibility. So please keep your name calling to yourself.


----------



## etayorius (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's because you've moved away from authorized users and into the realm of unauthorized users. So instead of being a license violation, it's a copyright violation. Once again, businesses aren't going to stop in their tracks because some armchair warrior thinks they understand how the law works. Either the DLL was copyrighted material that was copied or W1zz agreed to nVidia's terms and is in violation of the license. Either way, it doesn't sound good.




You a lawyer or represent nVidia?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Nope. Again not true. Authorized and Unauthorized specifically applies if unauthorized is defined as such in the agreement and universally applied to everyone who hasn't even read that agreement. Which is not true here.
> 
> This is similar TechPowerUp hosting BIOS files. The BIOS is property of nVidia provided to manufacturers under strict Agreements and Conditions. However, extracting a BIOS from a GPU that you purchase, and posting file does not in turn hold you accountable, as you did not agree to BIOS terms and conditions.


That's a false equivalency. I don't recall ever agreeing to a license to download BIOS files for my motherboards or GPUs like nVidia does when you download these libraries. Once again, it's still either a copyright violation or a license violation. Also, if an application does ship these DLLs part of the license is saying that they need to ship with similar terms.

nVidia does call this out for those using the libraries.



> c. You agree to distribute the SDK subject to the terms at least as protective as the terms of this license, including (without limitation) terms relating to the license grant, license restrictions and protection of NVIDIA’s intellectual property rights.


^ That's something the distributor has to enforce. All they have to say is that they shipped the game with the license to cover themselves legally.

I suspect lawyers are better at practicing law than you are.



etayorius said:


> You a lawyer or represent nVidia?


No, I know how to read a freaking license and I write software for a living and have to abide by these sort of licenses. Apparently you people don't.

Edit: ...and for what it's worth, I have notified nVidia. I'll let them figure it out. They'll either take action or they won't, but if it were my software and people were in violation of the license, I'd be pretty pissed.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I don't recall ever agreeing to a license to download BIOS files for my motherboards or GPUs like nVidia does when you download these libraries.



Exactly. Because Manufacturers and devs who modify BIOS are the ones agreeing to those terms, not you as an end user. Please read my statement again before just trying to disagree for the sake of disagreeing. Calling it false equivalency is your opinion, prove it if you think you are right.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Edit: ...and for what it's worth, I have notified nVidia


LOL


Aquinus said:


> They'll either take action or they won't


read: "I'm right, and even if I'm not I'm still right"


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

spnidel said:
			
		

> read: "I'm right, and even if I'm not I'm still right"


They might just not care, but the language of the license makes me think that they do.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Exactly. Because Manufacturers and devs who modify BIOS are the ones agreeing to those terms, not you as an end user. Please read my statement again before just trying to disagree for the sake of disagreeing. Calling it false equivalency is your opinion, prove it if you think you are right.


Well, then you're getting into intended purpose. There's probably a license somewhere for things like BIOS and it probably calls out that it's okay to distribute for an intended use and not modification. It's probably in the zip that comes with the BIOS or something if you don't explicitly agree to it. At least that would be my expectation. That is not what nVidia's license says though. The verbiage is pretty clear on the fact that it's their IP and they want it protected if you agree to use it and they go so far to make you agree to it and require the users of these libraries to do the same by including the license as a term of using it, so someone is always responsible.

This is why it's either a copyright violation (sp. theft,) or a license violation. If you copy it from a game, you either agree with the license and are violating it, or you're copying it against the licenses provided with the game. If the game doesn't have the license, then that business is liable for being in violation of the license since they had to get it from somewhere or for illegally copying it themselves, but an entity is always responsible when nVidia does it this way.

Look, I'm no fan of nVidia, but I don't think this is legal. I really don't.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Edit: ...and for what it's worth, I have notified nVidia. I'll let them figure it out. They'll either take action or they won't, but if it were my software and people were in violation of the license, I'd be pretty pissed.


Oh my god, what a jobsworth!  PLEASE report me to nVidia as well, I effing hate them, and you can quote that to them, from me, with love.

But really though, what a piece of work...  You have a gall to call spnidel a child, while you are the one playing the playground snitch?

What exactly do you want to happen?  This site to get shut down?  to make peoples lives a little more miserable?  Seriously, why don't you just delete the bookmark and move on dude?


----------



## GlowingPotato (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus, are you representing Nvidia or something ? wtf is wrong with you.
Its a damn unreadable/compiled DLL, that will eventually find its way into my computer.

Do you want a cookie from Nvidia ?


----------



## etayorius (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's a false equivalency. I don't recall ever agreeing to a license to download BIOS files for my motherboards or GPUs like nVidia does when you download these libraries. Once again, it's still either a copyright violation or a license violation. Also, if an application does ship these DLLs part of the license is saying that they need to ship with similar terms.
> 
> nVidia does call this out for those using the libraries.
> 
> ...



That's exactly what i thought you would do, lol run off to them like if your life depends on it and tell them of the "horrible" things that this site is doing with their Intelectual Property. 

Seriously dude, you don't belong here. You're better off hanging out on Twitter cancelling Famous people for expressing their opinion. You would fit perfectly there.


----------



## john_ (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You're redistributing DLLs produced by nVidia. I don't see the difference. nVidia forces developers to agree to some terms before making the DLLs available.
> 
> Also, their license specifically says:
> 
> ...


With simple modders implementing AMD's FSR in games with easy, if we consider GTA V example as an indication of what is coming, Nvidia could have sent those libraries themselves to TechPowerUp and other tech sites.


----------



## Thorsthimble (Jul 5, 2021)

"Edit: ...and for what it's worth, I have notified nVidia. I'll let them figure it out. They'll either take action or they won't, but if it were my software and people were in violation of the license, I'd be pretty pissed."

Seriously? I have no idea if you are right or wrong. You could be absolutely, 100% correct. Frankly, I don't care one way or the other. It is what it is. But to run off and tattle to Nvidia because some other posters challenged you is just.... I don't know. Impressive, and not in a good way.


----------



## _Flare (Jul 5, 2021)

This "problem" if it exists is between TPU and Nvidia and we speculating about it is useless. If there comes up any conflict, we are also useless.
I´ll now go on and eat my pizza.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 5, 2021)

that feel when you're so desperate to win an internet argument you run to a corporation's lawyers


----------



## Steevo (Jul 5, 2021)

This is great, watching people with no reason figure out ways to argue. I remember when anything performance related was fair game, in fact that was the point. 

I cannot comprehend why anyone is concerned that Nvidia may or might or not do something about a thing on a tech site that they seem to value run by a person with technical skills and connections to ensure its probably OK.


But keep going, it's entertaining!!


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 5, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Well, then you're getting into intended purpose.



How does uploading it to techpowerup change the intended purpose or use of the file? The file and its purpose are still the same. Sorry, I am just trying to understand how any of the agreements that you mentioned here apply to techpowerup.


----------



## DicehunterTPU (Jul 5, 2021)

Holy crap there are some twitter level Karens in here, Yikes.

On a side note thanks for this TPU, Will be interesting to see if replacing the DLSS2 DLL's in other games will make a difference.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 5, 2021)

spnidel said:


> that feel when you're so desperate to win an internet argument you run to a corporation's lawyers


Isn’t that the only way to verify which one of you is right (or #winning)? Why are you against it?

edit: and this is quite clearly just redistiribution of a part of a copyrighted game, which to my knowledge is illegal in the same capcity as redistributing the whole game without the copyright holders permission. 

Whether nvidia cares is a different question, I’ll give it 50/50.


----------



## RH92 (Jul 5, 2021)

_Flare said:


> This "problem" if it exists is between TPU and Nvidia and we speculating about it is useless. If there comes up any conflict, we are also useless.
> I´ll now go on and eat my pizza.



Pretty much my take aswell, i don't get why peoples are looosing their mind  over legal obligations about something doesn't concern them at all ..... If there is a conflict it's between TPU and Nvidia so yeah , pointless discussion .


----------



## spnidel (Jul 5, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Isn’t that the only way to verify which one of you is right (or #winning)? Why are you against it?


there must be something wrong with you if you think reaching out to lawyers over a fucking internet argument is time well spent
to clarify: no, I don't mean you in particular. I'm talking in a broad sense


----------



## Dredi (Jul 5, 2021)

spnidel said:


> there must be something wrong with you if you think reaching out to lawyers over a fucking internet argument is time well spent
> to clarify: no, I don't mean you in particular. I'm talking in a broad sense


Why argue, if you can’t even make a case for your point of view? If clear thought process does not make a mark on someones (incorrect) view, the only way forward is sadly to get an authoritative take on the subject in question.

Also, I don’t see the problem in reaching out to a lawyers. Regardless of how shitty you think nvidia to be as a company, it is still fair to them to inform that their rights are being broken.
Plus, it’s just wasting their time if you are correct in your view. And wasting the time of a shitty corporations lawyers should be good way to spend time on the internet.


----------



## DicehunterTPU (Jul 5, 2021)

Dredi said:


> I don’t see the problem in reaching out to a lawyers. Regardless of how shitty you think nvidia to be as a company, it is still fair to them to inform that their rights are being broken.


There's a good word that describes someone like this, Jobsworth.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 5, 2021)

Steevo said:


> This is great, watching people with no reason figure out ways to argue. I remember when anything performance related was fair game, in fact that was the point.
> 
> I cannot comprehend why anyone is concerned that Nvidia may or might or not do something about a thing on a tech site that they seem to value run by a person with technical skills and connections to ensure its probably OK.
> 
> ...


You are right.

This is far more entertaining that watching millionaire professional footballers faking injuries.

Anyhow TPU is not the first mainstream technology site to have posted these files. Based on the fact that neither Nvidia nor AMD have ordered DMCA takedowns of the various BIOSes on this site, it is unlikely that Nvidia will ask TPU to remove these DLSS dlls.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 5, 2021)

emotions surrounding image upscaling are facinating


----------



## Dredi (Jul 5, 2021)

DicehunterTPU said:


> There's a good word that describes someone like this, Jobsworth.


Or maybe just anal?

 Seeing how nvidia is just a shitty corporation, I don’t really care about their rights. It’s still entertaining to see whether they will respond. If the question was about some small companys SW informing them of such thing would be something even I’d do.


----------



## DicehunterTPU (Jul 5, 2021)

Dredi said:


> *Or maybe just anal?*
> 
> Seeing how nvidia is just a shitty corporation, I don’t really care about their rights. It’s still entertaining to see whether they will respond. If the question was about some small companys SW informing them of such thing would be something even I’d do.


I'd say pathetic neckbeard that needs to get out more, Like a lot more, Would be a more apt description of any individual that is emotionally distraught by this, And that person should definitely book a therapist session while they're out.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 5, 2021)

DicehunterTPU said:


> I'd say pathetic neckbeard that needs to get out more, Like a lot more, Would be a more apt description of any individual that is emotionally distraught by this, And that person should definitely book a therapist session while they're out.


Exactly


----------



## qubit (Jul 5, 2021)

@Aquinus From the looks of the rules that you've quoted, you're technically right, it's piracy on the high seas!  However, in practice, I don't think it's a problem, because NVIDIA won't mind as it simply helps them to increase their market share that little bit with enthusiasts and shut AMD out. On top of that, from a user perspective, TPU is once again providing a cool service to help the community - thanks @W1zzard 

This situation reminds me of all those cheap Windows and Office keys being sold everywhere. Sure, they're not strictly legit, despite the claims, but Microsoft knows that it helps them to keep that grip on marketshare, so they look the other way and even well established sites like TPU can advertise these sellers, like we see on here frequently, without fear of getting sued.

Finally, put it this way: if megacorps NVIDIA and Microsoft don't care, then why should we? The fact that it's technically a kind of soft piracy is rendered moot and merely a talking point.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 5, 2021)

btarunr said:


> We're not distributing code.


I mean you are...  but presumably these dlls are literally redistributables or they wouldn't be packaged like this, meaning nvidia probably doesn't care.



Aquinus said:


> I hate to say it, but this is a blatant violation of nVidia's terms.


It appears to be yes, but then again, we have greymarket key sites. advertised here...  TPU has always conducted itself this way, for better or worse.  If they don't get sued and it helps gamers, I honestly don't mind (in this instance).



Soul_ said:


> This is similar TechPowerUp hosting BIOS files. The BIOS is property of nVidia provided to manufacturers under strict Agreements and Conditions. However, extracting a BIOS from a GPU that you purchase, and posting file does not in turn hold you accountable, as you did not agree to BIOS terms and conditions.


Actually, it does.  Even bios files are legally grey.  But thing is, NVIDIA has posted them openly itself at times, so it's pretty aparent it does not care.

Here?  We'll see I guess.  Hope w1zzard did his research.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 5, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> presumably these dlls are literally redistributables or they wouldn't be packaged like this, meaning nvidia probably doesn't care.


They are distributed like this, so that not a single line of the actual DLSS code needs to exit nvidias premises. Legally whether something is a dll or not has zero merit.


----------



## milewski1015 (Jul 5, 2021)

Jesus, why all the damn hate? All TPU is trying to do is provide a risk-free place for people to download the DLLs that they would find other places anyway. That's commendable in my opinion


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 5, 2021)

DicehunterTPU said:


> There's a good word that describes someone like this, Jobsworth.


I think its the same guy.  They at least share the same skewed view of their own self importance, and need to influence their "power" over others.

The whole "I don't agree with you, so i'm going to (tell my dad) the Police so they can give you a good telling off" is the stuff of the schoolyard... or the Twitter mob.


----------



## DicehunterTPU (Jul 5, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> I think its the same guy.  They at least share the same skewed view of their own self importance, and need to influence their "power" over others.



I just find it really sad and pathetic, How empty and meaningless does someones life have to be to make a non existent mole hill into mount Everest over graphical DLL's on a tech site.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 5, 2021)

> the DLSS libraries, which are usually located in the game's installation folders,



So the dlls are distributed via game installations? I see this as purely coincidental, that the same files as in the SDK. I also take it to mean the files in the SDK are redistributable, or they wouldnt be installed within game folders.


----------



## qubit (Jul 5, 2021)

milewski1015 said:


> Jesus, why all the damn hate? All TPU is trying to do is provide a risk-free place for people to download the DLLs that they would find other places anyway. That's commendable in my opinion


Duh! Exactly. Let no good deed go unpunished.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 5, 2021)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> So the dlls are distributed via game installations? I see this as purely coincidental, that the same files as in the SDK. I also take it to mean the files in the SDK are redistributable, or they wouldnt be installed within game folders.


The game developers put them there deliberately for titles that support DLSS. It makes zero sense to have the end user install software that doesn't do anything. The game developers qual a certain version of DLSS to work with a certain version of the game. That's why various games have different versions of DLSS.

Remember that DLSS needs game-specific profiles (calculated by Nvidia's supercomputers) to work. I can't just drop these dlls into a game like, oh, let's say Minesweeper and expect them to work automagically. It doesn't work like that.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

milewski1015 said:


> Jesus, why all the damn hate? All TPU is trying to do is provide a risk-free place for people to download the DLLs that they would find other places anyway. That's commendable in my opinion


I'm not disputing that. All I'm saying is that redistributing it may not be legal given the wording of the license. I don't want @W1zzard getting grief and I don't want nVidia's software license being thrown to the wind because of what that implies for other software licenses. It's an absolutely terrible precedent to set.



cvaldes said:


> Remember that DLSS needs game-specific profiles (calculated by Nvidia's supercomputers) to work. I can't just drop these dlls into a game like, oh, let's say Minesweeper and expect them to work automagically. It doesn't work like that.


Well... technically you can if API compatibility isn't broken. That depends on nVidia's diligence to not break backwards compatibility. If a game uses DLSS and a newer DLL doesn't break backwards compatibility with the APIs, it might work. It also might not, it's a gamble. It also assumes that it doesn't depend on code changes to other DLLs either.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 5, 2021)

Dredi said:


> They are distributed like this, so that not a single line of the actual DLSS code needs to exit nvidias premises. Legally whether something is a dll or not has zero merit.


I wasn't speaking legally.  I was speaking to intended use.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 5, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I wasn't speaking legally.  I was speaking to intended use.


When I manage dependencies in projects, I specify exact versions. Newer versions of deps can cause issues if the code hasn't been updated to handle the changes if there is a breaking change, intentional or not. For intended use, sure, but I think there is an argument to be had that you're playing with fire by just updating a single dependency without understanding the full dep graph. That's aside from the legality issues. I wouldn't just go swapping out DLLs. At best, it works. In reality, it might not. At worst, it works and it triggers anti-cheat or something dumb like that.

Either way...


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 5, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> While you are absolutely right in your interpretation of this agreement. Neither this DLL nor the games they came from have this license agreement to accompany with them. This Agreement that you quote, is for those who chose specifically to use nVidia SDK, which I dont think is the case here. Furthermore, Techpowerup didn't agree to any of those terms anywhere in the process of receiving this file, because they weren't extracted from SDK.


What?
is that like driving without a license you don't have to abide by the road rules?
Oh and the car is hot but that doesn't count either cos you didn't steal it yourself, your just driving it?


----------



## zlobby (Jul 6, 2021)

qubit said:


> Duh! Exactly. Let no good deed go unpunished.


Don' get me wrong. If anyone hates nvidia the most, that would be me. Here comes the 'but'... But nvidia stated the rules clearly and explicitly, love it or hate it.

In modern world people serve more time in the pen for copyright infringement than DUI or even homicide! 

For as long as any company is pushing openness and fair play, they will have my money.


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I don't want @W1zzard getting grief


You are the grief.


----------



## net2007 (Jul 6, 2021)

Soy boys rated R


----------



## wolf (Jul 6, 2021)

qubit said:


> I don't think it's a problem, because NVIDIA won't mind as it simply helps them to increase their market share that little bit with enthusiasts


I think this is probably one of the bigger points of merit, this is essentially free press for NVIDIA, it's getting people talking about their tech, in a positive way, people are genuinely excited about this stuff to get the best out of DLSS. 

NVIDIA wants all the DLSS hype they can get, and this plays right into their hands, plus, for all the extra visibility, it might even have game dev's testing and updating games to the newer/better DLL files.

Could it be technically wrong? seems quite possibly it is. Will they care? I bloody well doubt it, at least not in a negative way.


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 6, 2021)

Nvidia won't care long as it stays proprietary and can be segemented into supported DLSS versions they don't care much like Microsoft with Direct X with Windows. It's all about that jail cell they confine you too and lock you within.


----------



## Richards (Jul 6, 2021)

zlobby said:


> Don' get me wrong. If anyone hates nvidia the most, that would be me. Here comes the 'but'... But nvidia stated the rules clearly and explicitly, love it or hate it.
> 
> In modern world people serve more time in the pen for copyright infringement than DUI or even homicide!
> 
> For as long as any company is pushing openness and fair play, they will have my money.


We dnot care stop stealing



R-T-B said:


> That's not how the world works.  Warning a bussiness about a potential legal misstep is not what you do if your goal is grief.


Its good we d'not  want thiefs and pirates reputation  for  the  site


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Richards said:


> Its good we d'not want thiefs and pirates reputation for the site


I really think you need to draw a line between this and blatant piracy, even if legally it's the same, ethically it's not.  It's literally the same as TPU's VBIOS database in that line of thought.

That ship sailed long ago if we're worried about such things.


----------



## wolf (Jul 6, 2021)

InVasMani said:


> It's all about that jail cell they confine you too and lock you within.


I'm not sure I follow, owning a DLSS capable card and playing DLSS games today, locks me into needing an Nvidia card for any future replacements?


----------



## bobsled (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> That's not how the world works.  Warning a bussiness about a potential legal misstep is not what you do if your goal is grief.


I fail to see how notifying Nvidia is warning TPU against a potential misstep.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

bobsled said:


> I fail to see how notifying Nvidia is warning TPU against a potential misstep.


He is notifying w1zzard?  Where did he ever say he was notifying nvidia?



Aquinus said:


> Edit: ...and for what it's worth, I have notified nVidia. I'll let them figure it out. They'll either take action or they won't, but if it were my software and people were in violation of the license, I'd be pretty pissed.



Ah, nvm.  I missed this.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> aquinus must be having a bad day,


I mean, I kinda get it.  I'm a failed software developer, but I still understand the sentiment that EULAs matter.

I just don't really care if nvidia doesn't, is what it boils down to.  But for many, it comes down to a matter of principles...  and that is the core disagreement here.


----------



## zlobby (Jul 6, 2021)

Fold the water hoses, Jose. Nvidia will soon catch wind of what's happening here and we'll know their verdict before the hammer falls.

I hope nvidia play it like gentlemen for once and keep it civil with TPU.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I mean, I kinda get it.  I'm a failed software developer, but I still understand the sentiment that EULAs matter.
> 
> I just don't really care if nvidia doesn't, is what it boils down to.  But for many, it comes down to a matter of principles...  and that is the core disagreement here.


Yup. Also, if nvidia does not care, they should just strip the licence. Otherwise TPU is in a bad spot where they know they are doing something illegal, but are ”permitted” to do it in a strictly non binding manner, which for a typical company would be something to avoid like the plague. At least TPU isn’t doing anything with the DLL’s nor are they asking money for the distribution (oh, wait, the download page has ads - and thus TPU is generating income via copyright infringement. Let’s hope that TPU never writes a bad review of any nvidia products  ).

nvidia as a company is not beyond petty tactics when it comes to how its products are represented in the media and I would not give them any attack vectors voluntarily. In order to prevent this, it would be best to just ask nvidia if this is OK or not. You TPU people have some contacts you can definitely use in this. @W1zzard et al.


----------



## OmniaMorsAequat (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You're redistributing DLLs produced by nVidia. I don't see the difference. nVidia forces developers to agree to some terms before making the DLLs available.
> 
> Also, their license specifically says:
> 
> ...



We remind you that we are on a site where, before publishing certain contents, the manager undertakes to find out if this file can be published or not, if you are used to run on scam and hack sites, here in the case of techpowerup you do not have to worry, I remind you that we do not live in a jungle and as such any content posted on the site is legally verified before its publication at unless, as written before, they are not scam/hack sites etc. in that case the situation would be different, let's avoid creating useless flames just to give attention and move waters that have nothing moved.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> That's not how the world works.  Warning a bussiness about a potential legal misstep is not what you do if your goal is grief.


That's one thing, but informing lawyers is quite another.  Too many power happy tripsters with an inflated sense of their own opinions here.

Half of this forum could have sent a private DM or email to the owners or admin of this site, to air their concerns, instead of publically engaging in virtue signalling ego inflating competitions.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

InVasMani said:


> Nvidia would be playing with fire by going after TMU over this matter and I'm pretty certain their fully aware of it. Worst case what is Nvidia going to do send them a cease and desist and TPU writes a article about it and maybe or maybe not holds a bit of a grudge and even if TPU doesn't directly many in the tech world certainly might have a fair degree of resentment towards Nvidia on the matter.


Nvidia could very well do this in a manner where any public debate would cost TPU dearly. Would it slightly tarnish nvidias public image? Sure. Would it matter to them in any meaningful monetary way? No. 
edit: where is TPU registered? Depending on location the possibilities nvidia has for ransoming are vastly different. 

@W1zzard has a contact at nvidia from which to ask permission for this. If your other points are valid, they will say yes and sponsor some content while at it.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

TPU has nothing to lose except being asked to not host the files any longer

This is a very weird, inflated problem.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> TPU has nothing to lose except being asked to not host the files any longer
> 
> This is a very weird, inflated problem.


Because when you distribute pirated software, you are always just asked nicely to stop and no other reprecussions ever apply. Nvidia will _probably_ just ask nicely, but that is an assumption and not a fact.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Because when you distribute pirated software, you are always just asked nicely to stop and no other reprecussions ever apply. Nvidia will _probably_ just ask nicely, but that is an assumption and not a fact.


But its not pirated?

No code was modified, nothing was cracked, hacked, decompiled, reverse engineered or altered.
This is as dangerous as TPU hosting the Nvidia driver packages, because they arent from nvidias site either...


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Because when you distribute pirated software, you are always just asked nicely to stop and no other reprecussions ever apply. Nvidia will _probably_ just ask nicely, but that is an assumption and not a fact.


So your flat out calling the admins of TPU Pirates now?  Exactly why are you still here then?  Are you just here to snitch on activities here to nVidias lawyers, hoping to get the golden RTX4090Ti from them in return, like a few others in this thread seem to be hoping for?

Do me a favour, put your tears into an email, and send it to the admin of this site, and let them deal with their own business.  Why the need to virtue signal so much?  What are you compensating for?


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 6, 2021)

I mean if this is piracy
https://www.dll-files.com
is in a world of trouble...


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> But its not pirated?
> 
> No code was modified, nothing was cracked, hacked, decompiled, reverse engineered or altered.
> This is as dangerous as TPU hosting the Nvidia driver packages, because they arent from nvidias site either...


It’s not piracy if you host games that doesn’t require cracking, hacking or decompilation to be played? Licence wise it is the same thing.

If the licence for downloading driver does not explicitly tell you not to redistribute it, then it’s fine.



stimpy88 said:


> Exactly why are you still here then?


I’m just discussing this here, because the topic of software copyright is interesting to me. Why are you here?

I’m not virtue signaling anything.




InVasMani said:


> I mean if this is piracy
> https://www.dll-files.com
> is in a world of trouble...


Do they host the files in question?
Anyway, I’m not interested in what other sites are doing, I’m pretty sure there are a bunch of places in the internetz where someone does something that is not strictly legal. That isn’t news to me and hopefully neither for you.


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> It’s not piracy if you host games that doesn’t require cracking, hacking or decompilation to be played? Licence wise it is the same thing.
> 
> If the licence for downloading driver does not explicitly tell you not to redistribute it, then it’s fine.
> 
> ...


As far as the question goes I haven't checked, but I wouldn't doubt it. They have a lot pirated DLL's since 1998 and 2.5 million downloads a month.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

I googled it. Very hard. Was almost two entire sentences of reading.

Digital piracy is when you counter any measures meant to prevent unauthorised copying or distribution of a digital file.
What anti-copying measure was used and defeated here?


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> I googled it. Very hard. Was almost two entire sentences of reading.
> 
> Digital piracy is when you counter any measures meant to prevent unauthorised copying or distribution of a digital file.
> What anti-copying measure was used and defeated here?


My bad. I thought that digital piracy was just a term for illegal redistiribution of software or other digital media.

If it was as you are saying, audio CD music piracy would not be a thing, as it is not protected in any technical way.

Wikipedia states though that online piracy is the practice of downloading and distributing copyrighted content digitally without permission. Maybe you should edit the page, seeing how you know better.

What TPU is doing is just that, unless they get permission from nvidia.


Edit: @Mussels  where the hell did you get your definition for the term? I’m trying to find it but simply cannot.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> My bad. I thought that digital piracy was just a term for illegal redistiribution of software or other digital media.
> 
> If it was as you are saying, audio CD music piracy would not be a thing, as it is not protected in any technical way.
> 
> ...


Gee it's almost like you're really reaching here trying to defend some vague notions in your head instead of facts from the real world.
Compact Disc Digital Audio - Wikipedia






Even the RIAA states you can rip music CD's legally (and these are the people who sue kids for leaving limewire open), which is converting and modifying them since audio CD's are not stored as files, because you aren't breaking any protection methods.
What you can't do, is give it to others who are not paying customers for that product.






It is only illegal if these copied files are being modified, or distributed as part of another companies products for commercial use... and they are not. They are only able to be used by people who already paid for Nvidias RTX GPU's, in games that people already have with DLSS support implemented.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

btarunr said:


> We're not distributing code.


i just ruined your post lol, dont send me silly warnings in the future unless u want me to volunteer to represent nvidia in court

like seriously see that? i started an entire discorse just to get what I want, wccftech learned the hard way


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> i just ruined your post lol, dont send me silly warnings in the future unless u want me to volunteer to represent nvidia in court
> 
> like seriously see that? i started an entire discorse just to get what I want, wccftech learned the hard way


No ones making you be here.

you made a big discourse... that isn't getting you anything. Oopsie.


Edit: Holy shit looking up your posts on WCCF is AMAZING. You genuinely do post dumb things and get mad about it.











Even with the context of the original threads, your comments make no sense.






Simple fact: you troll here, you get banned. We wont shed any tears over it, and it's not like it takes us any effort.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> Gee it's almost like you're really reaching here trying to defend some vague notions in your head instead of facts from the real world.
> Compact Disc Digital Audio - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> ...


Try harder. I dare you to change the online piracy wikipedia page to match your bullshit.

also, how is TPU making sure that the dll’s are downloaded only by nvidia customers? Not that it would make any difference in the legality argument.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> No ones making you be here.
> 
> you made a big discourse... that isn't getting you anything. Oopsie.


wasnt an oopsie i got myself in the spotlight from a mod right now, objective obtained, have a good one


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> wasnt an oopsie i got myself in the spotlight from a mod right now, objective obtained, have a good one


yeah, see the post edit. If your objective was to give me a good laugh, you've succeeded.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> wasnt an oopsie i got myself in the spotlight from a mod right now, objective obtained, have a good one


Noticing who liked your comment, I think it's easy to see that we have some garden variety Trolls here, fake virtue signalling so they can have an argument to look cool to each other...  Bet they have TBs of HD space full of pirated software, while they stand up for all the "coders" out there.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Noticing who liked your comment, I think it's easy to see that we have some garden variety Trolls here, fake virtue signalling so they can have an argument to look cool to each other...


What is virtue signaling? I’m pretty sure what I’m posting here has nothing to do with it.

i take no position whether what TPU is doing is morally right or wrong. I’m only discussing the legality of it. That should not be taken as ”virtue signaling” as the term is typically understood.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Try harder. I dare you to change the online piracy wikipedia page to match your bullshit.
> 
> also, how is TPU making sure that the dll’s are downloaded only by nvidia customers? Not that it would make any difference in the legality argument.


It doesnt matter, as the file has not had any security measures removed.
And uhh, wiki has an edit history? Go check the page yourself. Go on.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Noticing who liked your comment, I think it's easy to see that we have some garden variety Trolls here, fake virtue signalling so they can have an argument to look cool to each other...


tbh i had a side a genda being i dont like getting told off for saying it how it was, and considering i caused a minor controversy my drunk opportunist self tried to get my agenda across, if it succeeded or not who cares. i feel better


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> What is virtue signaling? I’m pretty sure what I’m posting here has nothing to do with it.
> 
> i take no position whether what TPU is doing is right or wrong. I’m only discussing the legality of it.


Look it up.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Look it up.


all i do is spin the moral to my own ends, dont give it a fancy name, i took a chance and it didnt pay


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Look it up.


”the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue.”

at no point have I taken a moral stance on the matter, or tried to demonstrate that my ”character” would be better than someone elses.

Whether something is legal or not is strictly a technical argument and has no moral stance.

whether something _should be_ illegal or not is a moral argument and I don’t really care about that in this context.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> all i do is spin the moral to my own ends, dont give it a fancy name, i took a chance and it didnt pay


So you and Dredi are the same person then?  Or did you get confused and answered using the wrong username?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> all i do is spin the moral to my own ends, dont give it a fancy name, i took a chance and it didnt pay


and the same will happen here.
Kay, official warning time:

Until and unless one of you hears back from your or Nvidias lawyers, stop this off topic crapfest.
Any continuation after this post will result in comment deletions and/or infractions/bans given.

The files are hosted, they are very likely to continue to be hosted.

Discuss how they friggin work or don't work in games, not pretend lawyering.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> No ones making you be here.
> 
> you made a big discourse... that isn't getting you anything. Oopsie.
> 
> ...


the midland dog account that says they keep adding stuff blah blah is non genuine, i wont defend my actions, ill stand behind em



stimpy88 said:


> So you and Dredi are the same person then?  Or did you get confused and answered using the wrong username?


nah, im Goon Bag, THE ONE TRUE Midland Dog, Midland Wog, Midland Bog, Midland Log, Midland Cog etc u get the point


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> Any continuation after this post will result in comment deletions and/or infractions/bans given.


Could you please nominate a thread where to continue this debate then? Preferrably move most of the shit in here to there in order to clean up the discussion.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

and now my power has exceeded the mods as they had to clip at least 3 pages of posts. basically give up its easier and warrants no response from a troll



Midland Dog said:


> and now my power has exceeded the mods as they had to clip at least 3 pages of posts. basically give up its easier and warrants no response from a troll


thank you for confirming my excellence


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> So you and Dredi are the same person then?  Or did you get confused and answered using the wrong username?


Don’t associate me with him/her/they.
I will admit it if I’m wrong about something, and I don’t do modbaiting.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

anyone who needs a thread/forum hijacked hmu, i took down nvidia's discus for the lols, source most of wccftech, screenshots and nvidia's minecraft rtx discus that i took down


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> and the same will happen here.
> Kay, official warning time:
> 
> Until and unless one of you hears back from your or Nvidias lawyers, stop this off topic crapfest.
> ...


I never expected the level of hate I'm getting for thinking that software licenses are there for a reason and that throwing them to the wind is a dangerous precedent. It implies that rules regarding IP doesn't matter regardless of the license and I find that morally questionable. Also, didn't W1zz move this thread so we could continue discussing this *civilly* without it being tied to the news thread?


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I never expected the level of hate I'm getting for thinking that software licenses are there for a reason and that throwing them to the wind is a dangerous precedent. It implies that rules regarding IP doesn't matter regardless of the license and I find that morally questionable. Also, didn't W1zz move this thread so we could continue discussing this *civilly* without it being tied to the news thread?


i was OP so i was steering it to cause chaos looks like they fixed it tho, obvioulsy caused a stir. and yeah its a bad precedent, im gunna share gpu-z on the premise that i have an archive of an older version that they wont supply (/s)
@W1zzard


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> im gunna share gpu-z on the premise that i have an archive of an older version that they wont supply


Feel free to do that, or just go to the GPU-Z download page and click "Show older versions"


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I never expected the level of hate I'm getting for thinking that software licenses are there for a reason and that throwing them to the wind is a dangerous precedent. It implies that rules regarding IP doesn't matter regardless of the license and I find that morally questionable. Also, didn't W1zz move this thread so we could continue discussing this *civilly* without it being tied to the news thread?


Yeah, TPU is a strange place. I think mussles just lost it for some unknown reason, maybe he’s simply having a bad day. Quite common during the covid not to be best every day. 

I really hope that W1z has used his contacts before embarking on this (strictly speaking) illegal endeavour.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> i was OP so i was steering it to cause chaos looks like they fixed it tho, obvioulsy caused a stir. and yeah its a bad precedent, im gunna share gpu-z on the premise that i have an archive of an older version that they wont supply (/s)
> @W1zzard


That's a bit different though. You're shipping an application and it's just out of date and the newer version is better. Something like a DLL is a bit different because of how it's intended to be used and the license that's associated with it. I'm pretty sure W1zz doesn't include no redistribution language on a license for GPU-Z. nVidia on the other hand, has explicitly called this out. There is a big difference because they're two different decisions regarding IP, both of which should be respected.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Feel free to do that, or just go to the GPU-Z download page and click "Show older versions"


you have respect still its just deteriorating, an example is an example, lets say you didnt and i did, wouldnt feel nice for someone else to host your work, yeah nvidia is a big mob but some dude still smashed hours out making dlss version x and im sure they would like to be the one to say just click older versions i recommend x y and z



Dredi said:


> Yeah, TPU is a strange place. I think mussles just lost it for some unknown reason, maybe he’s just having a bad day.


im good at my job


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Seriously though. Am I really a terrible person for being a software engineer and thinking that the license I choose for my personal works should be respected? I have to respect licenses for the software I use in my job and for personal works and I have to respect that while I work the IP I produce is the property of the business, so why would this be any different? I have strong opinions about this because it's something I need to be very aware of in my profession.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Seriously though. Am I really a terrible person for being a software engineer and thinking that the license I choose for my personal works should be respected? I have to respect licenses for the software I use in my job and for personal works and I have to respect that while I work the IP I produce is the property of the business, so why would this be any different? I have strong opinions about this because it's something I need to be very aware of in my profession.


the problem with this is that it only becomes illegal if say joe moe downloads dlss x.z for his pirated version of y game. just hosting the files isnt illegal. better to take them down and let pc gaming wiki handle that hot spud. keep stuff like c++ redist here since ms is to tarded to host it themselves but yeah nah, take it down


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Seriously though. Am I really a terrible person for being a software engineer and thinking that the license I choose for my personal works should be respected? I have to respect licenses for the software I use in my job and for personal works and I have to respect that while I work the IP I produce is the property of the business, so why would this be any different? I have strong opinions about this because it's something I need to be very aware of in my profession.


You lost respect when you told everyone that you had just reported this site to nVidia.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 6, 2021)

Wow.. what a show.

*golf clap*


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> You lost respect when you told everyone that you had just reported this site to nVidia.


specifically quote me specifically stating that i ratted anyone spastic, cease and desist ALL defamation, im manipulative and evil, but im no rat, ill use the threat of a rat but i aint no rat


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> ...No, I know how to read a freaking license and I write software for a living and have to abide by these sort of licenses. Apparently you people don't.
> 
> *Edit: ...and for what it's worth, I have notified nVidia. I'll let them figure it out. They'll either take action or they won't, but if it were my software and people were in violation of the license, I'd be pretty pissed.*





Midland Dog said:


> specifically quote me specifically stating that i ratted anyone *spastic*, cease and desist ALL defamation, im manipulative and evil, but im no rat, ill use the threat of a rat but i aint no rat


Dude, you need to calm down, and get back in your pram.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

waiting for you to say where i, midland dog ratted someone, i said i could, but never did


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> waiting for you to say where i, midland dog ratted someone, i said i could, but never did


Are you really this simple?  Read the post, and see who was quoted in it.  You will find that it wasn't you.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jul 6, 2021)

I'll just throw my sincere opinion on this matter, even if it is _supposedly a naughty thing_ to do by TPU, I would go as far as saying that it isn't in NV's best interests to prevent hosting of their official, precompiled redistributables for gamers' use, and that they should host these files in a readily available location themselves - since apparently, all it takes is the DLSS DLL replacement to "upgrade" a game from say, DLSS 1.0 to DLSS 2.x. They have competition now, on both hardware performance (hello, 3090 losing to the 6800 XT in some games! looking at you RDR2) and AMD's own open-source, hardware abstract upscaler, which also works on their own graphics cards, of any kind, age, and generation with stunning results.

Full disclaimer, I have an RTX 3090. FidelityFX Super Resolution works exceedingly well - and i'd argue that it is on equal footing to DLSS as far as performance and looks go. I will just say it to anyone's face: DLSS has never influenced my purchase decisions and I will gladly give up on this "technology", especially since AMD's competing solution is of very high quality indeed works just as well should I ever need to resort to using one with the kind of hardware I have. I fully expect DLSS to have the same fate as PhysX.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Are you really this simple?  Read the post, and see who was quoted in it.  You will find that it wasn't you.


"You lost respect when you told everyone that you had just reported this site to nVidia." no one even said the word respect in this thread other than me


----------



## Frick (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> waiting for you to say where i, midland dog ratted someone, i said i could, but never did



No, he's saying you didn't.

FWIW I think Aquinus did the right thing. If Nvidia ignores it we have an answer. And please, stop with idea of that was a tattle or whatever you call it. This ain't the 90's anymore and we are part of a shady IRC channel no one knows about.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Dr. Dro said:


> I fully expect DLSS to have the same fate as PhysX.


Proliferation to a literal ton of games via Unity?

OT but bad comparison.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> "You lost respect when you told everyone that you had just reported this site to nVidia." no one even said the word respect in this thread other than me


It really does seem that you really are that simple after all.  Is your username here Aquinus?  Because it clearly states that i'm quoting his post.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> "You lost respect when you told everyone that you had just reported this site to nVidia." no one even said the word respect in this thread other than me





Frick said:


> No, he's saying you didn't.
> 
> FWIW I think Aquinus did the right thing. If Nvidia ignores it we have an answer. And please, stop with idea of that was a tattle or whatever you call it. This ain't the 90's anymore and we are part of a shady IRC channel no one knows about.


hes basically baited himself is whats happened. i said quote me being a rat and he quoted someone else so i asked again. main point is to troll, this entire thread is a troll, i did it to annoy a mod, bout to download some music from youtube kek


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Midland Dog said:


> hes basically baited himself is whats happened. i said quote me being a rat and he quoted someone else so i asked again. main point is to troll, this entire thread is a troll, i did it to annoy a mod, bout to download some music from youtube kek


You really are pointless.  Speaks volumes about the admins and moderation here.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Dr. Dro said:


> I'll just throw my sincere opinion on this matter, even if it is _supposedly a naughty thing_ to do by TPU, I would go as far as saying that it isn't in NV's best interests to prevent hosting of their official, precompiled redistributables for gamers' use, and that they should host these files in a readily available location themselves - since apparently, all it takes is the DLSS DLL replacement to "upgrade" a game from say, DLSS 1.0 to DLSS 2.x. They have competition now, on both hardware performance (hello, 3090 losing to the 6800 XT in some games! looking at you RDR2) and AMD's own open-source, hardware abstract upscaler, which also works on their own graphics cards, of any kind, age, and generation with stunning results.


I completely agree! The licence is simply just harmful to nvidia, and makes no sense in the current market. IMO they should just strip the licence of the dll’s and the API and call it a day. I’m not holding my breath though, as clearly they can get more when media outlets are distributing it regardless.

the dlss 1.0 library is not API compatible with the 2.x versions though.


----------



## ThrashZone (Jul 6, 2021)

Hi,
After using some basic forum features I feel better now 



stimpy88 said:


> You really are pointless.  Speaks volumes about the admins and moderation here.


Not sure how he's existed this long.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> After using some basic forum features I feel better now


I get you, I'm doing it now...  Cheers for the reminder.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Proliferation to a literal ton of games via Unity?
> 
> OT but bad comparison.



Oh no, by "fate" I mean thrown in a GitHub repo as "open source with some caveats" and effectively forgotten about. The thing about DLSS being supported on some blockbuster games of its time is already ongoing for some time now, just like the 2008-2013 games all having PhysX showcased as hot stuff and gamers having a secondary dedicated GPU just for it being some sort of status symbol.

The last PhysX redist from NV is a few years old at this point and no games have used this technology for a considerable amount of time now, as other platform agnostic and/or open-source solutions supplanted, and then replaced it entirely.



Dredi said:


> I completely agree! The licence is simply just harmful to nvidia, and makes no sense in the current market. IMO they should just strip the licence of the dll’s and the API and call it a day. I’m not holding my breath though, as clearly they can get more when media outlets are distributing it regardless.
> 
> the dlss 1.0 library is not API compatible with the 2.x versions though.



Oh, nice. I guess we learn something new every day. I think I read somewhere that upgrading from 2.0 to 2.1 or something was possible by DLL replacement, so... I'll just be frank here, I care very, very little about upscaling technologies, aside from finding how they work rather fascinating... if I wanted to compromise in any way from a pristine, native resolution image, I would be running an RX 480 right now. That graphics card was cheap, yet so great, it'd probably still run virtually everything I play at 1080p with highish graphics settings very happily.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> After using some basic forum features I feel better now
> 
> 
> Not sure how he's existed this long.


I'm pretty sure he is using multiple accounts, and a few of them are in this thread.  They even have conversations with each other.  At least he is committed, one way or another!


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> You really are pointless.  Speaks volumes about the admins and moderation here.


@wizzard1 and now i turn your people against you lmao


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> I'm pretty sure he is using multiple accounts, and a few of them are in this thread.  They even have conversations with each other.  At least he is committed, one way or another!


And someone is paranoid.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> I'm pretty sure he is using multiple accounts, and a few of them are in this thread.  They even have conversations with each other.  At least he is committed, one way or another!


nope, just the one, im just that powerful. cease and desist



Dredi said:


> And someone is paranoid.


hes freakin out brah ahahahaha


----------



## ThrashZone (Jul 6, 2021)

Hi,
Witness lol 
There's an old saying 
Shit or get off the pot.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> And someone is paranoid.


But not paranoid enough to call my lawyers, or tattle to my Dad on you though, unlike "some"here.

Sorry to disappoint you "both". 

Dog, I know your barking at my posts, but please don't bother, you should use the ignore function, like I have.


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 6, 2021)

Never go full schizophrenia...


----------



## Frick (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> You really are pointless.  Speaks volumes about the admins and moderation here.



How they're human and can't instantly see every single post within minutes of posting plus they have to discuss things between themselves? I agree.


----------



## Midland Dog (Jul 6, 2021)

@stimpy88 didnt even have to do anything to get you shot down


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> But not paranoid enough to call my lawyers, or tattle to my Dad on you though, unlike "some"here.


Do you also think that snitches should get stitches too? Nobody should be discouraged from reporting a possible crime if that report is made in good faith. Your replies make me think that you both don't care about laws and don't care about software licenses, which is your right, but I'm going to say it flat out right now, that it's a shortsighted view.


----------



## virtualbs (Jul 6, 2021)

Let's be civil everyone, and discuss ideas and facts, not people. There is merit to both sides of the debate. My take on this is that TPU should be "ok-ish", as what they are redistributing is a piece of software that does not work in itself, and especially only works when used with software that had licensed its use in the first place. But definitely it is not a black-and-white debate.


----------



## GerKNG (Jul 6, 2021)

i really don't see any "crime" here..
it's something that everybody has on it's PC as long as you have a game with DLSS 2.x installed.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Caring1 said:


> What?
> is that like driving without a license you don't have to abide by the road rules?
> Oh and the car is hot but that doesn't count either cos you didn't steal it yourself, your just driving it?



So much misinformation in this post. Don't even know where to start.

This will be like driving a car which requires development license only to develop it. So, when I buy the car for driving no development license or agreement is required to be signed, so I can drive it without a development license, but with my drivers license or the end user agreement only, which doesn't have any of the stipulations cited as part of the development license.



R-T-B said:


> Actually, it does.  Even bios files are legally grey.  But thing is, NVIDIA has posted them openly itself at times, so it's pretty aparent it does not care.
> 
> Here?  We'll see I guess.  Hope w1zzard did his research.



Which is the point I have trying to make. It is a grey area with no clear breach for these files, if extracted from games, to be hosted here. As long as the intended purpose for use of these files does not change, and they are not modified.


----------



## Mescalamba (Jul 6, 2021)

nVidia wont react for simple reason, which is that webs like this do them way too much service to even think about doing something against them.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Do they host the files in question?
> Anyway, I’m not interested in what other sites are doing,


you should, its the same thing there as TPU is doing here. Lame.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> So, when I buy the car for driving no development license or agreement is required to be signed, so I can drive it without a development license, but with my drivers license or the end user agreement only, which doesn't have any of the stipulations cited as part of the development license.


Are you sure? I’m pretty confident that eula of most if not all games strictly disallows redistribution of even a small portion of it.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> We wont shed any tears over it, and it's not like it takes us any effort.


The effort is in not pulling the trigger too soon.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Dr. Dro said:


> no games have used this technology for a considerable amount of time now, as other platform agnostic and/or open-source solutions supplanted, and then replaced it entirely.


Pretty much every Unity game does.  That was my point.



Aquinus said:


> Do you also think that snitches should get stitches too?


Lol, now I feel bad for that being the codename of my last release of UnityAnalyticsKiller...









						Releases · R-T-B/UnityAnalyticsKiller
					

Binary distributions of my other Unity Telemetry related projects.  Basically a custom coded dll stack that replaces Unity methods and kills "analytics" or telemetry of most sorts.  Also ...




					github.com


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

I am really amused at all of the excuses for why people think that the SDK license for these DLLs don't apply if they can think of some weird loophole with regards to how they got their hands on the very files that the SDK provides. It's almost like people are looking for a reason to be able to say that the license means nothing because it could possibly provide some tangible benefit. While I understand the pursuit of performance, what's the issue with going to nVidia's site and agreeing to those terms to use the DLLs in an already existing game? It keeps everything legal and people can still muck with it to their hearts content. Hell, maybe there are other DLLs that could benefit from a newer minor or patch version.


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I am really amused at all of the excuses for why people think that the SDK license for these DLLs don't apply if they can think of some weird loophole with regards to how they got their hands on the very files that the SDK provides. It's almost like people are looking for a reason to be able to say that the license means nothing because it could possibly provide some tangible benefit. While I understand the pursuit of performance, what's the issue with going to nVidia's site and agreeing to those terms to use the DLLs in an already existing game? It keeps everything legal and people can still muck with it to their hearts content.


i highly suggest you go to a lawyer's office and sit down with a copy of the EULA so they can explain the language to you. there are reasons why going to law school and passing the bar exams are requirements . . .

in the meantime, i'll point out whether you want to admit it or not, this has nothing top do with you or your work.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

looniam said:


> i highly suggest you go to a lawyer's office and sit down with a copy of the EULA so they can explain the language to you. there are reasons why going to law school and passing the bar exams are requirements . . .
> 
> in the meantime, i'll point out whether you want to admit it or not, this has nothing top do with you or your work.


Uhh, actually it does because if you didn't notice, the license for DLSS is incompatible with many open source licenses.


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Uhh, actually it does because if you didn't notice, the license for DLSS is incompatible with many open source licenses.


where?* language please!*

again GO SEE A LAWYER.

because obviously talking to you here will do nothing since you seem to think you know more than anyone here.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 6, 2021)

Mussels said:


> And uhh, wiki has an edit history? Go check the page yourself. Go on.


And?

Still waiting on where you got your extremely skewed definition of online piracy. It definitely didn’t appear with just a couple of clicks on google.



looniam said:


> where?* language please!*
> 
> again GO SEE A LAWYER.
> 
> because obviously talking to you here will do nothing since you seem to think you know more than anyone here.


He is correct about the license being incompatible with free SW. For example Quake rtx does not have dlss support because of it.

(free as in free to do what ever you want with it)


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> And?
> 
> Still waiting on where you got your extremely skewed definition of online piracy. It definitely didn’t appear with just a couple of clicks on google.
> 
> ...


no one is talking developing software. this has been point out incessantly, details matter. go see a lawyer.


----------



## Totally (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's because you've moved away from authorized users and into the realm of unauthorized users. So instead of being a license violation, it's a copyright violation. Once again, businesses aren't going to stop in their tracks because some armchair warrior thinks they understand how the law works. Either the DLL was copyrighted material that was copied or W1zz agreed to nVidia's terms and is in violation of the license. Either way, it doesn't sound good.



Stop. That doesn't matter. Without a shadow of a doubt can it be proven that the file came from the SDK which the agreement applies?


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Are you sure? I’m pretty confident that eula of most if not all games strictly disallows redistribution of even a small portion of it.



While you might be right on the game EULA (I can't confirm), we were specifically discussing nVidia agreements. nVidia SDK agreements have no weight in this situation.

EDIT: A typical clause from Game Dev is as below:

_Unless provided otherwise in the Documentation, you shall not display, modify, reproduce and distribute any Game Content, or portion(s) thereof, included with or relating to the Software Product, if any. Any such authorized display, modification, reproduction and distribution shall be in full accord with this EULA. Under no circumstances will your use, display, modification, reproduction and distribution of the Game Content give you any intellectual property or proprietary rights in the Game Content or in any logos and/or trade or service marks_


Looks like they are only concerned about *game content, and portions of game content*. I highly doubt that DLL file with no game content would be considered a part of the game EULA.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

looniam said:


> where?* language please!*





> e. You may not use the SDK in any manner that would cause it to become subject to an open source software license. As examples, licenses that require as a condition of use, modification, and/or distribution that the SDK be: (i) disclosed or distributed in source code form; (ii) licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (iii) redistributable at no charge.


Maybe you should read the license before running your mouth.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 6, 2021)

Settle down Kyle.  Do you honestly think this site does not have a legal team? You should have a look around the internet and see what kinds of files are being hosted by third parties, and have been so for well over a decade.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Looks like they are only concerned about *game content, and portions of game content*. I highly doubt that DLL file with no game content would be considered a part of the game EULA.


Software tends to ship with licenses for all the proprietary software included in the application. The EULA doesn't cover all of those other licenses and if it does, it's some nuanced language regarding how all related licenses apply.


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Maybe you should read the license before running your mouth.





> subject to an open source software license.



and where is TPU's license? seems to me what their doing isn't requiring it.

pull your head out and talk to someone other than yourself. because really, i feel for your cause but not about the way your going on by brewing a storm in a teacup.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Totally said:


> Stop. That doesn't matter. Without a shadow of a doubt can it be proven that the file came from the SDK which the agreement applies?


Yes, this is where file hashes come in handy.

If it came in a retail game, it was sublicensed under that games commercial EULA, which would be an even worse choice to violate.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Software tends to ship with licenses for all the proprietary software included in the application. The EULA doesn't cover all of those other licenses and if it does, it's some nuanced language regarding how all related licenses apply.



Again, please prove it, or leave it. Show me one DLSS game that has done it. If not, you can start of by replying to closure of our discussion from yesterday. If you cant do that either, then please get off your high horse.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

looniam said:


> and where is TPU's license? seems to me what their doing isn't requiring it.
> 
> pull your head out and talk to someone other than yourself. because really, i feel for your cause but not about the way your going on by brewing a storm in a teacup.


You have yet to make any valid point regarding why the SDK license isn't applicable, so I'm not sure why the burden of proof is on me when I've been quoting this stupid license all day long. You know, the one that you need to agree to in order to get it from nVidia.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

looniam said:


> and where is TPU's license?


That is half the issue.  They are taking a licensed work and distributing it without its license, or terms.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Again, please prove it, or leave it. Show me one DLSS game that has done it. If not, you can start of by replying to closure of our discussion from yesterday. If you cant do that either, then please get off your high horse.


I'm literally *quoting nVidia's license for using their damn library*. How hard is that to understand?


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I'm literally *quoting nVidia's license for using their damn library*. How hard is that to understand?


Which applies to game devs who use the files from the SDK, and not to end users of the games. You really have a very short memory of discussion from yesterday don't you?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> That is half the issue.  They are taking a licensed work and distributing it without its license, or terms.


I bet you that they wouldn't care if they required people downloading it to agree to the same license, but an open download without acknowledging the license is the part that's wrong IMHO.



Soul_ said:


> Which applies to game devs who use the files from the SDK, and not to end users of the games. You really have a very short memory of discussion from yesterday don't you?


Dude, I've already quoted the parts of the license that covers redistribution with an application which includes shipping the application with the license. Maybe it's not my memory that's short.


> c. You agree to distribute the SDK subject to the terms at least as protective as the terms of this license, including (without limitation) terms relating to the license grant, license restrictions and protection of NVIDIA’s intellectual property rights.


The post

Have any of you even read the freaking license before posting in this thread? The wording of this license literally always leaves some entity as a responsible party. It's not rocket science, just read the damn thing.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I bet you that they wouldn't care if they required people downloading it to agree to the same license, but an open download without acknowledging the license is the part that's wrong IMHO.
> 
> 
> Dude, I've already quoted the parts of the license that covers redistribution with an application which includes shipping the application with the license. Maybe it's not my memory that's short.
> ...


That only applies to redistribution of SDK. No one is redistributing SDK. Read the words, objectively please.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> That only applies to redistribution of SDK. No one is redistributing SDK. Read the words, objectively please.


The license explicitly forbids redistributing any portion of the SDK unless it's part of an application that adds value. Once again, I also quoted that part of the license. Do I really have to hand hold you through this? Do we have to make this journey together because you refuse to read the damn license?



> 2. DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS. These are the distribution requirements for you to exercise the grants above
> a. An application must have material additional functionality, beyond the included portions of the SDK.


The post (again...)


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You have yet to make any valid point regarding . . .



i wouldn't expect any other reply. i mean you just pointed out conditions but refuse to see they are not being met.

you haven't shown proof of harm. so back to you bud.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> That only applies to redistribution of SDK. No one is redistributing SDK. Read the words, objectively please.


The dlls are part of the SDK.



looniam said:


> i wouldn't expect any other reply. i mean you just pointed out conditions but refuse to see they are not being met.
> 
> you haven't shown proof of harm. so back to you bud.


I don't think any of you on the "this is legal" side are making a very honest effort to understand this, frankly.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> The license explicitly forbids redistributing any portion of the SDK unless it's part of an application that adds value. Once again, I also quoted that part of the license. Do I really have to hand hold you through this? Do we have to make this journey together because you refuse to read the damn license?





R-T-B said:


> The dlls are part of the SDK.



DLLs are part of SDK only if you extract them from the SDK. If you extract them from a game, they are no longer part of SDK as you as the entity had no interaction with the said SDK.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

looniam said:


> i wouldn't expect any other reply. i mean you just pointed out conditions but refuse to see they are not being met.
> 
> you haven't shown proof of harm. so back to you bud.


That's because you're immune to facts. At least @R-T-B knows how to put 1 and 1 together to make 2.


R-T-B said:


> The dlls are part of the SDK.





Soul_ said:


> DLLs are part of SDK only if you extract them from the SDK. If you extract them from a game, they are no longer part of SDK as you as the entity had no interaction with the said SDK.


I don't even know how to respond to that. They're not part of the SDK because you got them from somewhere other than the SDK? You're ignoring how they did come from the SDK if they were pulled from a game become some dev did agree to it and used it in the game. Your logic is really screwed up.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> If you extract them from a game


Then you just violated a commercial games eula and are far worse off.

I'd suggest trying to use the NVIDIA agreements terms first.

And yes, it's still a problem if you agree to no eula at all.  It then falls to copyright.  This is where we enter the domain of blatant piracy.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Then you just violated a commercial games eula and are far worse off.



No I didn't. Read this post on that subject.



Soul_ said:


> While you might be right on the game EULA (I can't confirm), we were specifically discussing nVidia agreements. nVidia SDK agreements have no weight in this situation.
> 
> EDIT: A typical clause from Game Dev is as below:
> 
> ...


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Then you just violated a commercial games eula and are far worse off.


You're violating nVidia's license which is covered by the game company devs agreeing to them.


Soul_ said:


> No I didn't. Read this post on that subject.


That's because your understanding of how these licenses work is wrong.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I don't even know how to respond to that. They're not part of the SDK because you got them from somewhere other than the SDK? You're ignoring how they did come from the SDK if they were pulled from a game become some dev did agree to it and used it in the game. Your logic is really screwed up.



As an end user I did not agree to any terms that Devs agreed to with nvidia. No one of the SDK terms apply to me as an end user unless and until they are part of the game EULA, which they are not. There is no implicit in this case. unless explicitly specified, it is not applicable.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> No I didn't. Read this post on that subject.



That is completely wrong.  Dlls and anything in the game are absolutely "game content."  Otherwise code would not be protected.



Soul_ said:


> As an end user I did not agree to any terms that Devs agreed to with nvidia. No one of the SDK terms apply to me as an end user unless and until they are part of the game EULA, which they are not. There is no implicit in this case. unless explicitly specified, it is not applicable.


So you are just violating copyright law then, by using a private work no eula has granted you rights to use?

That does not help you.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You're violating nVidia's license which is covered by the game company devs agreeing to them.
> 
> That's because your understanding of how these licenses work is wrong.



Devs are agreeing to, does not mean End User is agreeing to. You just are based on opinions, no substance or objectivity what-so-ever.



R-T-B said:


> That is completely wrong.  Dlls and anything in the game are absolutely "game content."  Otherwise code would not be protected.
> 
> 
> So you are just violating copyright law then, by using a private work no eula has granted you rights to use?
> ...



That is your interpretation, assumption and opinion. Unless specified explicitly, it is not true.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You're violating nVidia's license which is covered by the game company devs agreeing to them.


Yeah, that too.  It does seem to be a sublicensed work situation.


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> The dlls are part of the SDK.
> 
> 
> I don't think any of you on the "this is legal" side are making a very honest effort to understand this, frankly.


what? i see an imagined harm so i decide to speak?

i really think a problem is understanding an individual is entirely different than a corporation.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> That is your interpretation, assumption and opinion. Unless specified explicitly, it is not true.


It's literally probably defined in the "definitions" section of any game eula you look at...  Try reading a dlss game eula.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Devs are agreeing to, does not mean End User is agreeing to. You just are based on opinions, no substance or objectivity what-so-ever.
> 
> 
> 
> That is your interpretation, assumption and opinion. Unless specified explicitly, it is not true.


Agreeing to nVidia's license requires including their language in the application.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

looniam said:


> i really think a problem is understanding an individual is entirely different than a corporation.


That may be part of your misunderstanding.

Legally they are not.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> It's literally probably defined in the "definitions" section of any game eula you look at...


It is not there. Again you are assuming.



Aquinus said:


> Agreeing to nVidia's license requires including their language in the application.


Again you are assuming. If it is not there, it is not there.


----------



## OneMoar (Jul 6, 2021)

asking for legal advise from a forum ....
if you need to question the legality of something then its probly not legal


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> It's literally probably defined in the "definitions" section of any game eula you look at...  Try reading a dlss game eula.


EA's user agreement: https://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBTERMS/US/en/PC/


> 2. License​The EA Services are licensed to you, not sold. EA grants you a personal, limited, non-transferable, revocable and non-exclusive license to use the EA Services to which you have access for your non-commercial use, subject to your compliance with this Agreement. You may not access, copy, modify or distribute any EA Service, Content or Entitlements (as those terms are defined below), unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. You may not reverse engineer or attempt to extract or otherwise use source code or other data from EA Services, unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. EA or its licensors own and reserve all other rights, including all right, title and interest in the EA Services and associated intellectual property rights.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> EA's user agreement: https://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBTERMS/US/en/PC/


This is EA services license. Not game EULA. LOL!!! really grasping at straws aren't you?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> EA's user agreement: https://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBTERMS/US/en/PC/


Likewise, a DLSS games agreement, No Mans Sky:









						No Man's Sky EULA
					






					store.steampowered.com
				




Note:



> *4. WHAT YOU CANNOT DO*





> 4.2.2 in whole or in part reproduce, translate, reverse engineer, derive source code from, modify, adapt, merge, translate, disassemble, decompile, or create derivative works based on or of the Game, except where applicable law provides otherwise in which case the product and all end results of such acts shall belong to, vest in and be the exclusive property of Hello on creation;
> 4.2.3 remove, disable or circumvent any proprietary notices, labels or copy protection software contained on or within the Game;





> 4.2.6 *separate or use component parts of the Game*


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> This is EA services license. Not game EULA. LOL!!! really grasping at straws aren't you?


You know, I've provided plenty of proof. All your saying is that I'm wrong. Screw off unless you have a real point to make with material to back it up.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> This is EA services license. Not game EULA. LOL!!! really grasping at straws aren't you?


Not really.


Aquinus said:


> You know, I've provided plenty of proof. All your saying is that I'm wrong. Screw off unless you have a real point to make.


I agree.  At least one user here has no interest in listening.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Likewise, a DLSS games agreement, No Mans Sky:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This I agree with. Good find.


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> That may be part of your misunderstanding.
> 
> Legally they are not.


legally or not the agreements and EULAs will have entirely different language for each.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Not really.


Why not? EA service EULA is for EA hosted services, not games. Good and services are two different entities, and unless explicitly specified they are governed differently.



Aquinus said:


> You know, I've provided plenty of proof. All your saying is that I'm wrong. Screw off unless you have a real point to make with material to back it up.


No you haven't, not even provided a single irrefutable proof.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Why not? EA service EULA is for EA hosted services, not games.
> 
> 
> No you haven't, not even a single irrefutable proof from you.


That's because the language is generic to cover anything within the application. Jeez you're dense. Also that license covers products and services, not just services. Learn to read, man.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Why not? EA service EULA is for EA hosted services, not games.


Look at my post.



looniam said:


> legally or not the agreements and EULAs will have entirely different language for each.


and I just showed one example showing we are correct on at least one DLSS game.

I'm not going to do them all.  I would suggest the opposition provide something, because right now your team is not winning this debate.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's because the language is generic to cover anything within the application. Jeez you're dense. Also that license covers products and services, not just services. Learn to read, man.



 Good and services are two different entities, and unless explicitly specified they are governed differently. And calling me dense? And you don't even understand the different between goods and services?


----------



## OneMoar (Jul 6, 2021)

my 3.14159265359 cents
no take it down you are walking into a minefield and its not worth the trouble


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I'm not going to do them all. I would suggest the opposition provide something, because right now your team is not winning this debate.


...and for all the people giving me shit for emailing nVidia:


> You agree to notify NVIDIA in writing of any known or suspected distribution or use of the SDK not in compliance with the requirements of this license, and to enforce the terms of your agreements with respect to the distributed portions of the SDK.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Good and services are two different entities, and unless explicitly specified they are governed differently.


First two sentences:


> Welcome to EA. This Agreement governs your access and use of products, content and services...


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> ...and for all the people giving me shit for emailing nVidia:



You did what?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> You did what?


He's legally required to if he uses the library as a dev, so yeah.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> First two sentences:



Correct, but the license part "he" cited is specifically for services:

2. License​The EA Services are licensed to you, not sold. EA grants you a personal, limited, non-transferable, revocable and non-exclusive license to use the EA Services to which you have access for your non-commercial use, subject to your compliance with this Agreement. You may not access, copy, modify or distribute any EA Service, Content or Entitlements (as those terms are defined below), unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. You may not reverse engineer or attempt to extract or otherwise use source code or other data from EA Services, unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. EA or its licensors own and reserve all other rights, including all right, title and interest in the EA Services and associated intellectual property rights.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Correct, but the license part "he" cited is specifically for services:
> 
> 2. License​The EA Services are licensed to you, not sold. EA grants you a personal, limited, non-transferable, revocable and non-exclusive license to use the EA Services to which you have access for your non-commercial use, subject to your compliance with this Agreement. You may not access, copy, modify or distribute any EA Service, Content or Entitlements (as those terms are defined below), unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. You may not reverse engineer or attempt to extract or otherwise use source code or other data from EA Services, unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. EA or its licensors own and reserve all other rights, including all right, title and interest in the EA Services and associated intellectual property rights.


That's because everything is a service when you don't own the product.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> Correct, but the license part "he" cited is specifically for services:
> 
> 2. License​The EA Services are licensed to you, not sold. EA grants you a personal, limited, non-transferable, revocable and non-exclusive license to use the EA Services to which you have access for your non-commercial use, subject to your compliance with this Agreement. You may not access, copy, modify or distribute any EA Service, Content or Entitlements (as those terms are defined below), unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. You may not reverse engineer or attempt to extract or otherwise use source code or other data from EA Services, unless expressly authorized by EA or permitted by law. EA or its licensors own and reserve all other rights, including all right, title and interest in the EA Services and associated intellectual property rights.


In this agreement games are being treated as a service.

Look, I know it isn't popular but it helps to read these things.

I'm out for now.  May be back later, but I have a Ryzen 5000 system to build and this is a shitshow.  I don't think any of you can blame me.


----------



## looniam (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Look at my post.
> 
> 
> and I just showed one example showing we are correct on at least one DLSS game.
> ...


sorry bud but i'm not here for any debating competition. what i see is a lot of shit being thrown on the wall, hoping it will stick. 

so with that said, i will ask that you allow me to exit stage left.

ok an encore . . .(so it maybe ends well)

what evga did to unwinder (and then refusing to sample a certain site) was bad. but TPU is good.


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's because everything is a service when you don't own the product.


LOLOLOL!!!! just shows the intellect I am dealing with in this one sentence.



R-T-B said:


> In this agreement games are being treated as a service.
> 
> Look, I know it isn't popular but it helps to read these things.
> 
> I'm out for now.  May be back later, but I have a Ryzen 5000 system to build and this is a shitshow.  I don't think any of you can blame me.




All good. Good discussion, you made some good points that I agree with.


----------



## delshay (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> ...and for all the people giving me shit for emailing nVidia:



I certainly will not give you shit for this. The way I see this is clarification how the files can be distributed. It would be nice if someone from Nvidia jumps into this thread & clear things up.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Soul_ said:


> LOLOLOL!!!! just shows the intellect I am dealing with with this one sentence.


Have you never heard of SaaS? A lot of games give you access to use the game, not own it. Most game companies use this language these days.

Seriously, what's your problem? You're full of ad hominem attacks and I don't get it.


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 6, 2021)

So what's *the verdict*, did bean counters at Nvidia/JHH think it was worth their time to pursue TPU?

Not to mention some bad PR at that


----------



## Soul_ (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Have you never heard of SaaS? A lot of games give you access to use the game, not own it. Most game companies use this language these days.
> 
> Seriously, what's your problem? You're full of ad hominem and I don't get it.


Correct, SaaS is a service. Game that you download and play is not. SaaS service in this case would be EA Play, or whatever they are calling it these days. Not 'NFS Heat'.

Anyway, I am off this case. I think we have done enough damage for the day.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R0H1T said:


> So what's *the verdict*, did bean counters at Nvidia/JHH think it was worth their time to pursue TPU?
> 
> Not to mention some bad PR at that


If they were to take action, I would expect it to take time because of the bureaucracy and I think that I wouldn't be the one getting an email back unless it was a "thank you for reaching out to us," which I have not yet received.


Soul_ said:


> Correct, SaaS is a service. Game that you download and play is not. SaaS service in this case would be EA Play, or whatever they are calling it these days. Not 'NFS Heat'.


You should look at the EULAs for your games again because you don't understand how wrong you are about that. You are being granted limited and revocable access to the software by buying it. You're not buying the software with all of the rights attached to it. This is very common in the software space these days, even for software you run on your own machine. More often than not, if you're being shipped a binary, your rights to anything in it are practically zilch beyond using it as intended (as far as licensing is concerned.)

Either way, I've had my fun... and remember folks, licensing is important. Read the document if you're going to use it because you're basically agreeing to it, whether you like it or not.


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 6, 2021)

I'm sure they can, if they wanted to, but if there's one thing* trillion dollar companies hate probably more than paying taxes* it's the (slightly) *bad PR*. JHH is a smart man, if he does want to pursue these tactics ~ well by all means.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R0H1T said:


> I'm sure they can, if they wanted to, but if there's one thing* trillion dollar companies hate probably more than paying taxes* it's the (slightly) *bad PR*. JHH is a smart man, if he does want to pursue these tactics ~ well by all means.


Is it really bad PR for nVidia to be enforcing the license that they made for their software or for TPU if they're actually in violation of it? I don't know. I suspect that they'll sit back and watch, or if they do something, do it quietly. They're not going to come into this forum and announce it, that's for sure.


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 6, 2021)

Risk vs reward, why did Nvidia sell the 970 without disclosing full specs at the time? Well they actually lied about the specs!


Aquinus said:


> They're not going to come into this forum and announce it, that's for sure.


Sure, my point is they'd be smart not to go down this road ~ they have more than their fair share of fresh skeletons still rotting in there!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 6, 2021)

Regardless, if Nvidia act , TPU would act Soo I can't see any hurt.
The first time I came to the site was for tips and tricks to enhance my gaming experience via hard and soft mods non pirate I would add, that and gpuz and ATI tray tool, way back.
W1zzard has channels to Nvidia, and this just promotes Nvidia/dlss use at a time when Fsr just came out.

Let's just see what happens.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> Regardless, if Nvidia act , TPU would act Soo I can't see any hurt.
> The first time I came to the site was for tips and tricks to enhance my gaming experience via hard and soft mods non pirate I would add, that and gpuz and ATI tray tool, way back.
> W1zzard has channels to Nvidia, and this just promotes Nvidia/dlss use at a time when Fsr just came out.
> 
> Let's just see what happens.


I'm not arguing anything about merit, just what the license says. I honestly don't care if nVidia acts or not, their license just makes it seem like they'd care. It's quite strict.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I'm not arguing anything about merit, just what the license says. I honestly don't care if nVidia acts or not, their license just makes it seem like they'd care. It's quite strict.


I get you, I will leave it to you all to figure out that, but if swapping a file in a game is some massive crime then some communities are fffd people mod game's legally and illegally all the time.
All such licence's are up to and solely the right of Nvidia to enforce or pursue and clearly they will act if it's in their interest to ,we agree there.
For me I truly respect game licence's and yet still would mod any part of a game to create a more graphically well presented game.
Not to cheat on any level, but to push the hardware I have as much as possible.
Or maybe add effects.
So obviously I am happy to see what's said by Nvidia.


----------



## piotrj3 (Jul 6, 2021)

When I don't think what techpowerup is fully legal there is few big issues in this case that makes license hard to enforce.

First issue is that this .dll can only be used practically in things that are already using DLSS and you replace it with another version of DLSS. Which means user copying those files move from one "compatible DLSS license" to another "compatible DLSS license", that wierd law problem is here no EULA can prevent you from literally deleting files of game (uninstall for example) and after creating a file. 

2nd is that mod community exists and they don't fall to lawsuits despite them activly reverse engineering and modyfing game files, and here you don't even have to go that far. There are ways you can be prosecuted, eg. removing copyright protection or publishing reverse-engineered findings or infringing 3rd party copyright protection during moding but nothing quite occurs here.

3rd. Lawyer doing lawsuit against someone, need to estimate damage done. What harmful to Nvidia or any gaming company that provided such DLSS file has been done and how much worth it is (in $). .dll file on its own is useless and can only be used in places where user already obtained license for product already using DLSS. There is no damage, there is actually improvement and positive PR for Nvidia or other gaming companies here as it improves experience.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 6, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> it really bad PR for nVidia to be enforcing the license that they made for their software or for TPU if they're actually in violation of it?


Honestly, both.



piotrj3 said:


> 2nd is that mod community exists and they don't fall to lawsuits despite them activly reverse engineering and modyfing game files


Actually this has happened in the past...  not common anymore because it's bad for PR.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Actually this has happened in the past... not common anymore because it's bad for PR.


I think they'd be more likely to just ask to have the license included with it and add some language to make the license applicable to those who download it. To me, that's 100% fair and is what I would expect to come out of it.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jul 6, 2021)

Pretty sure this falls in the grey area of "technically we could tell you to stop, but what you're doing isn't actually hurting us at all and telling you to stop would probably cause more harm than good" category. Probably best to leave it at that. If NVIDIA has an issue I'm sure wizz will get an email saying so, TPU is a known commodity so I'm sure they're well aware.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

ShiBDiB said:


> Pretty sure this falls in the grey area of "technically we could tell you to stop, but what you're doing isn't actually hurting us at all and telling you to stop would probably cause more harm than good" category. Probably best to leave it at that. If NVIDIA has an issue I'm sure wizz will get an email saying so, TPU is a known commodity so I'm sure they're well aware.


Totally. It's not like they're going to come out with guns blazing, that's for sure. Hell, if I were nVidia, I would just say "add a button saying you agree to this license and you can mirror our stuff all day long." The main issue is not agreeing to the license when you download it, at least in my perspective. Often they'll gather your information, then provide you with the libraries.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jul 6, 2021)

I don't get it. Why does anyone care what TPU hosts? If you don't like it you can certainly not visit the site?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 6, 2021)

Easy Rhino said:


> I don't get it. Why does anyone care what TPU hosts? If you don't like it you can certainly not visit the site?


Because it's redistributing software without adhering to the license from which it came with.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 6, 2021)

Been here a long time, and this is the weirdest thread i have read. Wow dummy out, trolls who survived Mussels wrath. I have had days rest for posting less than some of these posts here. I'm special though


----------



## Devon68 (Jul 6, 2021)

Wow three days later the discussion is going strong. I understand what Aquinus is trying to say, and I would be pissed is someone used my software without agreeing to the license, but in this case I will quote Dua Lipa's song and say IDGAF.
I'm just baffled as to why he (Aquinus) took it so personal.


----------



## OneMoar (Jul 6, 2021)

controversy.exe has committed an access violation and will be terminated press any key to continue


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jul 7, 2021)

Devon68 said:


> I'm just baffled as to why he (*******) took it so personal.



Because the population has been conditioned to take whatever rules are crammed down their throat by Corporate America, and have been programmed to support and defend their corporate masters like the good little tools they've become.


----------



## outpt (Jul 7, 2021)

Lulz


----------



## F7GOS (Jul 7, 2021)

I'd be _*very*_ surprised if the sudden revelation of injecting newer DLSS DLLs into the veins of other titles wasn't the result of a wink wink nudge nudged and scrawled on a green post-it note procured from a certain leather jacket as soon as word about FSR being platform agnostic started to rumble.

Nothing will come of this as its exactly what Nvidia wants to happen.


----------



## qubit (Jul 7, 2021)

qubit said:


> @Aquinus From the looks of the rules that you've quoted, you're technically right, it's piracy on the high seas!  However, in practice, I don't think it's a problem, because NVIDIA won't mind as it simply helps them to increase their market share that little bit with enthusiasts and shut AMD out. On top of that, from a user perspective, TPU is once again providing a cool service to help the community - thanks @W1zzard
> 
> This situation reminds me of all those cheap Windows and Office keys being sold everywhere. Sure, they're not strictly legit, despite the claims, but Microsoft knows that it helps them to keep that grip on marketshare, so they look the other way and even well established sites like TPU can advertise these sellers, like we see on here frequently, without fear of getting sued.
> 
> Finally, put it this way: if megacorps NVIDIA and Microsoft don't care, then why should we? The fact that it's technically a kind of soft piracy is rendered moot and merely a talking point.


@Aquinus I gave you a reasoned reply in the above post with some prudent points, so I think it deserves a reply and I'd like to see your rebuttal, assuming you disagree. Are you up to the challenge?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jul 7, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Because it's redistributing software without adhering to the license from which it came with.



That has never happened on the internet before. I am shocked.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 7, 2021)

Gruffalo.Soldier said:


> Been here a long time, and this is the weirdest thread i have read. Wow dummy out, trolls who survived Mussels wrath. I have had days rest for posting less than some of these posts here. I'm special though


Everyone has the right to question the legality of it, hence this threads existence.
It's the attitude that's come along with the questioning, oof.

I mean, we used to host modded GPU driver installers over a decade ago converting regular cards to quadro, nvidia didnt care.
TPU has NvCleanInstall, Nv doesnt care.
TPU has guides and articles about modding, overclocking, BIOS cross-flashing and so on... Nv doesnt care.



Heres .dll fixes for users with Phenom II CPU's and Core 2 CPU's for a variety of games, please contact all the game devs and AMD's and Intel's lawyers too, for fairness
Red dead redemption
No mans sky
Control
SkyrimSE
Cyberbug 2077
(I gave up here not because i ran out of examples, but because there are too many - this list would go on for dozens of entries)

This is not a new trend, with software modification for perfomance boosts in games by swapping DLL files and suddenly having a problem now over this one example only is... bizarre. If the DLL's were not used in the manner they were intended with compatible software, they wouldn't even start.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 7, 2021)

weekendgeek said:


> Because the population has been conditioned to take whatever rules are crammed down their throat by Corporate America, and have been programmed to support and defend their corporate masters like the good little tools they've become.


Heh, yeah.  It couldn't just be that he devs software and thus cares a lot about EULAs...

Nah.  Occams razor is for capitalist pigs.


----------



## tabascosauz (Jul 7, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Heh, yeah.  It couldn't just be that he devs software and thus cares a lot about EULAs...
> 
> Nah.  Occams razor is for capitalist pigs.



Reporting TPU to Nvidia over this issue isn't "caring a lot about EULAs" and "caring" about w1zzard's legal liabilities, don't ya think? I trust w1zz has a functioning brain of his own, don't need us questioning his decisions. I admit I also began to get a little overconcerned with the grey market Windows keys issue, but I realized I was beginning to come off a overzealous SJW and complete twit for no apparent reason, so I stopped.

I get that people have misconceptions about EULAs from not reading them. I get the point that we shouldn't willingly violate Nvidia's terms. But wouldn't a generally worded email inquiry to Nvidia have sufficed for clarification on their policy, instead of running whining to momma that TPU is doing something illegal and they should do something about it? Really detracts from an otherwise perfectly reasonable perspective to have on the terms. I can't take it seriously after that point, even though I fundamentally don't disagree.


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jul 7, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Heh, yeah.  It couldn't just be that he devs software and thus cares a lot about EULAs...
> 
> Nah.  Occams razor is for capitalist pigs.





Example 1:


Aquinus said:


> ...and for all the people giving me shit for emailing nVidia:
> 
> You agree to notify NVIDIA in writing of any known or suspected distribution or use of the SDK not in compliance with the requirements of this license, and to enforce the terms of your agreements with respect to the distributed portions of the SDK.


Example 2:


R-T-B said:


> He's legally required to if he uses the library as a dev, so yeah.



Summary:


weekendgeek said:


> Because the population has been conditioned to take whatever rules are crammed down their throat by Corporate America, and have been programmed to support and defend their corporate masters like the good little tools they've become.



Thanks for reinforcing my original comment.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 7, 2021)

Sounds like endorsement if you ask me


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 7, 2021)

weekendgeek said:


> Example 1:
> 
> Example 2:
> 
> ...


I don't agree EULAs are wrong and you aren't going to prove that premise to me, as they can and do work for me too.

So no.


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jul 7, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I don't agree EULAs are wrong and you aren't going to prove that premise to me.
> 
> So no.



You can't even see it - it's staring you right in your toothy frog face.  Oh well.

Also, by reading this post you've agreed to weekendgeek's EULA.  You're required to eat flies everyday.  And send me $100.  Legally required.  Don't make me report you to Kermit.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 7, 2021)

weekendgeek said:


> Also, by reading this post you've agreed to weekendgeek's EULA.


No u.


----------



## Sora (Jul 7, 2021)

spnidel said:


> but the DLL is not the SDK.



the dlls are parts of the SDK, you are not provided uncompiled source code that provides the same behavior.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 7, 2021)

im going to get fat from all the popcorn im consuming, this better end soon!


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 7, 2021)

tabascosauz said:


> I get that people have misconceptions about EULAs from not reading them. I get the point that we shouldn't willingly violate Nvidia's terms. But wouldn't a generally worded email inquiry to Nvidia have sufficed for clarification on their policy, instead of running whining to momma that TPU is doing something illegal and they should do something about it? Really detracts from an otherwise perfectly reasonable perspective to have on the terms. I can't take it seriously after that point, even though I fundamentally don't disagree.


My email was basically along the lines of, "I suspect that this might be a violation of your license." I wouldn't call it whining to momma and that mentality is along the same lines of "snitches get stitches," because there is no good reason to not inform nVidia of a possible license violation. It's like seeing a possible crime and turning a blind eye to it.


weekendgeek said:


> Thanks for reinforcing my original comment.


Uhhh, if I had software covered by some license and someone was in violation of it, I'd want to know. Licensing isn't limited to large corporate entities. It's literally what protects your IP regardless of where it came from or who produced it. In fact I do have licenses on almost all of my software that I've written personally.


----------



## qubit (Jul 7, 2021)

I'm still getting pointedly ignored. I think that can only mean one reason, besides rudeness: the user has no comeback to my arguments, so avoids replying.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 7, 2021)

qubit said:


> I'm still getting pointedly ignored. I think that can only mean one reason, besides rudeness: the user has no comeback to my arguments, so avoids replying.


I probably just missed it because this thread is 10 pages long at this point and most points people have been making have been excuses why they think that the license can be ignored.


qubit said:


> Finally, put it this way: if megacorps NVIDIA and Microsoft don't care, then why should we? The fact that it's technically a kind of soft piracy is rendered moot and merely a talking point.


Well, the wording of the license and forcing you to accept it in order to download the SDK is part of what makes me think that they do care. It's one thing to ship it with a license, it's another to require accepting it to get access to the SDK. A lot of other things nVidia has released does not require that license confirmation, but the DLSS SDK does. For example, nVidia's GPU drivers only link to the license, but you can download them directly without even viewing it. The DLSS SDK requires you to check a box saying you read and agree to the license and they take down your personal information before making it available. Almost all the places where I see that this is done is for proprietary software with strict licensing terms.

If nVidia doesn't care, then they don't care. However if they didn't care, I'd be a little confused why they'd be requiring people to explicitly accept the license when they could get the same thing elsewhere without doing that. That doesn't add up to me.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Jul 7, 2021)

Why are you a part of this community? Honestly, you sound like a whiney bitch to me and as a member that been around since the early days you can fuck off.


----------



## tabascosauz (Jul 7, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> My email was basically along the lines of, "I suspect that this might be a violation of your license." I wouldn't call it whining to momma and that mentality is along the same lines of "snitches get stitches," because there is no good reason to not inform nVidia of a possible license violation. It's like seeing a possible crime and turning a blind eye to it.
> 
> Uhhh, if I had software covered by some license and someone was in violation of it, I'd want to know. Licensing isn't limited to large corporate entities. It's literally what protects your IP regardless of where it came from or who produced it. In fact I do have licenses on almost all of my software that I've written personally.



If you suspected a serious crime has occurred, I would agree for reasons of public safety.

But redistributing SDK content is not a crime by any stretch of the imagination   ......crimes are dictated by criminal statutes. TPU breaching copyright law is in civil law, and so is breach of contract - unless the former is of especially serious or large-scale nature that the Justice Dept would feel compelled to prosecute, neither of which apply.

Do you still believe you are duty bound as a citizen to report it to Nvidia? Looking at that contractual term, (assuming you hadn't gone and notified them) do you think Nvidia would ever have the motivation to come hunt you down, prove that you possessed knowledge of the potential infringement, and punish you for failing to report it? I highly doubt their legal team has time or willingness for this kind of busybody shit. There's a lot of crap that corporate lawyers write into contracts that don't make sense/aren't seriously intended to be enforced/not even they care about.

It's not that big a deal, take a chill pill dude. We aren't living in the Cultural Revolution.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 7, 2021)

can I vote to close this thread, there is a lot of back forth, repeating points, etc.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 7, 2021)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> can I vote to close this thread, there is a lot of back forth, repeating points, etc.


I'll second this. Seems to have devolved.. I think we've had enough NVidia/TPU bashing... The situation between NVidia & TPU is the business of NVidia & TPU and none of ours.


----------



## claes (Jul 7, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Settle down Kyle.  Do you honestly think this site does not have a legal team? You should have a look around the internet and see what kinds of files are being hosted by third parties, and have been so for well over a decade.


There’s no way TPU has a legal team lol


----------



## qubit (Jul 7, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I probably just missed it because this thread is 10 pages long at this point and most points people have been making have been excuses why they think that the license can be ignored.
> 
> Well, the wording of the license and forcing you to accept it in order to download the SDK is part of what makes me think that they do care. It's one thing to ship it with a license, it's another to require accepting it to get access to the SDK. A lot of other things nVidia has released does not require that license confirmation, but the DLSS SDK does. For example, nVidia's GPU drivers only link to the license, but you can download them directly without even viewing it. The DLSS SDK requires you to check a box saying you read and agree to the license and they take down your personal information before making it available. Almost all the places where I see that this is done is for proprietary software with strict licensing terms.
> 
> If nVidia doesn't care, then they don't care. However if they didn't care, I'd be a little confused why they'd be requiring people to explicitly accept the license when they could get the same thing elsewhere without doing that. That doesn't add up to me.


I can see where you're coming from. Now, I of course, don't have any inside knowledge of NVIDIA's reasoning and motives either, but I can surmise that perhaps it's a box ticking exercise.

And seriously, when it's a megacorp with vast profits having a "problem" like this, I really wouldn't sweat it. It's different if it's a lone developer, or small software house trying to run a business and it was making a material dent in their profits.

I still think NVIDIA would bring their lawyers down on a few with lawsuits to make examples of them if it really bothered them and this "problem" would then go away pretty quickly.

Just my tuppence worth anyway.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jul 7, 2021)

Why is this thread still a thing...

If NVIDIA has an issue, they'll contact Wizz.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 7, 2021)

claes said:


> There’s no way TPU has a legal team lol


Why have a team?  That's expensive to keep on hand 24/7 when you can just hire a lawyer when and if you get bit.

Though, since we do seem to wade into uncharted waters from time to time, a legal consult may not hurt...  *shrugs*


----------



## piotrj3 (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I probably just missed it because this thread is 10 pages long at this point and most points people have been making have been excuses why they think that the license can be ignored.
> 
> Well, the wording of the license and forcing you to accept it in order to download the SDK is part of what makes me think that they do care. It's one thing to ship it with a license, it's another to require accepting it to get access to the SDK. A lot of other things nVidia has released does not require that license confirmation, but the DLSS SDK does. For example, nVidia's GPU drivers only link to the license, but you can download them directly without even viewing it. The DLSS SDK requires you to check a box saying you read and agree to the license and they take down your personal information before making it available. Almost all the places where I see that this is done is for proprietary software with strict licensing terms.
> 
> If nVidia doesn't care, then they don't care. However if they didn't care, I'd be a little confused why they'd be requiring people to explicitly accept the license when they could get the same thing elsewhere without doing that. That doesn't add up to me.


Counter argument : 
What if you install game over GOG or Steam and as you install them, you do not open game and you do not accept any EULAs. At this point you pretty much have a game but you are not forced to oblige to proceed with EULA until you open game. This is same thing as with hardware, until you open product to run and you tick "I agree with license agreements" those are sort of void and this is why dumps of GPU or motherboard BIOSes are around on internet.

This doesn't work when you legitimatly download entire Nvidia's SDK because there you are forced to register and process of downloading itself forces you to apply for it.


----------



## claes (Jul 8, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Why have a team?  That's expensive to keep on hand 24/7 when you can just hire a lawyer when and if you get bit.
> 
> Though, since we do seem to wade into uncharted waters from time to time, a legal consult may not hurt...  *shrugs*


No I totally agree with you, having even one lawyer on retainer would cost upwards of $20k, more if you need an IP specialist, before any legal work. I don’t think it’d make any sense at all for a site like this, and surely TPU would hire staff before lawyers if they had money like that.


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 8, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> 4.2.6 *separate or use component parts of the Game*


Would DLSS constitute as a component part of the game or separate component from it!? The game itself operates without DLSS. Also of importance No Man Sky doesn't own the rights to DLSS. Additionally DLSS isn't being circumvented it's not being reverse engineered or cracked. The GPU itself even acts like a form of dongle protection for DLSS in effect. Honestly this is nuts 10 pages of debate over a subjective minute difference cover band remix upscale effect. I could understand if it were about cat memes and copyrights, but no it's not even that pervasive a argument to be had.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 8, 2021)

The legal talk is silly cause if Nv had an issue, the download would be removed and thats that.

They dont instantly sue you into oblivion, the first step is always a take down request (which you can refuse if you're confident its legal)


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

piotrj3 said:


> Counter argument :
> What if you install game over GOG or Steam and as you install them, you do not open game and you do not accept any EULAs. At this point you pretty much have a game but you are not forced to oblige to proceed with EULA until you open game. This is same thing as with hardware, until you open product to run and you tick "I agree with license agreements" those are sort of void and this is why dumps of GPU or motherboard BIOSes are around on internet.
> 
> This doesn't work when you legitimatly download entire Nvidia's SDK because there you are forced to register and process of downloading itself forces you to apply for it.


The language of the SDK requires the application shipping with it to basically ship with the license or have language that's at least as protective as nVidia's license. We've sort of been over this already.


InVasMani said:


> Would DLSS constitute as a component part of the game or separate component from it!? The game itself operates without DLSS. Also of importance No Man Sky doesn't own the rights to DLSS. Additionally DLSS isn't being circumvented it's not being reverse engineered or cracked. The GPU itself even acts like a form of dongle protection for DLSS in effect. Honestly this is nuts 10 pages of debate over a subjective minute difference cover band remix upscale effect. I could understand if it were about cat memes and copyrights, but no it's not even that pervasive a argument to be had.


The issue is more regarding how the DLLs are being provided, not the actual act of swapping out the DLLs.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2021)

InVasMani said:


> Would DLSS constitute as a component part of the game or separate component from it!?


Legally speaking the game is the complete software package, so yes DLSS is part of it, whether licensed or not.

Mind you thats only one of many ways to get the dlls.  It's probably easier to claim you got them from the SDK then ripped them from commercial games.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 8, 2021)

claes said:


> There’s no way TPU has a legal team lol


Oh ok. I see you know this as fact. Pardon me. I don't know the owner, but I am fucking positive he would not break any kind of laws with a site like this. There may not be a team but sure as shit he has a good lawyer, and you would be silly to think otherwise. I am truly astounded by the tears in this thread..


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 8, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Oh ok. I see you know this as fact. Pardon me. I don't know the owner, but I am fucking positive he would not break any kind of laws with a site like this. There may not be a team but sure as shit he has a good lawyer, and you would be silly to think otherwise. I am truly astounded by the tears in this thread..


@claes , is THE attorney.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 8, 2021)

All good!

I still have room in my mouth for the other foot 

Edit


----------



## Dredi (Jul 8, 2021)

piotrj3 said:


> Counter argument :
> What if you install game over GOG or Steam and as you install them, you do not open game and you do not accept any EULAs. At this point you pretty much have a game but you are not forced to oblige to proceed with EULA until you open game. This is same thing as with hardware, until you open product to run and you tick "I agree with license agreements" those are sort of void and this is why dumps of GPU or motherboard BIOSes are around on internet.
> 
> This doesn't work when you legitimatly download entire Nvidia's SDK because there you are forced to register and process of downloading itself forces you to apply for it.


Licences don’t work like that. There is definitely a licence or eula.txt somewhere in the game files that you should be aware of when you copy stuff around. If things worked as you portray, people could just download the entirety of github, use the contents freely and when sued over licence violations say that ”i didn’t read the licence so it does not apply, LOL”.

I also have a feeling that the steam eula for example has some words in there to prevent this. Likely in the form of some blanket eula if not overruled by a specific game eula, or something similar.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

I have no idea what any of this thread is about. lol

So some people make adjustments to DLSS and improve them so the games run better? Isn't that just considered game mods? In fact wouldn't Nvidia welcome that? It means less resources they have to dish out to keep optimizing DLSS all the time.

Or am I simply not understanding what these DLSS files are for?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> I have no idea what any of this thread is about. lol
> 
> So some people make adjustments to DLSS and improve them so the games run better? Isn't that just considered game mods? In fact wouldn't Nvidia welcome that? It means less resources they have to dish out to keep optimizing DLSS all the time.
> 
> Or am I simply not understanding what these DLSS files are for?


They tweak the DLSS values (in hidden ways we cant see or edit) and people found swapping newer ones in had great results.
TPU is hosting them in a malware free, safe way and thats it.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

Mussels said:


> They tweak the DLSS values (in hidden ways we cant see or edit) and people found swapping newer ones in had great results.
> TPU is hosting them in a malware free, safe way and thats it.



so yeah not much different than a game mod then imo.  I don't see why nvidia would be mad about it, it helps them out. People won't use it unless it has good ratings and verified by others that it improves performance over other DLSS... so its basically like freelance free work for nvidia devs. lol

I imagine the only scenario nvidia wouldn't like this... if its lower quality too much to get that performance... but again most people won't be using those files unless good reviews/recommended, etc...  

I don't know, I don't care either way personally as I only have a gtx 1070.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Mussels said:


> The legal talk is silly cause if Nv had an issue, the download would be removed and thats that.
> 
> They dont instantly sue you into oblivion, the first step is always a take down request (which you can refuse if you're confident its legal)


And this is exactly why this whole thread is a waste of time and energy. Another user put it perfectly:


ShiBDiB said:


> If NVIDIA has an issue, they'll contact Wizz.


And the problem would be over...



Mussels said:


> They tweak the DLSS values (in hidden ways we cant see or edit) and people found swapping newer ones in had great results.
> TPU is hosting them in a malware free, safe way and thats it.


Just for the record, this is perfectly legal.


----------



## pantherx12 (Jul 8, 2021)

AHH, this thread has a certain nostalgia for me.

Reminds me of when mailman and I used to argue for pages and pages.

Good times.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Just for the record, this is perfectly legal.


Did you ask a lawyer?



lynx29 said:


> So some people make adjustments to DLSS and improve them so the games run better? Isn't that just considered game mods? In fact wouldn't Nvidia welcome that? It means less resources they have to dish out to keep optimizing DLSS all the time.


Yes, it makes no sense for nvidia to have the licence they currently have in place for the DLSS dll’s.


----------



## qubit (Jul 8, 2021)

pantherx12 said:


> AHH, this thread has a certain nostalgia for me.
> 
> Reminds me of when mailman and I used to argue for pages and pages.
> 
> Good times.


Yeah, what happened to him? I see he hasn't logged in for years.

Slightly off topic, but just one or two posts, mods.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

So, I have a question for all of you. What's so wrong about going to nVidia's site and agreeing to the license to gain access to all the DLLs in the SDK and using those that you need? It's a pretty easy process, so I'm not sure why people are fighting against the license. There really is a pretty simple legal solution to this, and that's just to download it from nVidia after agreeing to the license.


----------



## qubit (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> So, I have a question for all of you. What's so wrong about going to nVidia's site and agreeing to the license to gain access to all the DLLs in the SDK and using those that you need? It's a pretty easy process, so I'm not sure why people are fighting against the license. There really is a pretty simple legal solution to this, and that's just to download it from nVidia after agreeing to the license.


There's nothing wrong with that, either.

You know my thoughts on the whole issue though, so I won't repeat them here.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Did you ask a lawyer?


I once worked in the legal profession and specialized in the area of copyright law. I once argued against microsoft in binding mediation. I won. Any more questions?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I once worked in the legal profession and specialized in the area of copyright law. I once argued against microsoft in binding mediation. I won. Any more questions?


Why did you steal 40 cakes? That's as many as four tens. That's terrible.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> What's so wrong about going to nVidia's site and agreeing to the license to gain access to all the DLLs in the SDK and using those that you need?


The SDK gives you only one specific version of the DLL I hear. Other versions are unobtainable through NVIDIA


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> The SDK gives you only one specific version of the DLL I hear. Other versions are unobtainable through NVIDIA


...but isn't the goal to use newer versions to improve performance and visual quality? Not older versions to fix issues introduced in newer versions? What value is the older DLLs if the real goal is to swap out newer ones? Either way, this is aside from the legal discussion. Just getting it from nVidia removes any doubt which is why I suggest it.


----------



## qubit (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I once worked in the legal profession and specialized in the area of copyright law. I once argued against microsoft in binding mediation. I won. Any more questions?


0wnage.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> What value is the older DLLs if the real goal is to swap out newer ones?


Research? Several tech press people reached out to me already and thanked me for it. Also not sure if the version in the SDK is synchronized to be the actual latest, and will be so for the future



Aquinus said:


> older versions to fix issues introduced in newer versions


maybe that too


----------



## Mussels (Jul 8, 2021)

I couldnt save the link, but my pixel phones news feed just popped up with an article thanking TPU for hosting the DLSS files, that did mention the theorised legal controversy


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> So, I have a question for all of you. What's so wrong about going to nVidia's site and agreeing to the license to gain access to all the DLLs in the SDK and using those that you need?


There is nothing wrong with that. However, that is an involved process. Making modifications to files for the purpose of altering the effect of how they work or function is protected by fair-use, and that's fine too. NVidia's files are not being distributed in a way that violates their rights and for the following reasons;

1. Regardless of how the files are used, an EULA is in force at all times. Either one would need to agree for the SDK or one would have to agree to use the GPU drivers, which the files in question can not operate without. Either way, NVidia's interests are being properly governed and protected.

2. Making modifications to such files and making them available does not violate NVidia's rights because distribution is not unlawful in and of itself. An end user can not use such files without agreeing to NVidia's terms in one form or another. The modifications are protected fair-use. The distribution is not unlawful because it does not circumvent any of NVidia's governing terms.

3. Both situations are not legally actionable as no attributable harm is being done to NVidia.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Research? Several tech press people reached out to me already and thanked me for it. Also not sure if the version in the SDK is synchronized to be the actual latest, and will be so for the future
> 
> 
> maybe that too


So for my work I used a proprietary database that has package for basically the SQLite version of it that runs in a single service (versus distributed and in the cloud,) and I have to go through the exact same process to get it. It's a library, although not a DLL, it's a JAR that I can can use. Datomic only provides the current version of dev local and the only reason I would ever want an older version is because I'm too lazy to update all of the dependencies where it's used. Backwards compatibility is usually fine, so it tends to be a drop-in replacement. I suspect that nVidia designs their libraries the same way within a major version, which is why I find the need for multiple versions to be a bit dubious.

Either way, the utility isn't what I have an issue with. It's the distribution of license protected material. I'm not doubting the usefulness of what you're doing, I'm just not convinced that it's in line with the spirit of the license that came with it.



lexluthermiester said:


> There is nothing wrong with that. However, that is an involved process. Making modifications to files for the purpose of altering the effect of how they work or function is protected by fair-use, and that's fine too. NVidia's files are not being distributed in a way that violates their rights and for the following reasons;
> 
> 1. Regardless of how the files are used, an EULA is in force at all times. Either one would need to agree for the SDK or one would have to agree to use the GPU drivers, which the files in question can not operate without. Either way, NVidia's interests are being properly governed and protected.
> 
> ...


You pointing off what you think is important isn't the same thing as pointing out the language of the license. The license explicitly forbids redistribution outside of an application using it with licensing as strict as nVidia's license. That's the crux of the issue. These are the bits that concern me which has nothing to do with what you're mentioning. Modifications are called out in the license, but that's not the issue.


> 2. DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS. These are the distribution requirements for you to exercise the grants above:
> 
> *a. An application must have material additional functionality, beyond the included portions of the SDK.*
> 
> ...



and this:



> 3. LIMITATIONS. Your license to use the SDK is restricted as follows:
> 
> a. You may not reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble, or remove copyright or other proprietary notices from any portion of the SDK or copies of the SDK.
> 
> ...



It seems pretty clear to me.

Honestly, if W1zz just made a simple application and slapped nVidia's license on it, I think it'd be fine. It's shipping just the DLL part that's dubious because the license explicitly calls out the usage of the SDK being used in an application and not being just a subset of the SDK that's being provided.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> So for my work I used a proprietary database that has package for basically the SQLite version of it that runs in a single service (versus distributed and in the cloud,) and I have to go through the exact same process to get it. It's a library, although not a DLL, it's a JAR that I can can use. Datomic only provides the current version of dev local and the only reason I would ever want an older version is because I'm too lazy to update all of the dependencies where it's used. Backwards compatibility is usually fine, so it tends to be a drop-in replacement. I suspect that nVidia designs their libraries the same way within a major version, which is why I find the need for multiple versions to be a bit dubious.
> 
> Either way, the utility isn't what I have an issue with. It's the distribution of license protected material. I'm not doubting the usefulness of what you're doing, I'm just not convinced that it's in line with the spirit of the license that came with it.
> 
> ...


Except that you are missing a couple key points. EULA terms are ONLY enforceable if they are valid under the law. For example, making a demand to not "reverse engineer" is a hollow and unenforceable term as reverse engineering is a widely understood protected right.

I could keep going like that proving how much bullshit is in EULAs, not just from NVidia, but I don't feel the need to spend the next 4 hours typing up a dissertation.

Instead I'm going to sum it up:

TPU is *not* breaking any laws or civil legal code. TPU is violating no *enforceable* EULA stipulations, nor are they facilitating such from or for their users. TPU is *not* circumventing any copyright protections afforded to NVidia by standing law.

The objections in this thread are examples of people making mountains out of mole-hills and making problems where there are none because of their own ignorance.

@W1zzard
We both know you have copyright attorney's at the ready. If you have any doubts and have not done so already, consult. I'd bet my swinging cod they'll give you more or less the same rundown I have here.



Mussels said:


> I couldnt save the link, but my pixel phones news feed just popped up with an article thanking TPU for hosting the DLSS files, that did mention the theorised legal controversy


Was that NVidia doing the thanking? Wouldn't be surprising at all. TPU hosting the files has highlighted something of value to its end users that they have yet to explore themselves.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 8, 2021)

No, i was just pointing out that random, unaffiliated websites have noticed and dont think its a legal issue themselves


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> The objection in this thread are examples of people making mountains out of mole-hills and making problems where there are none because of their own ignorance.


Lets keep it civil, shall we? You don't care about software licenses and have a lot of *opinions* about them already, okay, I get it.



Mussels said:


> No, i was just pointing out that random, unaffiliated websites have noticed and dont think its a legal issue themselves


If that was the case, why didn't they do it themselves? It's not like serving up files on a CDN is hard. They're probably thanking TPU because they didn't have to stick out their own necks to do it.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Lets keep it civil, shall we?


That was me being civil.


Aquinus said:


> You don't care about software licenses


I didn't say that. DON'T put words in my mouth.


Aquinus said:


> and have a lot of *opinions* about them already


Opinions supported by A LOT of case law.


Aquinus said:


> okay, I get it.


Good. Moving on..


Aquinus said:


> If that was the case, why didn't they do it themselves?


Because tinkering isn't something a company like NVidia generally affords time for it's employees to do.


Aquinus said:


> They're probably thanking TPU because they didn't have to stick out their own necks to do it.


Yeah, that might be true.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 8, 2021)

because no one thought of it yet, and TPU is as well known website for various repositories of tech related files







How is what we're doing any different to crossflashing an Nvidia BIOS file, also hosted here? (which i did a few minutes ago to raise the power limit on my 3090)


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Mussels said:


> How is what we're doing any different to crossflashing an Nvidia BIOS file, also hosted here?


Another excellent point! Answer: There is no difference.


----------



## sepheronx (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> so yeah not much different than a game mod then imo.  I don't see why nvidia would be mad about it, it helps them out. People won't use it unless it has good ratings and verified by others that it improves performance over other DLSS... so its basically like freelance free work for nvidia devs. lol
> 
> I imagine the only scenario nvidia wouldn't like this... if its lower quality too much to get that performance... but again most people won't be using those files unless good reviews/recommended, etc...
> 
> I don't know, I don't care either way personally as I only have a gtx 1070.


what happened to your 6800?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

Mussels said:


> because no one thought of it yet, and TPU is as well known website for various repositories of tech related files
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't recall having to explicitly accept a license for downloading things like GPU BIOS files or GPU drivers. How many of those ship with a license that the creator requires you to accept before downloading? Probably none of them.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I once worked in the legal profession and specialized in the area of copyright law. I once argued against microsoft in binding mediation. I won. Any more questions?


A simple ’no’ would have sufficed. Thanks.

anyway, we seem to be both on the same page about the fact that what TPU is doing is technically breaking the SW licence that comes with the DLSS dll’s. The only difference is in whether we think that the licence itself is enforceable or not.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

Dredi said:


> anyway, we seem to be both on the same page about the fact that what TPU is doing is technically breaking the SW licence that comes with the DLSS dll’s. The only difference is in whether we think that the licence itself is enforceable or not.


The safe thing to do is treat all software licenses as enforceable. As I said, a small application using DLSS would put TPU in compliance with the license. As far as I care it could be a cat picture that gets upscaled, but that would fit the language of the license. Just add something of material value beyond the DLLs themselves, that's it. Well, and include nVidia's license. Then you're all set. Problem solved with DLSS cat picture goodness. The application just has to be the vehicle for distribution, that's all. Use the same application for every version of the DLL. Easy as pie.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Dredi said:


> A simple ’no’ would have sufficed. Thanks.


You're welcome, glad you enjoyed it.
/s


Dredi said:


> anyway, we seem to be both on the same page about the fact that what TPU is doing is technically breaking the SW licence that comes with the DLSS dll’s. The only difference is in whether we think that the licence itself is enforceable or not.


I think you need to carefully re-read what was said. Context is important, and you're missing some...



Aquinus said:


> I don't recall having to explicitly accept a license for downloading things like GPU BIOS files or GPU drivers.





And the VBIOS code potions can be found by reading the relevant portions of stated EULA. Again, some of that is negated by fair-use, but it's in there.



Aquinus said:


> The safe thing to do is treat all software licenses as enforceable.


That is a fallacy and has no merit. Better advice would be to encourage people to research and better understand their RIGHTS so that they will know what is and is NOT enforceable.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> And the VBIOS code potions can be found by reading the relevant portions of stated EULA. Again, some of that is negated by fair-use, but it's in there.


That's after you've already downloaded it and are about to start using it. You're not agreeing to the license before getting the software. This is the way you do something when you want something to intentionally be redistributable. Accepting it just to download it puts limits on redistribution. That's a pretty big difference.


lexluthermiester said:


> That is a fallacy and has no merit. Better advice would be to encourage people to research and better understand their RIGHTS so that they will know what is and is NOT enforceable.


I think most people would prefer to avoid a legal battle, not encourage it, even if you think you can win on what you believe to be a moral high ground. There is a cost to trying to win a battle like that. I don't agree with your assessment.

Think of it this way, it would be cheaper to do this:


Aquinus said:


> As I said, a small application using DLSS would put TPU in compliance with the license. As far as I care it could be a cat picture that gets upscaled, but that would fit the language of the license. Just add something of material value beyond the DLLs themselves, that's it. Well, and include nVidia's license. Then you're all set. Problem solved with DLSS cat picture goodness. The application just has to be the vehicle for distribution, that's all. Use the same application for every version of the DLL. Easy as pie.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> That's after you've already downloaded it and are about to start using it. You're not agreeing to the license before getting the software.


Perhaps not, but you can't USE the software until you agree to the EULA. NVidia knows this. Soo...


Aquinus said:


> Accepting it just to download it puts limits on redistribution. That's a pretty big difference.


It's not as big as you think. Nor is it as effective as you think..


Aquinus said:


> I think most people would prefer to avoid a legal battle, not encourage it


Most people are a little spineless too.


Aquinus said:


> I don't agree with your assessment.


Ok, disagree as you see fit. Doesn't make you correct.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Perhaps not, but you can't USE the software until you agree to the EULA. NVidia knows this. Soo...


No, but you've not agreed to any license and are free to give that installer to anyone as you see fit. That's a pretty huge difference compared to a license that called out how it can be redistributed before even downloading it.



lexluthermiester said:


> Ok, disagree as you see fit. Doesn't make you correct.


It doesn't make you correct either.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> No, but you've not agreed to any license and are free to give that installer to anyone as you see fit. That's a pretty huge difference compared to a license that called out how it can be redistributed before even downloading it.


Not really. The rights holder, in this case NVidia, is still protected from infringment even when the transporters of said protected works are not bound by the governing EULA.

More to the point, distributing a "dll" file, modified or not, does not violate ANY protection afford by law to the creator as that DLL can not function on it's own. It is a part of a software suite that can not be used without fisrt accepting an EULA. Therefore NVidias rights are not violated by making a DLL available for download and as such does NOT injure them in any way, does not infringe upon the protected rights and does not circumvent, or attempt to circumvent, NVidias creator rights.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Not really. The rights holder, in this case NVidia, is still protected from infringment even when the transporters of said protected works are not bound by the governing EULA.


How are you not bound to a license that you explicitly agreed to? This isn't an implied license where just by using it, the terms are in effect.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> How are you not bound to a license that you explicitly agreed to?


Because a transporter didn't agree to anything. The end user does. How do you not understand that VERY simple concept?


Aquinus said:


> This isn't an implied license where just by using it, the terms are in effect.


You're correct, it's not. Why? Because the dll files can not be used by themselves. They are a "Dynamic Link Library", effectively addendum code that is referenced by the executing code which is itself governed by the EULA, which an end user would have had to agree to in order use the subject software.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Because a transporter didn't agree to anything.


How did they get the DLL then? Assume for a moment that everyone who got the SDK, got it from nVidia and agreed to that license. The wording of the license called out that anyone using the sdk would have licensing at least as strict as nVidia's. If you don't agree to some license, be it the EULA or the terms nVidia puts on their site, wouldn't that then be copyright infringement because you're not merely moving the DLL, you're copying it and making a copy of it every time someone downloads it. I wasn't even going to go there, but that seems like a worse position to be in.

What's wrong with shipping every version of the DLL with some dumb application using it again?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> How did they get the DLL then? Assume for a moment that everyone who got the SDK, got it from nVidia and agreed to that license. The wording of the license called out that anyone using the sdk would have licensing at least as strict as nVidia's. If you don't agree to some license, be it the EULA or the terms nVidia puts on their site, wouldn't that then be copyright infringement because you're not merely moving the DLL, you're copying it and making a copy of it every time someone downloads it. I wasn't even going to go there, but that seems like a worse position to be in.
> 
> What's wrong with shipping every version of the DLL with some dumb application using it again?


You do realize you answered your own point there, right?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> You do realize you answered your own point there, right?


Which one? There was more than one. I think shipping each version of the DLL with a dumb application using it is the correct way to go here. It doesn't even have to use DLSS itself, it could just spit out the DLL version and maybe some stats about the library. Maybe see if some basic functions work as expected. That's still material value beyond the DLL itself. Seems like a very simple solution that remains in the spirit of the SDK license and we all know TPU likes its tools.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Which one? There was more than one. I think shipping each version of the DLL with a dumb application using it is the correct way to go here. It doesn't even have to use DLSS itself, it could just spit out the DLL version and maybe some stats about the library. Maybe see if some basic functions work as expected. That's still material value beyond the DLL itself. Seems like a very simple solution that remains in the spirit of the SDK license and we all know TPU likes its tools.


Oh good grief. You're arguing in circles. Not sure whether you're doing it deliberately or because you're missing something. Regardless, I'm done with you on this subject.


----------



## piotrj3 (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> How are you not bound to a license that you explicitly agreed to? This isn't an implied license where just by using it, the terms are in effect.


Because transporter or distributor is not bound by it.

Does shop that sells game with DLSS technology is obliged to be correct with EULA? Does Microsoft distributing drivers have to be correct with EULA? Does shop like steam or GOG has to be compliant with EULA? No
Meanwhile END USER (END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT) is already using DLSS compatible license in game he uses. There is no possible usage of .dll being used outside of it. Techpowerup is NOT end user.
EULAs are not enforcable, and any laws existing already are higher value.
Fair use totally covers those cases.
Lawyer would need to prove yes we got damaged by it. They were not so case would be dissmissed.
And your argument you would prefer to be not sued by someone. Well you can be sued for any reason, whatever reason. Case would be dismissed simply.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 8, 2021)

piotrj3 said:


> Because transporter or distributor is not bound by it.


So you cannot limit transportation or distribution with a licence?


----------



## freeagent (Jul 8, 2021)

I don't understand.. why are you guys pushing this so hard? How does it effect you? What do you have to gain from this? I admit I did not read through the entire thread, even for previous comments.. it honestly seems like a lot of bullshit, and I am surprised to see 12 pages.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 8, 2021)

freeagent said:


> I don't understand.. why are you guys pushing this so hard? How does it effect you? What do you have to gain from this? I admit I did not read through the entire thread, even for previous comments.. it honestly seems like a lot of bullshit, and I am surprised to see 12 pages.


Discussing a topic needs to affect me, or have something to gain other than the discussion itself? What? :lol:


----------



## freeagent (Jul 8, 2021)

Cool! Thanks for being a dick


----------



## Dredi (Jul 8, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Cool! Thanks for being a dick


I personally simply find sw licences an interesting topic, and there is nothing wrong with finding them boring either.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 8, 2021)

Dredi said:


> I personally simply find sw licences an interesting topic, and there is nothing wrong with finding them boring either.


All good buddy. I guess my question was directed more towards the OP.

Ahh geez. I started page 13.


----------



## claes (Jul 8, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Oh ok. I see you know this as fact. Pardon me. I don't know the owner, but I am fucking positive he would not break any kind of laws with a site like this. There may not be a team but sure as shit he has a good lawyer, and you would be silly to think otherwise. I am truly astounded by the tears in this thread..





moproblems99 said:


> @claes , is THE attorney.


To be sure, I am not an attorney for TPU. I don’t know if @W1zzard has one, but given that most (all?) of the editors and reviewers are volunteers I assumed they don’t. I meant no offense @freeagent, nor do I think W1zzard has any malicious intent, and maybe I’m wrong and TPU has an army of lawyers :shrug:

Aside, I wouldn’t take legal advice from Lex, as not only are they not a lawyer, but they also don’t seem to understand basic civil law, their rights as a property/business owner, and have frequently referenced Canadian YouTube lawyers and infowars correspondents to warrant their legal claims. Not trying to start a flame war, just a matter of fact. Fortunately he’s blocked me so hopefully all is well. 

Still, as a lawyer who _doesn’t_ specialize in IP law, I don’t think nvidia cares about this at all — but don’t take my word for it. It is curious what fair-use means in this context!


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 8, 2021)

Look people, this was explained in the first two pages of comments including my first comment on this topic (back on page 2).

If Nvidia wanted TechPowerUp to stop hosting these dlls, they would have issued a DMCA takedown notice. They haven't so clearly they don't mind.

Remember that *FOR YEARS* TPU has hosted a variety of Nvidia software, including but not limited to driver software, various utilities, BIOS files, graphics demos, et cetera ad nauseam.

Same with AMD files. Same with Intel files. Same with Microsoft files. Start to see a pattern here?

Watching people argue about this has been hilariously entertaining so thanks to most of you who didn't understand. Even other tech media sites have smugly noted this discussion.

I am eagerly waiting for TPU to post a different set of Nvidia files so the same silliness can start up again.

This is almost as good as bodybuilders arguing about how many days in a week.

Keep it up people! The Internet needs you! THANK YOU!

Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Just for the record, this is perfectly legal.


I mean,
Strictly speakjng, it's not, which is why this thread exists.

It also really doesn't matter, which is why this thread is way, way too long.

Reference:  I am not a lawyer, but I work for a group that handles legal transcripts, so I'm familiar with a lot more than the average frog.



claes said:


> most (all?) of the editors and reviewers are volunteers


For the record I am pretty sure all editors are paid.  I know I was when I worked the news team role.


----------



## claes (Jul 8, 2021)

I had no idea — that’s great!


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

As a software engineer who puts licenses on his software, knowing that people are going to abide by those agreements is kind of important to me. I actually don't really care about nVidia, just that rights regarding intellectual property is respected because that's what earns me a living and if I come up with a good idea and I want to restrict how my work can be used, that should be my right, just as it's nVidia's right as a company.

All I'm saying is that laws regarding IP are important and it's a little irritating when it appears that they're not being respected, regardless of the justification for it.


cvaldes said:


> If Nvidia wanted TechPowerUp to stop hosting these dlls, they would have issued a DMCA takedown notice. They haven't so clearly they don't mind.


Or maybe it takes time to review these cases to see if it warrants action.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 8, 2021)

claes said:


> To be sure, I am not an attorney for TPU.


Damn, we had a good thing going and you blew it.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> As a software engineer who puts licenses on his software, knowing that people are going to abide by those agreements is kind of important to me. I actually don't really care about nVidia, just that rights regarding intellectual property is respected because that's what earns me a living and if I come up with a good idea and I want to restrict how my work can be used, that should be my right, just as it's nVidia's right as a company.
> 
> All I'm saying is that laws regarding IP are important and it's a little irritating when it appears that they're not being respected, regardless of the justification for it.
> 
> Or maybe it takes time to review these cases to see if it warrants action.


Unlikely based on TPU's *LONG HISTORY OVER YEARS* of hosting certain other Nvidia software.

There's a very high probability that Nvidia's legal department has some sort of internal guidelines for what can and what cannot be allowed to be hosted by third parties. They know that whatever they post (like developer versions of graphics drivers that have the anti-mining code disabled) may prove to be tempting for some parties on the Internet to recirculate.

Moreover it's not like DLSS was announced last week. It's been around for a few years now like the DLSS 1.0 dll that shipped with the Metro Exodus.

It's not Nvidia's first rodeo. They were founded over twenty years ago. They aren't that stupid. And their legal department most certainly isn't run by 25-year-old snot-nosed newbs. It's amusing to see people here treat Nvidia like they're a bunch of amateurs.

Remember that DLSS dlls aren't some sort of magic bullet. The game title needs to be written to take advantage of DLSS. It's not like I can drop DLSS 2.2.10 into Overwatch and turn into an Overwatch world champion overnight due to enhanced graphics.

But I realize that some people will try to cover their behinds by digging deep for unrealistic justifications.

What's the cutoff point for you? One month? One year? Ten years?

Just wondering...



And THANK YOU for added to the entertainment value of this discussion!


----------



## qubit (Jul 8, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> Look people, this was explained in the first two pages of comments including my first comment on this topic (back on page 2).
> 
> If Nvidia wanted TechPowerUp to stop hosting these dlls, they would have issued a DMCA takedown notice. They haven't so clearly they don't mind.
> 
> ...


But you forgot the popcorn!

Son, I am disappoint.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 8, 2021)

I ran out of popcorn a long time ago due to the lengthy festivities!


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> Wall of text


I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the points I laid out and why the other things that have been redistributed have been done in a way where it makes sense for them to be and haven't been in directly conflict (in my opinion,) with the license. Not all software licenses enforce the same requirements.

It's really not hard to understand that a license means what it says, even if what it says is hard to understand. Honestly, I think nVidia's license is pretty clear. A lot more clear than some other licenses I've seen. It's strict, but clear.


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 8, 2021)

I'd argue whatever license Nvidia claims is pretty much enforceable only under the "laws of the land" i.e. Nvidia may have have a claim but unless they plan to fight it in Germany, China, India or wherever else it doesn't mean jack!


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> It's really not hard to understand that a license means what it says, even if what it says is hard to understand.



The main issue, is most of the people spewing corporate this or corporate dogs that have just unlikely ever achieved life goals that violating licenses can render moot in a flash.  

IE: Salaries over $100k.   

When you have a lot to lose, you pay attention to the details.  Or ignore them at your choice (and peril).  I don't know about you, but I like to be able to buy $300 bottles of alcohol because I worked my ass off and sacrificed.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> The main issue, is most of the people spewing corporate this or corporate dogs that have just unlikely ever achieved life goals that violating licenses can render moot in a flash.
> 
> IE: Salaries over $100k.
> 
> When you have a lot to lose, you pay attention to the details.  Or ignore them at your choice (and peril).  I don't know about you, but I like to be able to buy $300 bottles of alcohol because I worked my ass off and sacrificed.



anyone and their mom can become a semi-truck driver in USA - 60k starting and 90k within 7 years. several people I know make 100k a year just driving the big rigs. it's so in-demand, they offer free training. literally anyone in USA can change their stars overnight by making a simple phone call to a trucking company.

funny how so many choose not to.


----------



## erocker (Jul 8, 2021)

So some snitch here really reported this to Nvidia? This has to be the most pathetic thing I've heard in a while. Not like I think Nvidia is going to care anyways. But talk about corporate mind control, sheesh!


----------



## claes (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> anyone and their mom can become a semi-truck driver in USA - 60k starting and 90k within 7 years. several people I know make 100k a year just driving the big rigs. it's so in-demand, they offer free training. literally anyone in USA can change their stars overnight by making a simple phone call to a trucking company.
> 
> funny how so many choose not to.



Probably because it’s a terrible job


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

claes said:


> Probably because it’s a terrible job



it's all about perspective imo, better than fast food, and those fast food employees can go apply to be semi-truck drivers too.  

no boss breathing down your throat, can listen to audiobooks all day (some people enjoy that a lot), or podcasts, etc.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 8, 2021)

I get how licensing affects you, but your name isn’t on any of this stuff.. and they are not your employer so it has nothing to do with you at all. That is why I am confused. It should have no bearing on your life at all is what I’m getting at. All this licensing talk makes me way to open up torrent or something.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2021)

R0H1T said:


> I'd argue whatever license Nvidia claims is pretty much enforceable only under the "laws of the land" i.e. Nvidia may have have a claim but unless they plan to fight it in Germany, China, India or wherever else it doesn't mean jack!


That's basically the end conclusion all of us (except some stubborn types) have reached.



erocker said:


> So some snitch here really reported this to Nvidia? This has to be the most pathetic thing I've heard in a while. Not like I think Nvidia is going to care anyways. But talk about corporate mind control, sheesh!


Read the thread, he's a developer who has explained his reasoning.  In short the agreement requires him to do so.

I don't think many of us have troble understanding Aquinus's rationale there.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> The main issue, is most of the people spewing corporate this or corporate dogs that have just unlikely ever achieved life goals that violating licenses can render moot in a flash.
> 
> IE: Salaries over $100k.
> 
> When you have a lot to lose, you pay attention to the details.  Or ignore them at your choice (and peril).  I don't know about you, but I like to be able to buy $300 bottles of alcohol because I worked my ass off and sacrificed.


They've probably never produced IP that's worthy of having a license to protect it either. Most people don't produce IP, they use it.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2021)

I mean, I don't really get what's so hard to understand.

A lot of my projects are OSS that require the license to be distrubuted with them, and that they remain non-commercial works.

If I found out someone incorperated it for example into a product without a license, or sold it in a commerical product, I'd be pissed.  And you'd probably understand that.  This is the same emotion driving Aquinus.  Because it can and does happen and this is the culture that enables it.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

erocker said:


> So some snitch here really reported this to Nvidia? This has to be the most pathetic thing I've heard in a while. Not like I think Nvidia is going to care anyways. But talk about corporate mind control, sheesh!


Sooo, I agreed to a license that says I need to notify nVidia when I see something that I might suspect is a violation of the license, on top of the fact that I'm an engineer with licenses on his own work. I would rather nVidia come back and make sure that TPU does it in a way that's in the spirit of the license. I didn't notify them because I hate TPU or I want it taken down. I want the license to be respected, that's all, because I would expect that same level of respect with any other software. People work hard to produce software, I know I do.



R-T-B said:


> I mean, I don't really get what's so hard to understand.
> 
> A lot of my projects are OSS that require the license to be distrubuted with them, and that they remain non-commercial works.
> 
> If I found out someone incorperated it for example into a product without a license, or sold it in a commerical product, I'd be pissed.  And you'd probably understand that.  This is the same emotion driving Aquinus.  Because it can and does happen and this is the culture that enables it.


Most of my personal works are under the eclipse license. Not all of it, but everything I want to share publicly. There are a handful of GPL works, but I don't tend to use that license these days. Eclipse and MIT are my go-to licenses depending on the need. Anything closed source is a "I hold all rights to this software" kind of deal because most of it hasn't been released for people to consume. Those are the ideas I keep under lock and key.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I mean, I don't really get what's so hard to understand.
> 
> A lot of my projects are OSS that require the license to be distrubuted with them, and that they remain non-commercial works.
> 
> If I found out someone incorperated it for example into a product without a license, or sold it in a commerical product, I'd be pissed.  And you'd probably understand that.  This is the same emotion driving Aquinus.  Because it can and does happen and this is the culture that enables it.



I still don't understand why W1zz just doesn't email Nvidia and ask, I know he has to have connections there for his review samples. It would make this thread end quickly anyway whatever the answer may be.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> I still don't understand why W1zz just doesn't email Nvidia and ask, I know he has to have connections there for his review samples. It would make this thread end quickly anyway whatever the answer may be.


Have you ever tried to email nVidia? They don't always respond and you sometimes need to poke them a bit to get even the most simple of responses.

...but your right. They're the ones you'd want to get the ok from, but even then, I'd be skeptical because of the license. I'd prefer nVidia update the license as opposed to making exceptions.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Have you ever tried to email nVidia? They don't always respond and you sometimes need to poke them a bit to get even the most simple of responses.



yeah but he has contacts I thought? how else does he get his review samples?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> yeah but he has contacts I thought? how else does he get his review samples?


They're probably not the same people who deal with legality issues. Big companies have a lot of different departments.


----------



## looniam (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> it's all about perspective imo, better than fast food, and those fast food employees can go apply to be semi-truck drivers too.
> 
> no boss breathing down your throat, can listen to audiobooks all day (some people enjoy that a lot), or podcasts, etc.


are you misguided.

those "schools" do little more than provide fresh meat for some trucking company's grinder via job placement services. i know from first hand experience that not everyone is ok with seeing their home just 3 times a month - you make the money driving and being the new driver it would be the shittest routes.
but if you're under 28 and have no family - go for it; and then buy your own rig later.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> They're probably not the same people who deal with legality issue. Big companies have a lot of different departments



you make a good point... I worked at an art museum one time, it only had like 100 employees, and I still couldn't even get a keyboard replaced that some other employee had spilled soda on... even though the IT department literally had a 100 keyboards brand new stacked in their office...

it's amazing to me how broken organizations can be, even though everyone is technically on the same team... lol



looniam said:


> are you misguided.
> 
> those "schools" do little more than provide fresh meat for some trucking company's grinder. i know from first hand experience that not everyone is ok with seeing their home just 3 times a month - you make the money driving and being the new driver it would be the shittest routes.



truck driving isn't for everyone, but if you have no obligations to a family, etc. could be a good way out of poverty level min wage fast food jobs, etc. I'd rather make 60k a year if i was only making 9 an hr at mcdonalds. but you do you, context is different for everyone.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> you make a good point... I worked at an art museum one time, it only had like 100 employees, and I still couldn't even get a keyboard replaced that some other employee had spilled soda on... even though the IT department literally had a 100 keyboards brand new stacked in their office...
> 
> it's amazing to me how broken organizations can be, even though everyone is technically on the same team... lol


The logistics of managing large businesses is hard. There are a ton of moving parts for businesses that have north of 10s of millions of USD in revenue.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> As a software engineer who puts licenses on his software, knowing that people are going to abide by those agreements is kind of important to me.


And that is perfectly understandable. However, no software engineer or publisher has ANY control over citizen statutory rights. Your rights as a copyright holder must at all times yield to personal rights, without exception. And in some certain contexts, they do. You have no choice in that. You, like any other software dev/engineer/publisher, can put any terms you want in to an EULA. Doing so does not and will not guarantee that any or all of them are enforceable. Now in reality many terms certainly will be enforceable. However, I have NEVER seen an EULA that is 100% enforceable. Most don't even come close. You want to see glaring examples of pathetic EULA terms, go read an EULA from Electronic Arts. Those are examples of laughable contract garbage. Hint: DON'T emulate that very poor example. Another example of a completely unenforceable term(if it actually exists)...


Aquinus said:


> Sooo, I agreed to a license that says I need to notify nVidia when I see something that I might suspect is a violation of the license


...THAT. No copyright holder can enforce such a contract condition. There are many instances of case law that strike down such garbage contract terms.



R-T-B said:


> I mean,
> Strictly speakjng, it's not, which is why this thread exists.


Nonsense. This thread exist because a few "special" users who wanted to SJW on TPU. The downloads in question are of no legal consequence at all. Even if NVidia cared, which is VERY doubtful, any DMCA take-down issued can lawfully and correctly be refused. It's called fair-use. This situation is no more unlawful than that of a hack of Super Metroid(perfectly legal for the very same fair-use reasons).


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Nonsense. This thread exist because a few "special" users wanted to SJW on TPU.


Dude, I work in (well, rather with) the court system and no judge would see it that way.  That is not a legal argument.



lexluthermiester said:


> read an EULA from Electronic Arts.


You weren't in the thread earlier, I can see.


----------



## looniam (Jul 8, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> truck driving isn't for everyone, but if you have no obligations to a family, etc. could be a good way out of poverty level min wage fast food jobs, etc. I'd rather make 60k a year if i was only making 9 an hr at mcdonalds. but you do you, context is different for everyone.


absolutely! the trucking industry can be a worthwhile career and is important to the economy as a whole, not just the driver.

sorry it was what seemed like a "become the king (or queen) of the road" kinda thingy. i think you may understand my point that there is no free lunch, that everyone pays their dues, to use some clichés.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Dude, I work in (well, rather with) the court system and no judge would see it that way.  That is not a legal argument.


Oh? Let's review...


Midland Dog said:


> isnt this illegally redistributing licensed code?


So what is this then? Is this the question of a concerned person? Or is this an example of someone not involved with the situation asking about something that is (A) none of their business and (B) completely ignorant to the condition under which these downloads have been provided?

The above user and a number of others are doing little more that stirring the pot & creating drama/problems where there are none. No Judge would ever entertain any of those comments as having any merit or credibility as they have no direct involvement with the administration of either TPU or NVidia. Only W1zzard, certain other TPU staff and representatives of NVidia are parties of interest. A Judge would give only statements made by and for them any grace at all.



R-T-B said:


> You weren't in the thread earlier, I can see.


No, TL; DGAFRA. Care to point anything out specifically?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> No, care to point anything out specifically?


You mean the other how many pages of this thread beyond the first post? I've been pretty active in it because I'm that bastard who is keeping it alive and even I miss things. (Sorry @qubit.)


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> No Judge would ever entertain any of those comments as having any merit or credibility as they have no direct involvement with the administration of either TPU or NVidia.


Well no shit.  But the respect of the EULA is something devs share, and the EULA instructed Aquinus to report suspected violations, so he did.  How is that "SJW" behavior?  Not seeing it.

This is more than a suspected violation.  It is a violation.  Whether or not it is enforcable seems to be what you are hinging your argument on, but you've yet to name any unenforcable points or clauses.


lexluthermiester said:


> Oh? Let's review...


Done.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

@lexluthermiester let's ignore the law for a minute. Do you think it's morally acceptable for a knowledge worker who creates something to not have control over his or her creations? That's really what the boils down to, isn't it? I understand your stance and there is a counter-argument to it. But I'm doing this on a matter of principle, are you? If so, I want to understand why. Loopholes in law are a means to an end.


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 8, 2021)

This is a silly argument to have. If its not harming or costing NVidia money, and TPU isn't making money from it, then I don't see why they would even care. If anything, I see it as a way of NVidia promoting its products at the expense of TPU since they have to foot the bill of hosting the storage & bandwidth for those files.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

MentalAcetylide said:


> This is a silly argument to have. If its not harming or costing NVidia money, and TPU isn't making money from it, then I don't see why they would even care. If anything, I see it as a way of NVidia promoting its products at the expense of TPU since they have to foot the bill of hosting the storage & bandwidth for those files.


Silly arguments are the best ones to have and if I've forced everyone who's read this thread to at least think about software licenses, then I think that I've succeeded.

Also, for what it's worth, I've offered ways to do the same thing and still be in compliance with the licence.


----------



## Mescalamba (Jul 8, 2021)

From what game it is anyway?


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 8, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Silly arguments are the best ones to have and if I've forced everyone who's read this thread to at least think about software licenses, then I think that I've succeeded.
> 
> Also, for what it's worth, I've offered ways to do the same thing and still be in compliance with the licence.


Perhaps, assuming there's even a violation to begin with, but what's your history here and what were the motives behind it? Only you can answer that. Nevertheless, I'm sure there were probably a number of other ways to handle it besides raising a ruckus in the forums, no?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 8, 2021)

MentalAcetylide said:


> Perhaps, assuming there's even a violation to begin with, but what's your history here and what were the motives behind it? Only you can answer that. Nevertheless, I'm sure there were probably a number of other ways to handle it besides raising a ruckus in the forums, no?


I've been very clear about that multiple times in this thread.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 8, 2021)

Mescalamba said:


> From what game it is anyway?



It's for any game with DLSS.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 8, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> This is more than a suspected violation. It is a violation.


It is opinion not supported by merit or the facts of the situation.



Aquinus said:


> let's ignore the law for a minute.


Oh, that's just funny... and a bit ironic, wouldn't you say?


Aquinus said:


> But I'm doing this on a matter of principle, are you?


Oh yes.


Aquinus said:


> If so, I want to understand why.


I found your postulation intriguing. Let's explore it..


Aquinus said:


> Do you think it's morally acceptable for a knowledge worker who creates something to not have control over his or her creations?


That greatly depends on what is defined as "control".

Do you have the right to profit and/or benefit from your creation?
Absolutely. But there are limitations to that right. See below..

Do you have the right to limit or control distribution?
Within certain boundaries, yes but not completely.

Do you have to right to dictate the terms of use within the context of personal citizen usage?
Absolutely NOT.

Why?
Because you have NO RIGHTS at all to instruct or enforce adherence of use terms where personal use is concerned. You can try, you will fail, morally AND legally.

Do you have the right to dictate terms of use within the context of business entity use?
Absolutely YES, and almost without limits.

Why?
Because business entities(governments, for profit & not for profit organizations) are not in the same class of legal entities as citizens. Personal rights do not apply to entities. You have the right to nearly completely dictate terms to an entity, whether they like it or not.

Do you have the right to control resale of a creation you have sold?
No.

Why?
Why should you? When an oil paint artist sells/gives away a painting, he surrenders a great measure of control of that painting to the person/entity offering payment, if any. Said artist has ZERO claim of interest in any proceeds from a resale of that painting. Nor can that artist control or limit resale. However, the artist in most situations retains copyright(unless otherwise also sold/surrendered). In this way no one but the artist can sell copies or recreations of the original painting. This school of thought applies equally to books, movies and yes, software.

Can you claim a software license is not a sale in the context of a individual citizen?
No. If you give or *SELL* a copy of software to a person, that person is in lawful possession of that copy of software, per defined legal statues under both civil and criminal law. As such they are ethically, legally and morally entitled to use that software in any way THEY see fit so long as it is within the confines of their PERSONAL use, with OR without the permission of the copyright holder. Additionally and most importantly, the United States Constitution protects the right of possession as to be the same as ownership in almost all situations, software included. This is the real reason why companies like microsoft willingly activate Windows/Office CDKeys regardless of that key status. They know full well that ultimately they must yield to personal use statues. They will not disclose this, but this is the reason.

Can you claim a software license is not a sale in the context of a business entity?
Yes. They are an entity and not entitled to the same rights as an individual.

I could care less whether or not anyone agrees or disagrees with anything/everything stated here. Most of it IS enforceable depending on the effort expended.
However, my motivation and set of principles should be abundantly clear here.


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 9, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I've been very clear about that multiple times in this thread.


Yes, and simply going by that, its clearly being a fly in the ointment, so to speak. I don't see anything constructive going this route, just all controversial. Its no different than going up on social media and throwing around suggestions for the wow-factor.


----------



## Timelessest (Jul 9, 2021)

Since it's Nvidia vs TPU I vote for TPU, DLSS should be open source!


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Do you have to right to dictate the terms of use within the context of personal citizen usage?


What happens when personal citizen usage crosses over into the legal world...such as violating laws.  Say I was speeding in a posted zone.

Or....what if a pedo was Viewing child pornography with the express consent of the child.  I mean after all, it's all personal citizen usage in the privacy of their own home.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Timelessest said:


> Since it's Nvidia vs TPU I vote for TPU, DLSS should be open source!


It's not TPU VS NVidia. It's a couple of forum users being "special" and interpreting simple things drastically out of context.


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 9, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> What happens when personal citizen usage crosses over into the legal world...such as violating laws.  Say I was speeding in a posted zone.
> 
> Or....what if a pedo was Viewing child pornography with the express consent of the child.  I mean after all, it's all personal citizen usage in the privacy of their own home.


I guess the speedster will learn about Newton's Laws & Hooke's Law if they hit anything and/or anyone. 
As for pornography involving underage minors, consent means squat. The adult is the responsible individual regardless of the child's disposition, and its their responsibility as the adult to protect children from being involved in any kind of sexual act or innuendos simply due to the physical, psychological, and social impact it has on the minor. There's just really no comparison here between copyrights/EULA & pedophilia in regards to the law & its severity.



lexluthermiester said:


> It's not TPU VS NVidia. It's a couple of forum users being "special" and interpreting simple things drastically out of context.


Its a failure to recognize the spirit of the law. This is why we have too many frivolous lawsuits and high liability insurance rates. We certainly don't see as many private practice physicians & specialists compared to years ago. All because some colostomy bags want to abuse the law to either make money or just take the piss.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> What happens when personal citizen usage crosses over into the legal world...such as violating laws.  Say I was speeding in a posted zone.
> 
> Or....what if a pedo was Viewing child pornography with the express consent of the child.  I mean after all, it's all personal citizen usage in the privacy of their own home.


And to that mental drivel I will offer the same statement...


lexluthermiester said:


> It's a couple of forum users being "special" and* interpreting simple things drastically out of context.*


... Yup..


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> It's not TPU VS NVidia. It's a couple of forum users being "special" and interpreting simple things drastically out of context.


Why do you resort to ad hominem? I've made my stance pretty clear, but when push comes to shove you seem like really like applying connotation labels.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

MentalAcetylide said:


> There's just really no comparison here between copyrights/EULA & pedophilia in regards to the law & its severity.


Other than the law is the law.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 9, 2021)

@lexluthermiester give me until the morning to come up with a well formulated response. The bourbon isn't going to give you a response worthy of your rebuttal. It's been a long day and I don't feel like going into a deep response right now.


----------



## Hachi_Roku256563 (Jul 9, 2021)

This is possibly going to sound dumb but what use is a nvidea dlss dll by itself
is it similar to how you can get some windows dlls that come from things that wont install under 10 and paste them in a game dir and it will run even though the actual thing isent installed
*i had to do a similar thing for a program*


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Why do you resort to ad hominem? I've made my stance pretty clear, but when push comes to shove you seem like really like applying connotation labels.


You say that like it's a bad thing. Stop vilifying someone who is only acting as a voice of reason and logic.

Regardless, people attempting to cause problems for TPU over what is effectively a *deeply flawed interpretation* of both legal statue and EULA terms & conditions is a MUCH bigger problem.


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 9, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Why do you resort to ad hominem? I've made my stance pretty clear, but when push comes to shove you seem like really like applying connotation labels.


Well, its like me having a problem with a company I work for and putting up a post on the public bulletin board about it. Then it unnecessarily becomes everyone's problem. Its no different than the way some choose to use social media. They have an axe to grind so the first thing they do is twitter or disgrace book to the masses. Of course you're going to rile some feathers doing this.


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 9, 2021)

Did anyone even happen to directly or privately ask W1z if he contacted Nvidia on this matter rather just speculating about what TPU did or didn't do possibly or otherwise illegal potentially or hypothetically under the law? He's a difficult one to get in contact with I know...especially here on TPU. I'm just going to go out on a limb by stating that TPU and it's staff probably has a good idea about the situation at hand in question more than speculation circulating around it. The legalities of it I suppose are another matter, but as far as TPU's legal binding in relation with Nvidia is a perhaps a different situation entirely. That's just a hunch though.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Regardless, people attempting to cause problems for TPU over what is effectively a *deeply flawed interpretation* of both legal statue and EULA terms & conditions is a MUCH bigger problem.


Why look at it as a negative.  All he sought was clarification.  They can choose to provide it or not.  If Nvidia isn't ok, they'll just ask to take it down.  If they are, everyone's life will go on and it will be clear for all.  Not sure why anyone needs to make it more difficult than that.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> @lexluthermiester give me until the morning to come up with a well formulated response. The bourbon isn't going to give you a response worthy of your rebuttal. It's been a long day and I don't feel like going into a deep response right now.


Oh, sure. Go sleep that off. Such a response is no doubt going to be predictable, but should also be entertaining.

For the record, I'm not fanboying, bootlicking(eh @claes?), ass-kissing or shoving my nose where the Sun doesn't shine. TPU has made a few mistakes in the past and I have been one of the people to more or less politely point them out.

TPU IN THIS SITUATION, has done no wrong. At all, full stop, end of fraking discussion. It's not our problem, responsibility, accountability or stewardship. This matter rests fully and exclusively with W1zzard(& staff) and NVidia.



InVasMani said:


> Did anyone even happen to directly or privately ask W1z if he contacted Nvidia on this matter rather just speculating about what TPU did or didn't do


W1z did create this thread to give the discussion a better home, so clearly he didn't want to be seen as censoring critics.

TPU is seemingly hosting modified DLSS DLL files.








						NVIDIA DLSS DLL (2.4.13) Download
					

This download provides various versions of NVIDIA's DLSS DLL for download.   In this one file, which is bundled with all games that support NVIDIA's




					www.techpowerup.com
				




So the circumstances are clear. The drama being created here is a vapid argument of legality, IMHO.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Why look at it as a negative.  All he sought was clarification.  They can choose to provide it or not.  If Nvidia isn't ok, they'll just ask to take it down.  If they are, everyone's life will go on and it will be clear for all.  Not sure why anyone needs to make it more difficult than that.


There-in presents the flaw in thought: You(and others) assume TPU is doing something wrong. You also assume that NVidia has the option to take down those downloads. Both notions are incorrect.


----------



## Zubasa (Jul 9, 2021)

With all this drama, did nVidia actually said anything about it?
Or is it just people having concern for nVidia's "rights" more so than the company itself?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 9, 2021)

Zubasa said:


> With all this drama, did nVidia actually said anything about it?
> Or is it just people having concern for nVidia's "rights" more so than the company itself?


Too early to say, honestly.  Nothing in a corperation moves fast.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Not really. The rights holder, in this case NVidia, is still protected from infringment even when the transporters of said protected works are not bound by the governing EULA.
> 
> More to the point, distributing a "dll" file, modified or not, does not violate ANY protection afford by law to the creator as that DLL can not function on it's own. *It is a part of a software suite that can not be used without fisrt accepting an EULA*. Therefore NVidias rights are not violated by making a modified DLL available for download as such does NOT injure them in any way, does not infringe upon the protected rights and does not circumvent, or attempt to circumvent, NVidias creator rights.


This is the part i had diffculty wording earlier

the file is not modified, no protections are broken, and it cannot be used except in previously supported applications with an applicable EULA for that file/feature/product

And again: how is this different to hosting the BIOS files here? What's changed? This practice has been going on for decades with no company caring.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> And again: how is this different to hosting the BIOS files here?


The restrictive EULA in play.



lexluthermiester said:


> There-in presents the flaw in thought: You(and others) assume TPU is doing something wrong. You also assume that NVidia has the option to take down those downloads. Both notions are incorrect.



We've provided our arguments for why it is wrong, including citing lines in the eula.  You need to do better deconstructing our arguments than just stating we are wrong, it is unenforcable, etc...  What is unenforcable?  Why?  Quotes please.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 9, 2021)

Mescalamba said:


> From what game it is anyway?


From my notes, DLSS 2.2.10.0 is from Rust.

Other recent versions:

2.2.9.0 - Unreal Engine 5
2.2.6.0 - Rainbow Siege Six
2.1.66.0 - Doom Eternal
2.1.63 - No Man's Sky
2.1.58 - ?
2.1.55 - Metro Exodus PC Enhanced Version
2.1.52 - Fortnite
2.1.51 - ?
2.1.40 - Rogue Company
2.1.39 - Cyberpunk 2077


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> This is the part i had diffculty wording earlier
> 
> the file is not modified, no protections are broken, and it cannot be used except in previously supported applications with an applicable EULA for that file/feature/product
> 
> And again: how is this different to hosting the BIOS files here? What's changed? This practice has been going on for decades with no company caring.


Wait, clarity please. Those DLL's are NOT modded/customized?


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Wait, clarity please. Those DLL's are NOT modded/customized?


That's the point. They can be dropped in to replace existing DLSS dlls for other games.

Did you not read the actual article? This has been covered on multiple PC gaming media sites (as well as general discussion forums like Reddit), not just TechPowerUp.

The game specific DLSS optimizations (profiles) ship with the GeForce driver software not the DLSS dll.

For a videogame to feature DLSS it needs three things: A.) DLSS support in the game software itself, B.) a compatible DLSS library file, and C.) the optimized game profile from the GeForce driver. The latter is provided by Nvidia based on their supercomputers analyzing game graphics. And these three requirements are beyond the hardware support requirement.

As I repeatedly mentioned, it's not like you can drop a random DLSS dll into the Minesweeper folder and automagically get DLSS support for that game.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> The restrictive EULA in play.


No, it isn't. The EULA does not apply here.


R-T-B said:


> We've provided our arguments for why it is wrong


You have. They do not apply to this situation.


R-T-B said:


> including citing lines in the eula.


Sure. And when the files are used the EULA is already in effect by the user using them.


R-T-B said:


> You need to do better deconstructing our arguments than just stating we are wrong


Oh sure, because that's what I always do... 


R-T-B said:


> What is unenforceable? Why? Quotes please.


I've already explained that...


cvaldes said:


> That's the point. They can be dropped in to replace existing DLSS dlls for other games.
> 
> Did you not read the actual article? This has been covered on multiple PC gaming media sites, not just TechPowerUp.
> 
> The game specific DLSS optimizations (profiles) ship with the GeForce driver software not the DLSS dll.


You're talking about this?








						NVIDIA DLSS DLL (2.4.13) Download
					

This download provides various versions of NVIDIA's DLSS DLL for download.   In this one file, which is bundled with all games that support NVIDIA's




					www.techpowerup.com
				



If not, no, I've only seen this thread.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 9, 2021)

_"Recent discussions on tech forums and Reddit revealed that the DLSS libraries, which are usually located in the game's installation folders, are user-swappable, meaning that one can replace their DLSS library file for a different version that enables a different set of features or potentially even image quality or performance improvements."_

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/284182/techpowerup-hosts-nvidia-dlss-client-libraries

Maybe a little extra research -- including reading other non-TPU sources -- should be in your strategy next time you post an opinion.

If you're trying to follow PC graphics/videogame technology, single sourcing your information is unwise.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, DLSS wasn't unveiled by Nvidia last week. It has been around for a couple of years. But do as you wish. You have contributed greatly to the overall amusement level of this discussion.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> _"Recent discussions on tech forums and Reddit revealed that the DLSS libraries, which are usually located in the game's installation folders, are user-swappable, meaning that one can replace their DLSS library file for a different version that enables a different set of features or potentially even image quality or performance improvements."_
> 
> Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/284182/techpowerup-hosts-nvidia-dlss-client-libraries


Actually yes, I did see that article. Didn't see the discussion before it got moved. This changes nothing...



cvaldes said:


> Maybe a little extra research -- including reading other non-TPU sources -- should be in your strategy next time you post an opinion.


Gee, really? Ok then...  



cvaldes said:


> If you trying to follow PC graphics/videogame technology, single sourcing your information is unwise.


Thanks for the advice, I'll take it under consideration...


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Thanks for the advice, I'll take it under consideration...


Do as you wish.

I did mention that you have contributed greatly to the amusement level of this discussion. It's entirely your choice whether or not you want to continue providing this entertainment.

As I have repeatedly stated in this thread, this has been marvelously entertaining in way that only a handful of other Internet discussions have rivaled.

Continue as you were.


----------



## claes (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> bootlicking(eh @claes?),


You rang? Are you calling me a bootlicker lol?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 9, 2021)

Ok wow, I like that line from star wars but since just-picture memes are against the rules (forgot this), I'll repeat my point a different way and clarify this is not meant as bait, it is a legitmate point:



Just saying something does not make it true.  And no what I quoted was NOT being presented as merely opinion.

Example:



lexluthermiester said:


> Sure. And when the files are used the EULA is already in effect by the user using them.


Then you are choosing to use the game EULA of whatever game.  We've been over this.  This does not help you.

If you did not sign any EULA, then you are running afoul of copyright law.

If anyone really wants to test this, I'd suggest hiring a lawyer, which none of us are.  But I'm probably as close as you'll get for free.

The bottom line of this is:

1.) He had every right to question if it's a EULA violation, because it is.

2.) I really doubt anyone believes that it's "so illegal" anything terrible will happen.  At most nvidia will clarify for us.

3.) Anyone making it out to be more than that are the true special people here.

How this is still going on is...  indeed weird.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Wait, clarity please. Those DLL's are NOT modded/customized?


no ones touching these files, only copying them from one game to another. they are left untouched, in the original state.

Two games that use DLSS 2.x can swap files, thats all.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 9, 2021)

InVasMani said:


> He's [w1zzard] a difficult one to get in contact with I know...especially here on TPU


lol no? my contact details are posted everywhere


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

No one may know his real name without being uninstalled from reality, but he's super easy to contact both via the forum (and he does reply to PMs) and his email is on the contact page


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 9, 2021)

Doesn't fair use apply here?
After all, the end user has already paid for using the DLSS technology when buying the hardware and software.
The end user decides what optimization code to use. TPU just provides a collection of files to choose from.
No harm done here.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

MentalAcetylide said:


> This is a silly argument to have. If its not harming or costing NVidia money, and TPU isn't making money from it, then I don't see why they would even care.


Last time I checked there were ads on the download page. Not that the amounts would be meaningful though.



Jacky_BEL said:


> Doesn't fair use apply here?
> After all, the end user has already paid for using the DLSS technology when buying the hardware and software.
> The end user decides what optimization code to use. TPU just provides a collection of files to choose from.
> No harm done here.


There is no check in place to confirm the GPU or installed games when downloading from TPU.

edit:

*To summarize the whole shitshow:*

1) TPU is explicitly violating either the DLSS SDK EULA, or a bunch of individual game EULAs
2) *It is highly unlikely that the above violation will bring anything negative to TPU. *
3) EULA that limits redistribution of software is very much enforceable. Even if other parts of the same EULA would not be enforceable.
4) Unauthorized redistribution of software is called online piracy.
5) Hosting driver installers or bios files that do not have redistribution limitations in their EULAs do not share the same problem.
6) Hosting full games on TPU would be the same thing *licence wise* as hosting these DLSS DLLs.
7) *Fair use most likely applies to individual users who change DLLs in their games.* Fair use does not grant the same provilidges to businesses, like TPU!


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Last time I checked there were ads on the download page. Not that the amounts would be meaningful though.
> 
> 
> There is no check in place to confirm the GPU or installed games when downloading from TPU.


they cant be used outside of those circumstances, so it can easily be assumed that is the case


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> they cant be used outside of those circumstances, so it can easily be assumed that is the case


What? So i can’t decompile them and post the contents on the internet somewhere? I cant reverse engineer them and create a copy or the algorithms written in direct ML? *Your definition of ”use” is very limited.*

edit: if you were presented an EULA that said that the files are provided only to be used with existing games, things would be different. Now TPU provides no licence with the files.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> Do as you wish.
> 
> I did mention that you have contributed greatly to the amusement level of this discussion. It's entirely your choice whether or not you want to continue providing this entertainment.
> 
> ...


Aww, that was adorable and somewhat pathetic. You and the other sad little hens having a good cluck are you? Please, do carry on...



claes said:


> You rang? Are you calling me a bootlicker lol?


I'm referring to the instance were YOU called me one, which was then swiftly removed by a mod. What, didn't think I saw that, eh?



R-T-B said:


> But I'm probably as close as you'll get for free.


Keep telling yourself that. 



Mussels said:


> no ones touching these files, only copying them from one game to another. they are left untouched, in the original state.
> 
> Two games that use DLSS 2.x can swap files, thats all.


Ah, thank you. I was under the impression that some changes had been made. However, changes or not, the situation is the same.


Mussels said:


> they cant be used outside of those circumstances, so it can easily be assumed that is the case


This. None of these DLL files can be used outside the context of an EULA agreement for the software in question, sooo...


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> This. None of these DLL files can be used outside the context of an EULA agreement for the software in question, sooo...


Very narrow minded of you. Using them as an end user to replace other dll’s is very likely within fair use and not a problem at all anyway.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> What? So i can’t decompile them and post the contents on the internet somewhere? I cant reverse engineer them and create a copy or the algorithms written in direct ML? *Your definition of ”use” is very limited.*
> 
> edit: if you were presented an EULA that said that the files are provided only to be used with existing games, things would be different. Now TPU provides no licence with the files.


These files can easily be obtained by just downloading a game or game demo if you wanted to source them for that.

And if someone actually did go to the absurd levels of effort to decompile by hand and learn how these work to alter them... uploading and sharing those ALTERED files would be the potential problem (or would it, since Nvidia lets us do that with their BIOS files, and driver .inf files...)


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> These files can easily be obtained by just downloading a game or game demo if you wanted to source them for that.


Yes, and in those situations you are presented with an EULA that explicitly forbids such things. But if I download them from TPU no licence is provided. That is the problem here.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

thats just pedantry.

I can get my 6 year old kid to click next buttons and install games and haahahaha, i'm legally free to do aaaaaaanythinng i want!


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> thats just pedantry.


No, not pedantry. Licence violation is the correct term here. Or copyright violation if the dll’s are pirated from games.

also, you are likely legally responsible of your kids actions, so I wouldn’t use him/her/they/them as a scapegoat here.


----------



## qubit (Jul 9, 2021)

I can't believe that this thread is still going round in circles after almost 400 posts over a non-issue!   

Just enjoy the support that @W1zzard has given us with these DLLs and be done with it.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

qubit said:


> I can't believe that this thread is still going round in circles after almost 400 posts over a non-issue!
> 
> Just enjoy the support that @W1zzard has given us with these DLLs and be done with it.


Just enjoy online piracy, it’s free!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> *To summarize the whole shitshow:*
> 
> 1) TPU is explicitly violating either the DLSS SDK EULA, or a bunch of individual game EULAs
> 2) *It is highly unlikely that the above violation will bring anything negative to TPU. *
> ...


I offer a quick review of your deeply flawed summery:

"1) TPU is explicitly violating either the DLSS SDK EULA, or a bunch of individual game EULAs"
How so? The use of the files in question by end users is, at all times, still governed by the EULA agreed to by the NVidia drivers(the effective governing document) in addition to the EULA for the games. Swapping one version of the files for another does not matter as NVidia's interests are still protected. TPU is doing nothing unlawful or even incorrect as no rights of NVidia are being infringed.

"2) *It is highly unlikely that the above violation will bring anything negative to TPU. "*
It's not a violation, but you're otherwise right, other than the clucking hens making needless noise, no harm will come to TPU.

"3) EULA that limits redistribution of software is very much enforceable. Even if other parts of the same EULA would not be enforceable."
Sure. But you need to define what is being distributed which isn't already being distributed. Literally nothing. Again, the files provided by TPU *CAN NOT BE USED OUTSIDE OF THE NVIDIA GOVERNING EULA!* It's not possible. How do you fail to understand this?

"4) Unauthorized redistribution of software is called online piracy."
Your understanding of both points in that line is deeply flawed. See below..

"5) Hosting driver installers or bios files that do not have redistribution limitations in their EULAs do not share the same problem."
They are covered in the EXACT same way. The hosted DLL files *CAN NOT BE USED WITHOUT THE DRIVERS & VBIOS SOFTWARE!* Seriously, show us all an example of how those DLLs can be used outside of a gaming context(which requires the drivers to access the function contained within them, requiring agreement to the NVidia driver EULA, which is the governing document), and I'll shut up.

"6) Hosting full games on TPU would be the same thing *license wise* as hosting these DLSS DLLs."
Another deeply flaw statement. If you really think this, your understanding of both copyright law and contract law needs COMPLETE revision.

"7) *Fair use most likely applies to individual users who change DLLs in their games.* Fair use does not grant the same provilidges to businesses, like TPU!"
That first part is correct. The second part does not apply as TPU is not providing any method what-so-ever to avoid or circumvent NVidia's copyright protections.

So there we are... I feel certain more pedantic clucking is incoming...


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> TPU is not providing any method what-so-ever to avoid or circumvent NVidia's copyright protections.


At any point have I ever talked about copyright protections? What do they have to do with anything?



lexluthermiester said:


> The use of the files in question by end users is, at all times, still governed by the EULA agreed to by the NVidia drivers(the effective governing document) in addition to the EULA for the games.


Your view on the use of the word ”use” in this context is deeply flawed. There are no checks in place to ensure the use you describe.



lexluthermiester said:


> the files provided by TPU *CAN NOT BE USED OUTSIDE OF THE NVIDIA GOVERNING EULA!* It's not possible. How do you fail to understand this?


They most definitely can be. I just did.



lexluthermiester said:


> Another deeply flaw statement. If you really think this, your understanding of both copyright law and contract law needs COMPLETE revision.


Please be more specific.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Instead of you and Aquinus being armchair SJW's, why don't you hire a lawyer and take TPU to court, and get this sorted once and for all.  All you two are doing, is trolling and arguing in constant circles.  After all, you two are big-league devs, whos code we are all no doubt using every day, so you have the means.
> 
> Just as you keep demanding of others, it's time PROVE your case, or shut it, and wait to see if TPU gets a DCMA claim from nVidia, if they do, you can then be the first to start a new thread, titled I TOLD YOU SO, and we will bow to you.


what the hell does SJW mean in this context? There is no social justice discussion in this topic at all.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> what the hell does SJW mean in this context? There is no social justice discussion in this topic at all.


I think we remember the whole "I have reported this to nVidia" thing...  Maybe I should use the term C(orperate)JW?


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> I think we remember the whole "I have reported this to nVidia" thing...  Maybe I should use the term C(orperate)JW?


How does that make me a SJW? I’m confused.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> How does that make me a SJW? I’m confused.


You two are outraged at a third parties decision to host a file not made by you, for the benefit of the public, and you want to take those nasty files away because nVidia's feelings might be hurt, and you want to make nVidia feel better by taking those nasty files away from the grateful public's dirty, ignorant little hands, who might accidentally disassemble the golden files and do nefarious things with them, so they must be stopped, for their own good of course...

Taking offence at something, and deciding others cannot have it, and putting a stop to it is exactly what todays SJWs do.  Calling us all software pirates each chance you get also goes along with this kind of thinking.

It is NOT DOWN TO YOU to decide what TPU or any other entity can do, or not do.  If you don't like it, feel free to write to the owner stating your displeasure and reasoning, then walk away, with your morals intact.  And if nVidia agree with you and don't like what TPU are doing, they will file a DMCA and get them removed, and TPU will, i'm sure, comply.  If they don't, then nVidia will decide their next course of action.


----------



## claes (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Last time I checked there were ads on the download page. Not that the amounts would be meaningful though.
> 
> 
> There is no check in place to confirm the GPU or installed games when downloading from TPU.
> ...


Hey; great post! My (non-professional/unsolicited) thoughts read similarly


lexluthermiester said:


> I'm referring to the instance were YOU called me one, which was then swiftly removed by a mod. What, didn't think I saw that, eh?


Honestly, I rely on it! I know you can’t get enough of my posts , and you’re pretty candid about blocking people and then visiting logged out to see what else has been said lol. Keep blocking me and pretending like your posts don’t get deleted every few days/don’t result in entire threads being shut down — it’s a winning strategy! Nice work using reason and reverting to case law rather than name calling as usual btw  looking forward to your citizens arrest against Aquinas for defamation; maybe if you call them an SJW “chicken” (god do you really think this endearing lol) long enough some real law men can come in and assert authority for you


----------



## qubit (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Just enjoy online piracy, it’s free!


No it isn't, don't be ridiculous.

I'm also not going to get sucked into an endless argument with you. I explained my thoughts on this early on in this thread to Aquinus, so have a look at that if you want to know. Sorry, I don't have the post number to hand.



stimpy88 said:


> You two are outraged at a third parties decision to host a file not made by you, for the benefit of the public, and you want to take those nasty files away because nVidia's feelings might be hurt, and you want to make nVidia feel better by taking those nasty files away from the grateful public's dirty, ignorant little hands, who might accidentally disassemble the golden files and do nefarious things with them, so they must be stopped, for their own good of course...
> 
> Taking offence at something, and deciding others cannot have it, and putting a stop to it is exactly what todays SJWs do.  Calling us all software pirates each chance you get also goes along with this kind of thinking.
> 
> It is NOT DOWN TO YOU to decide what TPU or any other entity can do, or not do.  If you don't like it, feel free to write to the owner stating your displeasure and reasoning, then walk away, with your morals intact.  And if nVidia agree with you and don't like what TPU are doing, they will file a DMCA and get them removed, and TPU will, i'm sure, comply.  If they don't, then nVidia will decide their next course of action.


So well said.


----------



## pantherx12 (Jul 9, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> As a software engineer who puts licenses on his software, knowing that people are going to abide by those agreements is kind of important to me.



This is the issue though, licenses and EULAs can say what ever they want.

It's like Apples licensing agreement that says about not using their software to make nuclear weapons. If making nuclear weapons( and weapons in general) was legal there would not actually be any legal restriction of me using their software to make weapons.

That caveat is in there so that if someone does use iTunes to make a nuclear weapon Apple can't be taken to court for making the initial software. It's to protect themselves , it's not actually preventative or protective in terms of software modification.


Basically any agreement as Lex stated earlier is subjected to the restrictions outlined in laws or statutes.

I can agree, and have agreed to all kinds of license agreements, or contracts, but if stipulations are not backed by actual law they mean nothing. One of my former employers tried to do the old " but you signed your contract that said x" and I just laughed and quoted the equality act 2010 which in this case made the agreement null and void.

Basically law supercedes any contract you agree to.

Also when agreeing to something digitally there's nothing to say that at the time of hitting the agree button you had capacity to enter a legal agreement , for example under the influence of drugs or alcohol, having a mental break down, suffering from acute mental health, having a child click agree instead of an adult etc etc etc.

Those licenses to an individual end user are basically worthless.

@qubit, literally no idea what happened to mailman, he was already gone when I returned.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> You two are outraged at a third parties decision to host a file not made by you, for the benefit of the public, and you want to take those nasty files away because nVidia's feelings might be hurt, and you want to make nVidia feel better by taking those nasty files away from the grateful public's dirty, ignorant little hands, who might accidentally disassemble the golden files and do nefarious things with them, so they must be stopped, for their own good of course...
> 
> Taking offence at something, and deciding others cannot have it, and putting a stop to it is exactly what todays SJWs do.  Calling us all software pirates each chance you get also goes along with this kind of thinking.
> 
> It is NOT DOWN TO YOU to decide what TPU or any other entity can do, or not do.  If you don't like it, feel free to write to the owner stating your displeasure and reasoning, then walk away, with your morals intact.  And if nVidia agree with you and don't like what TPU are doing, they will file a DMCA and get them removed, and TPU will, i'm sure, comply.


The only thing I'm taking offense with is how people like you think that software licenses can be ignored and that people or businesses that produce IP have zero control over their works, regardless of the justification for it, because that's basically what you're advocating.

Also, you people need to play nice. I went to bed just to wake up to another 3 pages of shit-slinging.


pantherx12 said:


> This is the issue though, licenses and EULAs can say what ever they want.
> 
> It's like Apples licensing agreement that says about not using their software to make nuclear weapons. If making nuclear weapons( and weapons in general) as legal there would not actually be any legal restriction of me using their software to make weapons.
> 
> ...


I think you missed the part where I said I do this on a matter of principal regardless of if it's enforceable or not. If I don't like a license, I don't agree to it and I don't use the software. I don't agree then use legal arguments to continue violating that agreement, legal or not. My point is that when I agree to a license, I'm doing it in good faith where I intend to respect the license. I don't agree to it so I can violate the parts I don't agree with that I think I can win in a legal battle with. To me, that's a scummy thing to do.


----------



## qubit (Jul 9, 2021)

@pantherx12 All good points. Unfortunately, they often get away with "enforcing" such null and void agreements, because most signees don't know any better and don't know how to stand up to the bullying company. It's quite underhand, really. Even myself, unless it says something outrageous, like "you agree to give us your bank account and PIN details", I likely wouldn't know what's enforceable and what isn't.


----------



## pantherx12 (Jul 9, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> The only thing I'm taking offense with is how people like you think that software licenses can be ignored and that people or businesses that produce IP have zero control over their works, regardless of the justification for it, because that's basically what you're advocating.
> 
> Also, you people need to play nice. I went to bed just to wake up to another 3 pages of shit-slinging.
> 
> I think you missed the part where I said I do this on a matter of principal regardless of if it's enforceable or not. If I don't like a license, I don't agree to it and I don't use the software. I don't agree then use legal arguments to continue violating that agreement, legal or not. My point is that when I agree to a license, I'm doing it in good faith where I intend to respect the license. I don't agree to it so I can violate the parts I don't agree with that I think I can win in a legal battle with. To me, that's a scummy thing to do.




You see for me, and obviously others here we differ in our principles and moral interpretation of an agreement.

For me personally unless it's legally enforceable it's not a true agreement in the first place. I also feel it's dishonest, especially when large companies do it to include agreements that are not legally enforceable. Just seems like posturing and using ones size ( in this case of the company) as a fear tactic. To me it's akin to bully tactics so I won't stand for it.


So morally, for me personally it's my duty to ignore these instances and point it out to others.

I accept that others don't feel the same way.


@qubit, your post it's precisely what I'm talking about above, I feel like lots of licenses and contracts are designed to take advantage of people's ignorance which seems morally bankrupt to me. Employment contracts are especially irksome as all of us pretty much have to work to partake in society/ not starve to death so non legally enforceable things in those contracts really irks me.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> You two are outraged at a third parties decision to host a file not made by you, for the benefit of the public, and you want to take those nasty files away because nVidia's feelings might be hurt, and you want to make nVidia feel better by taking those nasty files away from the grateful public's dirty, ignorant little hands, who might accidentally disassemble the golden files and do nefarious things with them, so they must be stopped, for their own good of course...
> 
> Taking offence at something, and deciding others cannot have it, and putting a stop to it is exactly what todays SJWs do.  Calling us all software pirates each chance you get also goes along with this kind of thinking.
> 
> It is NOT DOWN TO YOU to decide what TPU or any other entity can do, or not do.  If you don't like it, feel free to write to the owner stating your displeasure and reasoning, then walk away, with your morals intact.  And if nVidia agree with you and don't like what TPU are doing, they will file a DMCA and get them removed, and TPU will, i'm sure, comply.  If they don't, then nVidia will decide their next course of action.


You seem to be the only one raging though.

I’m only discussing the licences and how they apply, not placing any moral views on the matter. You seem to think that I’m somehow against file sharing or something, which I have never stated. I also have not taken offence in anything that TPU has done. Online piracy is a term, look it up, I’m not using it in a deflamatory meaning. Also, as stated earlier, users downloading these things from TPU to my understanding fall under fair use and do not constitute as piracy, and I have never called any individual here out for piracy.

I suggest that you too try to look at the matter from a technical point of view and not force your views of TPU or other users onto your posts. You can also just ignore the topic if its contents do not interest you, or causes fits of rage.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> You seem to be the only one raging though.


Are you sure? You have actually been READING the comments offered in this thread, correct?



pantherx12 said:


> For me personally unless it's legally enforceable it's not a true agreement in the first place. I also feel it's dishonest, especially when large companies do it to include agreements that are not legally enforceable. Just seems like posturing and using ones size ( in this case of the company) as a fear tactic. To me it's akin to bully tactics so I won't stand for it.


This, yes!


----------



## claes (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> You seem to be the only one raging though.
> 
> I’m only discussing the licences and how they apply, not placing any moral views on the matter. You seem to think that I’m somehow against file sharing or something, which I have never stated. I also have not taken offence in anything that TPU has done. Online piracy is a term, look it up, I’m not using it in a deflamatory meaning. Also, as stated earlier, users downloading these things from TPU to my understanding fall under fair use and do not constitute as piracy, and I have never called any individual here out for piracy.
> 
> I suggest that you too try to look at the matter from a technical point of view and not force your views of TPU or other users onto your posts. You can also just ignore the topic if its contents do not interest you, or causes fits of rage.


Honestly this whole thread is wonky; seems like any major issues are between nvidia and game studios and, if there are damages at all, is likely a reason for nvidia to start packaging dlls in an executable or encrypt them or something that my non-programmer self can’t speak to


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> "You seem to be the only one raging though..."
> 
> "I suggest that you too try to look at the matter from a technical point of view and not force your views of TPU or other users onto your posts.* You can also just ignore the topic if its contents do not interest you*, or causes fits of rage..."


No rage here...  But nice deflection though!

But I will refuse your invitation of censorship, which is how people like you spread your poison.  I will view and comment on anything I like thank you, but if you want to come here and take my rights as a citizen from me, I promise you will meet a very "difficult" situation.  I don't sit behind DMCA's...

Now, PROVE your original point, that what TPU is doing is illegal, instead of trolling, name calling (yes you are) and deflecting from other points of views or questions which don't suit your narrative.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> I refuse your invitation of censorship. I will view and comment on anything I like.


As you should!


----------



## claes (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Are you sure? You have actually been READING the comments offered in this thread, correct?


Show me the precedent daddy!!!


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Now, PROVE your original point, that what TPU is doing is illegal


I have never stated that TPU is doing something illegal. I’ve only said that they are violating either the DLSS SDK EULA or a bunch of individual game EULAs. Determining whether that is illegal or not requires both legal action from Nvidia, as well as an actual juring by a court. I cannot be of help in that endeavour, regardless of your pleas.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> No rage here...  But nice deflection though!
> 
> But I will refuse your invitation of censorship, which is how people like you spread your poison.  I will view and comment on anything I like thank you, *but if you want to come here and take my rights as a citizen from me, I promise you will meet a very "difficult" situation.  I don't sit behind DMCA's...*
> 
> Now, PROVE your original point, that what TPU is doing is illegal, instead of trolling, name calling (yes you are) and deflecting from other points of views or questions which don't suit your narrative.


You threaten another user here, and you're copping a ban. Are we clear on this?

People are fine to discuss this topic, but you're going to be civil about it.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

qubit said:


> I can't believe that this thread is still going round in circles after almost 400 posts over a non-issue!
> 
> Just enjoy the support that @W1zzard has given us with these DLLs and be done with it.


It's because the total brain processing power of this thread can't make more complex geometric shapes.



stimpy88 said:


> You two are outraged at a third parties decision to host a file not made by you,


Your ignorance is showing.  There is no outrage.  No one is trying to get TPU shutdown. People want clarification on the contracts they signed.

TPU IS NOT GOING TO BE SUED SCHFIFTY FIVE ZILLION MILLION DOLLARS

Everyone is getting butthurt because someone was following up on a legal contract THEY signed.  Get over it.  There are no victims here.



pantherx12 said:


> For me personally unless it's legally enforceable it's not a true agreement in the first place.


How do you know it's not legally enforceable until you get to court?  Are you willing to challenge that many things on the daily?  Remember, in jury trials, you have to count on them finding 12 intelligent people.  Judging this thread, the stats aren't in your favor.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 9, 2021)

One of the big deals with digital piracy, is that you had to have broken a security measure.
Around here in Au, you cant charge someone for theft if you left your car doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, and this is the digital version of that.

If you want me to believe these dll files can be modified hacked or altered in any way other than being put where they belong - in an Nvidia game with DLSS support that requires you to agree to their EULA, with an Nvidia GPU that you purchased and used Nvidia drivers with.

Someone. Anyone. I cant even find anything about anyone ever having achieved this. You can use a fake dll file with a legit looking name and try to trick a program or operating system into running it. You can make malicious code that uses dll files... but you cant reverse engineer someone elses dll file and modify it. The program loading it is just gunna damn well crash if it's not a legit, supported file as we've seen when people tried DLSS 2.x files on DLSS 1.x games.

So... what copy protection is being broken, and how is it being used for an unintended purpose?


----------



## qubit (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> Around here in Au, you cant charge someone for theft if you left your car doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, and this is the digital version of that.


I'm surprised at that. Theft is normally defined as taking something without authorisation and with the intention of not returning it. The lack of security shouldn't make a difference to this.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> but you cant reverse engineer someone elses dll file and modify it


You sir, need to read the internet more.  First search result in DuckDuckGo....not even google.  Took 5 seconds.

https://www.wikihow.com/Edit-DLL-Files

I got one with pictures for you since I know your reading isnt the best.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> "...I’ve only said that they are violating either the DLSS SDK EULA or a bunch of individual game EULAs. Determining whether that is illegal or not requires both legal action from Nvidia, as well as an actual juring by a court..."


And you have stated this...  And many others disagree, but you are completely right when you say "Determining whether that is illegal or not requires both legal action from Nvidia, as well as an actual juring by a court."  Then until this happens, lets all refrain from name calling, and insinuations of piracy, lack of morals etc.  It really is up to nVidia to decide if it's legal or not.

If I can come back here in a month or two, and the site, and the files are still up, then we know that what TPU is doing is not against the law, as nVidia literally have all the money they could ever need to use to crush this site, as after all, it has been reported to them, so they do know about it.  Another option open to nVidia would be locking specific versions of DLSS DLLs to specific games, this would be another way to recognise that nVidia does not like what TPU is doing.  Only time will tell.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> One of the big deals with digital piracy, is that you had to have broken a security measure.
> Around here in Au, you cant charge someone for theft if you left your car doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, and this is the digital version of that.


That may be the case in Au (i have no idea), but not for example in EU, nor in the States.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> If I can come back here in a month or two, and the site, and the files are still up, then we know that what TPU is doing is not against the law, as nVidia literally have all the money they could ever need to use to crush this site, as after all, it has been reported to them, so they do know about it. Another option open to nVidia would be locking specific versions of DLSS DLLs to specific games, this would be another way to recognise that nVidia does not like what TPU is doing. Only time will tell.


Glad you figured it out after 17 pages and foaming at the mouth.  It's a non issue.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Mussels said:


> You threaten another user here, and you're copping a ban. Are we clear on this?
> 
> People are fine to discuss this topic, but you're going to be civil about it.


I apologise for my comment, to you, to Dredi, and the rest of the forum users.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> If I can come back here in a month or two, and the site, and the files are still up, then we know that what TPU is doing is not against the law


No, in that case we still would not know. Determining whether something truly is illegal or not requires juring by a court. Nvidia may simply not care, which is not the same thing. And if they do care, I feel that TPU will simply fold and not go to court over a few DLLs.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Glad you figured it out after 17 pages and foaming at the mouth.  It's a non issue.


Grow up.


----------



## claes (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> I have never stated that TPU is doing something illegal. I’ve only said that they are violating either the DLSS SDK EULA or a bunch of individual game EULAs. Determining whether that is illegal or not requires both legal action from Nvidia, as well as an actual juring by a court. I cannot be of help in that endeavour, regardless of your pleas.



It’s so confusing having not read nvidia’e EULA outside of excerpts posted here because I don’t give a shit; it seems like the end user is either the studio/developer, who could be liable for exposing IP that might negatively impact performance of DLSS, or it’s the end-user who can fuck around for fair-use-sakes without any real consequence.

I think Aquinas is right in my non-professional/unsolicited opinion, though — just use the SDK’s EULA in an installer and TPU can distribute away (wow how annoying would maintaining that script/library of games and their DLSS capabilities be?)


Mussels said:


> You threaten another user here, and you're copping a ban. Are we clear on this?
> 
> People are fine to discuss this topic, but you're going to be civil about it.


With all respect, some users, like @lexluthermiester have been comfortably allowed to threaten violence and “citizen’s arrest” for years... why the sudden double-standard?*

*Not that I agree with that user, sounds trash to me, but principles should be principled


Mussels said:


> One of the big deals with digital piracy, is that you had to have broken a security measure.
> Around here in Au, you cant charge someone for theft if you left your car doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, and this is the digital version of that.


That’s not how it works in the US at all  I’d be surprised if this was the case AU


Mussels said:


> If you want me to believe these dll files can be modified hacked or altered in any way other than being put where they belong - in an Nvidia game with DLSS support that requires you to agree to their EULA, with an Nvidia GPU that you purchased and used Nvidia drivers with.
> 
> Someone. Anyone. I cant even find anything about anyone ever having achieved this. You can use a fake dll file with a legit looking name and try to trick a program or operating system into running it. You can make malicious code that uses dll files... but you cant reverse engineer someone elses dll file and modify it. The program loading it is just gunna damn well crash if it's not a legit, supported file as we've seen when people tried DLSS 2.x files on DLSS 1.x games.
> 
> So... what copy protection is being broken, and how is it being used for an unintended purpose?


The real issue, in my drunk at 8am/non-professional opinion is TPU as distributor. It’s one thing for an individual to copy-paste files between games that they legally purchased, it’s another to host those files derived from an SDK on a website with the intention of altering of other copyrighted material :shrug: 

(still, said user still likely owns the games and hardware in question so whatever god I have to get to work soon lol)


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> No, in that case we still would not know.


Inaction is action.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

qubit said:


> I'm surprised at that. Theft is normally defined as taking something without authorisation and with the intention of not returning it. The lack of security shouldn't make a difference to this.


You're in the UK. Laws are different there than down under. Even here stateside, the laws vary from area to area, even within the same state. For example, where I live, if you leave your car unlocked and someone takes anything which might be in it, that's your fault for not securing your vehicle. However, even if you leave the keys in that very same car, driving off with a car not registered or owned by you without permission is still grand-theft-auto and you will go to prison for it. So effectively, you can take keys to the car if one finds it unlocked, but you can't take the car itself.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Inaction is action.


But not a legal precident.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> But not a legal precident.


No, but if a company with the morals, size and money of nVidia take no action, then that speaks volumes.  But it this stage, it's too early to know anything.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Grow up.


Oh, I'll second THAT.



moproblems99 said:


> Does that mean the snowflake unblocked you? Are we celebrating today?


No, you both are still on my ignore list. It just means that someone let me know what was said I decided to respond.



moproblems99 said:


> How do you know it's not legally enforceable until you get to court?


It's called understanding the law, case law as it applies to certain situations and ones own personal rights. Some people have an advantage in this area as they have had experience with these things, either out of curiosity, necessity or because of professional requirements.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> No, but if a company with the morals, size and money of nVidia take no action, then that speaks volumes.  But it this stage, it's too early to know anything.


And if they take action, W1z will just fold and take the files down. Even that means nothing as far as legality goes.


----------



## DrCR (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> But not a legal precident.


Actually, it most definitely can be. I'm seeing a lot of absolute statements being made here that are simply not true.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> And if they take action, W1z will just fold and take the files down. Even that means nothing as far as legality goes.


And that happening would not set a president?  Think about what that would mean for the other files TPU offers, and other websites that do similar things.


----------



## qubit (Jul 9, 2021)

Oh


lexluthermiester said:


> You're in the UK. Laws are different there than down under. Even here stateside, the laws vary from area to area, even within the same state. For example, where I live, if you leave your car unlocked and someone takes anything which might be in it, that's your fault for not securing your vehicle. However, even if you leave the keys in that very same car, driving off with a car not registered or owned by you without permission is still grand-theft-auto and you will go to prison for it. So effectively, you can take keys to the car if one finds it unlocked, but you can't take the car itself.


Oh man, that's messed up.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 9, 2021)

qubit said:


> Oh
> 
> Oh man, that's messed up.


It's the same where I live.  If I leave my front door unlocked and go out, if everything gets taken, then that's on me.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 9, 2021)

qubit said:


> Oh
> 
> Oh man, that's messed up.


Yeah, land of the free.

W1z is in EU though, I wonder where TPU as a legal entity is registered.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> It's called understanding the law, case law as it applies to certain situations and ones own personal rights. Some people have an advantage in this area as they have had experience with these things, either out of curiosity, necessity or because of professional requirements.


Lex, you have as much understanding of case law as I do about differential equations.  Enough to know I'm doing it wrong.  The fact you said someone can steal something from you and you have no recourse.  Or that you can't mandate a mask in YOUR business.  You need to reevaluate your knowledge repository.

I just accept that I don't know everything and can be wrong.

I also wait your lesson in differential equations so I am less ignorant after you teach us all magic again.



stimpy88 said:


> And I apologized, I'll put money on that making me a better man than you. Get over it.


I am impressed and give you mad props.  It takes a lot to apologize.  I have to do it here often.

@lexluthermiester , if you can prove that you have no recourse if someone steals something from your car, you're stuck, I will Venmo you $100.

Although I probably just lost $100. He does live in New York and they don't much sense of law in that state.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 9, 2021)

Dredi said:


> W1z is in EU though, I wonder where TPU as a legal entity is registered.


The servers are located in the US. However that does not indicate the location of of TPU HQ. It could be possible that TPU is outsaide the US or EU.


----------



## 95Viper (Jul 9, 2021)

Stay on topic.
Stop the bickering/arguing/insults/ballyhoo.
Discuss the topic... NOT each other.

Thank You.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

@95Viper, I vote this thread is locked.  There is no good discussion that come of it anymore.  No one has the answer, and no one will get one.  I don't see any good of leaving it up anymore.  20 pages (without deletions) is enough.

I see all the sad faces.  My job is to break licenses for a living.  In order to do so, I have to sign contracts saying I will only break licenses in ways they deem fit in my rules of engagement.  Why is that important: Companies put licenses on things because they mean it.

They may choose not to pursue but that is detrimental to them as it starts to set a precedent that they don't care.  Is it legal?  Who knows? But if I was a company, and I put licenses on things, you can't let some people break it and others not.  Because, as a sane (sometimes) individual, if I am a juror, and I see 4 cases where the company ignored its license, I am not going to grant them the ability to punish the fifth person.  They lost that ability.

The other reason this should be close: it has been 18 pages of shitting on Aquinus  for doing his duty bound to the license he is part of.  He was also looking out for TPU by bringing it to their attention before Nvidia finds out in a way that makes them less happy.

If we have gone 18 pages and can't get over the fact that Aquinus was doing what he signed up for, and thinks he is trying to sink TPU, then what are we going to get out of another 18 pages?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 9, 2021)

pantherx12 said:


> It's like Apples licensing agreement that says about not using their software to make nuclear weapons. If making nuclear weapons( and weapons in general) was legal there would not actually be any legal restriction of me using their software to make weapons.


This is actually to prevent people from exporting apple encryption included in their products to known rogue nations, and yes, that is a legal requirement for them.



pantherx12 said:


> but if stipulations are not backed by actual law they mean nothing.


This is true, but no one in this thread has shown anything that can be legally challenged in NVIDIAs eula yet.

The burden of proof is on the claimant.



lexluthermiester said:


> The servers are located in the US. However that does not indicate the location of of TPU HQ. It could be possible that TPU is outsaide the US or EU.


TPU is HQ'd in the USA (formerly Germany).  I know, I worked there.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 9, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> This is actually to prevent people from exporting apple encryption included in their products to known rogue nations, and yes, that is a legal requirement for them.


Making your own weapons is legal too.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 9, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Making your own weapons is legal too.


And your point is?

You aren't legally required to make weapons.  Potato Onion.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 10, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> And your point is?
> 
> You aren't legally required to make weapons.  Potato Onion.


The quotee implied that making your own weapons was not legal, in general.  Which is not true.

The person you quoted.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 10, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> The quotee implied that making your own weapons was not legal, in general.  Which is not true.
> 
> The person you quoted.


Ah, sorry.  Misunderstood the quote chain.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 10, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Ah, sorry.  Misunderstood the quote chain.


Understandable.  It certainly wasn't obvious.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 11, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> TPU is HQ'd in the USA (formerly Germany). I know, I worked there.


Interesting. Fair enough.

So, the downloads are still there and reps from NVidia have seen what's going on(yes, they lurk these forum threads and couldn't have missed this with W1zzard himself highlighting it front and center), so can it safely be concluded that the situation is resolved? 

I really don't see NVidia doing anything, even if they could.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 11, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Interesting. Fair enough.
> 
> So, the downloads are still there and reps from NVidia have seen what's going on(yes, they lurk these forum threads and couldn't have missed this with W1zzard himself highlighting it front and center), so can it safely be concluded that the situation is resolved?
> 
> I really don't see NVidia doing anything, even if they could.


To be fair, I was told that they're reviewing it internally.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 11, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> To be fair, I was told that they're reviewing it internally.


If they actually said that to you, "Reviewing it" doesn't equal taking action. That's likely just corporate talk for "we're making sure none of our assets are unprotected" and then they leave it alone. If you heard that second hand, it's likely nothing-sauce..


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 11, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> If they actually said that to you, "Reviewing it" doesn't equal taking action. That's likely just corporate talk for "we're making sure none of our assets are unprotected" and then they leave it alone. If you heard that second hand, it's likely nothing-sauce..


That was the reply I received directly from the DLSS team.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 11, 2021)

This thread is brutal. I think it should have started as a PM personally.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 11, 2021)

freeagent said:


> This thread is brutal. I think it should have started as a PM personally.


I have a theory about that. This is such an emotive subject and W1zzard wants to see the honest responses of users that they(the mods) are being a bit more tolerant of the more "tenacious" comments as long as it's not blatant rule breaking..


----------



## InVasMani (Jul 12, 2021)

My theory is W1z is conserving his mana.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 12, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I have a theory about that. This is such an emotive subject and W1zzard wants to see the honest responses of users that they(the mods) are being a bit more tolerant of the more "tenacious" comments as long as it's not blatant rule breaking..


I don't know what you mean by "tenacious."

Most arguements have centered around legalese.

The only potential rule break I've seen is calling certain users "special" but it was so non specific I'm sure it's nothing.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 12, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I don't know what you mean by "tenacious."


Really? How very curious. Perhaps you missed a few things..



R-T-B said:


> Most *arguments* have centered around legalese.


True.



R-T-B said:


> The only potential rule break I've seen is calling certain users "special" but it was so non specific I'm sure it's nothing.


Then you have most definitely missed a few things.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 12, 2021)

Perhaps you could be so kind as to highlight the issues.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 12, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Perhaps you could be so kind as to highlight the issues.


No. I'm not willing to spend that much time picking through the thread just to prove something so silly as you missing things. If you want to know what you've missed, feel free to go review the thread yourself.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 12, 2021)

I've been here the whole time.  I think I'll just go play outside...


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 12, 2021)

LOL, this discussion is should make it into the TechPowerUp Hall of Shame.

It appears to be largely devoid of any discussion content of long-term pedagogical value.

I do realize that it has generated a bunch of pageviews and (*cough*) "reader engagement." The site operators have confirmed what their priorities are, that's pretty much the only takeaway from this discussion. That probably has some merit.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 12, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> LOL, this discussion is should make it into the TechPowerUp Hall of Shame.
> 
> There appears to be largely devoid of any discussion content of long-term pedagogical value.


It's most definitely generated opinions, some more flawed than others, like the above for example. Whether or not they have any educational, informational or teaching value is going to depend highly on the individual reader..


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 12, 2021)

qubit said:


> I'm surprised at that. Theft is normally defined as taking something without authorisation and with the intention of not returning it. The lack of security shouldn't make a difference to this.



In the UK its taking without owners consent {twoc} if it is left unlocked.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 12, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> It's most definitely generated opinions, some more flawed than others, like the above for example. Whether or not they have any educational, informational or teaching value is going to depend highly on the individual reader..


It's up to the site operators to decide whether or not any given forum thread contains meritorious discussion that advances their mission.

*NEVER *forget that. Their site, their rules.


----------



## qubit (Jul 12, 2021)

Gruffalo.Soldier said:


> In the UK its taking without owners consent {twoc} whether if it is left unlocked.


True. It's also the intention to not return it. That's pretty critical to the definition.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 12, 2021)

qubit said:


> True. It's also the intention to not return it. That's pretty critical to the definition.



It would always be at least twoc, even if it was your partners with no permission.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 12, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> It's up to the site operators to decide whether or not any given forum thread contains meritorious discussion that advances their mission.


Another flawed postulation. No, that is most definitely up to the reader. Site operators only facilitate the information. Whether or not it holds merit is up to the interpretation of the reader.



cvaldes said:


> *NEVER *forget that. Their site, their rules.


Wrong again. The site owner can not dictate what the reader thinks of what they read, only what is available to be read.

In the context of this thread, W1zzard wanted the discussion of these things fleshed out or he would have put an end to the topic of discussion rather than giving a home to it. Being a VERY experienced site owner and forum administrator, it seems likely that he knew that these discussions would take place.

*REMEMBER* that!


----------



## qubit (Jul 12, 2021)

Gruffalo.Soldier said:


> It would always be at least twoc, even if it was your partners with no permission.


Yes, your partner could steal, too. But look, it does take two parts for it to be properly defined as theft. Don't take my word for it though, this is how the Encyclopedia Britannica defines it:



> Theft is defined as the physical removal of an object that is capable of being stolen without the consent of the owner and with the intention of depriving the owner of it permanently.



There's more, but this is the core of it.

To muddy the waters a bit, there's this bit:



> In some instances an intention to deprive the owner of the property temporarily also is sufficient, as in the case of stealing a car for a “joyride” and then abandoning it in such a way that the owner is able to reclaim it.











						theft | law
					

theft,  in law, a general term covering a variety of specific types of stealing, including the crimes of larceny, robbery, and burglary. Theft is defined as the physical removal of an object that is capable of being stolen without the consent of the owner and with the intention of depriving the...



					www.britannica.com


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 12, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> In the context of this thread, W1zzard wanted the discussion of these things fleshed out or he would have put an end to the topic of discussion rather than giving a home to it. Being a VERY experienced site owner and forum administrator, it seems likely that he knew that these discussions would take place.


W1zzard probably realized that it would generate a huge number of pageviews as well. The advertisers would be pleased by that.

For sure, another takeaway is "de gustibus non est disputandum."


And the dlls are still being hosted here... In fact, they continue to upload older versions. Over this past weekend, it looks like versions 2.1.35 and 1.1.6 showed up. That means it is being actively maintained which makes the DLSS dll archive even more useful.

Good for TPU!


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 12, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Whether or not it holds merit is up to the interpretation of the reader.


You misunderstood.  He said it is up to the SITE OWNERS to decide if the threads are meritous for advancing the SITE'S MISSION.

Oh who am I kidding.  I will just be proven wrong.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 12, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> W1zzard probably realized that it would generate a huge number of pageviews as well. The advertisers would be pleased by that.


There's no advertising on the forums, so pageviews don't matter here


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 12, 2021)

Pageviews on a site-wide basis does matter to advertisers. There are 463 comments in this discussion thread. Even if there are no ad impressions HERE it does show to advertisers that there is significant traffic, reader engagement, and time spent on the site. Those are all metrics that were recognized as desirable way back in the Nineties -- long before people were paid to perform SEO duties.

There are many websites that have extremely low forum participation. Generally speaking, that is not considered desirable.

There's a balance between signal and noise; certainly different discussions will have different balances. Also, no one can please everyone all the time.

Trust me, I have found much of this thread discussion quite entertaining although perhaps for unintentional reasons.

Also it doesn't make me want to buy anything which is refreshing in itself and increasingly rare these days.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> Blah







I'm not seeing the necessary scripts for them to track your time on the site.  Sure they could save all the google and facebook js and serve it themselves.  I am pretty sure they don't do that.  No one is that dumb.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Jul 13, 2021)

God this is still going on? Ive been on vacation for a week and i come back to see this? Get the fuck over it already and move on!

Edit: Like why is this a hard concept to understand? Last i checked, fly avatar boy reported them to nvidia. If nvidia had a problem with it, they would threaten tpu with no more review samples if they didnt remove the dlss dlls. Has that happened? No? Then MOVE ON! Like it legit stops there. All this bitching and moaning and what if's and he said she said bull shit is just that.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> God this is still going on? Ive been on vacation for a week and i come back to see this? Get the fuck over it already and move on!


Sorry, you missed that part too.  Just here for cheap thrills now.  Better than the 25cent porn store.


----------



## qubit (Jul 13, 2021)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> God this is still going on? Ive been on vacation for a week and i come back to see this? Get the fuck over it already and move on!
> 
> Edit: Like why is this a hard concept to understand? Last i checked, fly avatar boy reported them to nvidia. If nvidia had a problem with it, they would threaten tpu with no more review samples if they didnt remove the dlss dlls. Has that happened? No? Then MOVE ON! Like it legit stops there. All this bitching and moaning and what if's and he said she said bull shit is just that.


I know, it's become totally ridiculous. This entertainment goes very well with delicious butterkist popcorn. Recommended.

People should just say thinks to W1zzard for helping out with these useful DLLs and quit whining over nothing.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 13, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> View attachment 207759
> 
> I'm not seeing the necessary scripts for them to track your time on the site.  Sure they could save all the google and facebook js and serve it themselves.  I am pretty sure they don't do that.  No one is that dumb.


I expect savvy advertisers to use a variety of methods to assess website traffic so of which are likely below the radar of dilettantes.

Remember that website traffic is a vector for malware distribution. This is why I use ad blocking: for security reasons, not anti-ad reasons. I started with the Internet Junkbuster proxy tool back in the late 90s. Security was less of any issue back then but the scales tipped about 15 years ago.

Surfing the Internet without an ad blocker is like driving your car without a seatbelt in 2021.


----------



## RealKGB (Jul 13, 2021)

I really don't know why I find this thread so funny. There's not much actual discussion going on, but it's amusing to watch people go back and forth about what amounts to absolutely nothing. If NVidia cares, they'll issue a DMCA takedown notice or something.


qubit said:


> I know, it's become totally ridiculous. This entertainment goes very well with delicious butterkist popcorn. Recommended.


I prefer M&Ms, Skittles, and Reeses Pieces mixed together for snacking while reading arguments such as this. The Skittles prevent stuff from disappearing instantly, and the M&Ms and Reeses Pieces add the chocolate and peanut butter.

Though I have learned a bit more about TPU's member history (feuds, events, other stuff).


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 13, 2021)

Again, the DMCA takedown was covered in the first 2 pages of this discussion.

We have also discussed the fact that for years TPU has hosted many other executables and redistributables.

But the thread discussion is funny. My guess is that it is funny for reasons that some of the participants would consider unintentional.

But many of them are not smart enough to recognize this so they continue posting. This is why the entertainment continues.

For sure, some people have a weird idea of desirable junk food. Even that is entertaining. Again, I'm sure this was unintentional from those who posted.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> I expect savvy advertisers to use a variety of methods to assess website traffic so of which are likely below the radar of dilettantes.
> 
> Remember that website traffic is a vector for malware distribution. This is why I use ad blocking: for security reasons, not anti-ad reasons. I started with the Internet Junkbuster proxy tool back in the late 90s. Security was less of any issue back then but the scales tipped about 15 years ago.
> 
> Surfing the Internet without an ad blocker is like driving your car without a seatbelt in 2021.


I have a Billy Madison quote on my mind right now.  What does looking at porn in the 90s matter?


----------



## claes (Jul 13, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> I expect savvy advertisers to use a variety of methods to assess website traffic so of which are likely below the radar of dilettantes.
> 
> Remember that website traffic is a vector for malware distribution. This is why I use ad blocking: for security reasons, not anti-ad reasons. I started with the Internet Junkbuster proxy tool back in the late 90s. Security was less of any issue back then but the scales tipped about 15 years ago.
> 
> Surfing the Internet without an ad blocker is like driving your car without a seatbelt in 2021.


Wth are you talking about?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

Well now that it's devolved into a bunch of people seemingly talking to themselves about how dumb it was, I guess I do see the issue.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 13, 2021)

Isn't that what the Internet really is fundamentally? A bunch of people talking to themselves? You post something on social media, Q&A forum, etc. and think to yourself "I created something great." Then you wait for the "likes".

Media professionals are guilty as any about this. They actually have a term: "navel gazing."

I'm okay with posting mostly nonsensical crap on forums like this. The signal-to-noise ratio has dropped precipitously since the Nineties, it's unrealistic to expect the majority of today's Internet denizens to actually have functional cerebral cortexes.

Hell, even if you think the Internet is the bomb, you'd be better off spending your time and money investing in the FBs, AMZNs, NFLXs, and GOOGs of this planet rather than trying to build your own little fiefdom.

But yeah, this thread has provided a certain entertainment value. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, it sure beats watching millionaire professional footballers faking injuries. I saw enough of that during the Euro 2020 tournament.


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 13, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> ...But the thread discussion is funny. My guess is that it is funny for reasons that some of the participants would consider unintentional.
> 
> But many of them are not smart enough to recognize this so they continue posting. This is why the entertainment continues...


Yes, but it's also "funny" to me, that it is mostly you who are keeping it going...  Strange that you should think it's everyone else...


----------



## 64K (Jul 13, 2021)

Seems like threads like this one start out with good intentions. Participants get an opportunity to voice their opinion. A few keep the thread going trying to convince the opposition that they are wrong. When that fails it's just page after page of repeating the same arguments over and over.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 13, 2021)

64K said:


> Seems like threads like this one start out with good intentions. Participants get an opportunity to voice their opinion. A few keep the thread going trying to convince the opposition that they are wrong. When that fails it's just page after page of repeating the same arguments over and over.



and there are people posting stuff like you and me now that is not really part of the discussion but more about the discussion itself which does not add anything either, just filler from people shouting from the sidelines


----------



## ThrashZone (Jul 13, 2021)

Hi,
Any other thread would be locked a long time ago.
Just beating a dead horse.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 13, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> I expect savvy advertisers to use a variety of methods to assess website traffic so of which are likely below the radar of dilettantes.
> 
> Remember that website traffic is a vector for malware distribution. This is why I use ad blocking: for security reasons, not anti-ad reasons. I started with the Internet Junkbuster proxy tool back in the late 90s. Security was less of any issue back then but the scales tipped about 15 years ago.
> 
> Surfing the Internet without an ad blocker is like driving your car without a seatbelt in 2021.


also @moproblems99 

We only do direct ad sales these days, no Google Adsense or other shit that tracks you and freeze/slow down the page.
This means we're the only people who have your tracking info, and I'm not giving it away to advertisers. 
We also require banners to be JPG/PNG/GIF only, so no security risks. If GIF, only lightly animated.
Advertisers do get reports of course, but these are (intentionally) not fine-grained enough to track individuals. 
Our ad server (which I wrote) only logs anonymized IPs (x.y.z.a becomes x.y.z.0)


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

@W1zzard , personally, I don't really have an issue with ads, revenue needs to be made.  I only have an issue with Google and Facebook because they are abusive, intrusive, assclowns.

GASP!  I also don't use an ad blocker.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

cvaldes said:


> Isn't that what the Internet really is fundamentally? A bunch of people talking to themselves?


No, sometimes people actually talk to other people.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> No, sometimes people actually talk to other people.


I generally don't advertise I argue with myself.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> I generally don't advertise I argue with myself.


I wasn't.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I wasn't.


Why you defensive?  Lose the argument?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Why you defensive?  Lose the argument?


No u.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

Secretly, I lose arguments to myself all the time.  Unsecretly, the other guy is an asshole.  Shhhhhhh.....don't tell him.

It's hard to have a fake argumentwwith yourself.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

So you are telling me you all exist in my head?

Ah hell no.  I'm stupid.

(burned myself and you guys in one joke, enjoy)


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 13, 2021)

So, in legal context, this thread presented an interesting situation. I got in touch with a few old colleagues and they reviewed the goings-on here. They also took a chance to look at the subject matter(downloads). There has been some interesting discussion. Here are the conclusions(a few of which I do not agree with but yield to their judgment):

1. TPU is neither breaking the law nor violating, on any level, NVidia's rights. As such...

2. NVidia has no claim for wrong-going or damages against TPU.

3. The user(or users) who made the "report" to NVidia under the guise of contractual obligations desperately need to consult with an attorney as their understanding of the portion of the contract they've referenced is disturbingly flawed. Assuming their motivations were of good intentions and were not malicious, they did themselves nor NVidia ANY favors.(This underlined potion is what I disagree with as these actions outside of a legal procedural context can only be interpreted as malicious intent, but that's just my opinion.)

4. Referencing point "3", if TPU could prove damages as a result of the actions taken, the users who made the reports could and would be libel for the damages done. TPU would have full rights to take legal action to seek compensation for those damages.

5. Whatever reports that were made were not done with the assistance of legal counsel and through proper legal procedure, as would be required by law for contractual clause obligation actions.

6. Referencing point "5", when action of a nature such as that with has been discussed in this thread has been taken one DOES NOT discuss it in an open and public forum!

To those users who took it upon themselves to take "action" and make "reports" to NVidia about TPU, you desperately need to get in touch with an attorney and listen to them when they tell you to STFU. Your stated actions in this situation are legally libelous because you did not do them in the context of proper legal procedure. This is CLEARLY evident by the fact that you have both publically stated that you made the reports AND that you were doing so under the guise of contractual obligations. No licensed and practicing attorney would do any less than to instruct you to refrain from discussing the matter with anyone not directly involved in the situation and not under oath.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

AHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAH fake news.

No sources other than Anonymous Colleagues.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 13, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I got in touch with a few old colleagues and they reviewed the goings-on here.


Sure you did. I’m sure they are very much legal experts such as you.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 13, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Sure you did. I’m sure they are very much legal experts such as you.


Aww, struck a nerve did I?


----------



## freeagent (Jul 13, 2021)

So much bitterness.. why? You did this to yourself lol..


----------



## Dredi (Jul 13, 2021)

freeagent said:


> So much bitterness.. why? You did this to yourself lol..


That’s a good question. I have no idea what is going on in lex’s head.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

freeagent said:


> So much bitterness.. why? You did this to yourself lol..


Not sure who you respond to but when a specific user says everyone else is always wrong and never provides any sort of sources to back up their claims....they get branded fake news.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 13, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Not sure who you respond to but when a specific user says everyone else is always wrong and never provides any sort of sources to back up their claims....they get branded fake news.


Sorry, it was the lukewarm of the moment..

I'm not a lawyer. I wont tell you how far I made it in school either because you would believe me lol.. Not really sure why I speak sometimes if I am honest. Been home for 8 months and don't talk to anyone except my family.. probably has something to do with it.


----------



## qubit (Jul 13, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> So, in legal context, this thread presented an interesting situation. I got in touch with a few old colleagues and they reviewed the goings-on here. They also took a chance to look at the subject matter(downloads). There has been some interesting discussion. Here are the conclusions(a few of which I do not agree with but yield to their judgment):
> 
> 1. TPU is neither breaking the law nor violating, on any level, NVidia's rights. As such...
> 
> ...


Epic, love it, especially the bold bit.

The whole lot (this whole thread) can be summarised as be grateful for what W1zzard has done for the community by hosting the files and enjoy them without causing trouble over nothing. STFU indeed.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 13, 2021)

Dredi said:


> That’s a good question. I have no idea what is going on in lex’s head.





moproblems99 said:


> Not sure who you respond to but when a specific user says everyone else is always wrong and never provides any sort of sources to back up their claims....they get branded fake news.


Yup, struck a nerve.

Hey children, go talk to a qualified attorney...


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

I don't need to, a very powerful, experienced attorney just laid down the law of the universe.



freeagent said:


> Sorry, it was the lukewarm of the moment..
> 
> I'm not a lawyer. I wont tell you how far I made it in school either because you would believe me lol.. Not really sure why I speak sometimes if I am honest. Been home for 8 months and don't talk to anyone except my family.. probably has something to do with it.


You would be floored if you knew what I did for a living.  I have a feeling, most people would be floored at what others do


----------



## xrobwx71 (Jul 13, 2021)

So, can I extract a DLL from the SDK and sell it to AMD? /s


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 13, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> You would be floored if you knew what I did for a living. I have a feeling, most people would be floored at what others do


Nope. Bring it on. You threw it out there, let's hear it..


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

I thought someone replied to me that I am on their ignore list.  Jobs don't sound like the topic of this thread.  I'd hate for that person to step on their morals and be off topic.


----------



## Dredi (Jul 13, 2021)

xrobwx71 said:


> So, can I extract a DLL from the SDK and sell it to AMD? /s


That seems to be the conclusion, as lex stated. XD

It seems that hosting games is legal as well, makes me slightly confused about the whole piratebay debacle. Just make sure not to host an entire game and everything is still somehow within nvidia eula and thus does not break copyright or some incomprehensible bullshit. I may need lex to describe the whole thing a couple of more times still before anyone gets it.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Referencing point "3", if TPU could prove damages as a result of the actions taken, the users who made the reports could and would be libel for the damages done. TPU would have full rights to take legal action to seek compensation for those damages.



Oh my god, no.  I'm not even a lawyer and I can safely say that guy needs to go back to law school.



lexluthermiester said:


> one DOES NOT discuss it in an open and public forum!


But it was solicited.  By virtue of TPU being a news org...  with a literal discussion thread under the article.

I didn't think Rudy was still practicing law but god damn.


----------



## DicehunterTPU (Jul 13, 2021)

Holy crap this is 20+ pages of Beckies and Karens, Get a grip people.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

DicehunterTPU said:


> Holy crap this is 20+ pages of Beckies and Karens, Get a grip people.


It's more like 10 pages of discussion, 10 pages of people complaining about said discussion using insults.


----------



## maxfly (Jul 13, 2021)

The official "im tellin on tpu thread"


----------



## mouacyk (Jul 13, 2021)

so, what's the verdict


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 13, 2021)

Dredi said:


> That seems to be the conclusion, as lex stated. XD
> 
> It seems that hosting games is legal as well, makes me slightly confused about the whole piratebay debacle. Just make sure not to host an entire game and everything is still somehow within nvidia eula and thus does not break copyright or some incomprehensible bullshit. I may need lex to describe the whole thing a couple of more times still before anyone gets it.


Awww, you wound me sir. Really you do...



R-T-B said:


> Oh my god, no. I'm not even a lawyer and I can safely say that guy needs to go back to law school.


Really? Maybe that's something you need to do. I learned in my second week that if you try to do harm to someone, you are responsible for the harm you do.


R-T-B said:


> But it was solicited. By virtue of TPU being a news org... with a literal discussion thread under the article.


Wow.. just wow.. example of context being missed.. again.


R-T-B said:


> It's more like 10 pages of discussion, 10 pages of people complaining about said discussion using insults.


I have a different take, but If I posted it, the mods would get upset as such would blatantly cross the lines.

However, I will admit to some flame-baiting(which is laughably easy given the pool of users) and bit of ridicule, unapologetically. 

I personally have zero tolerance for people who SJW on others without merit or cause. In this particular situation, people acting on what they "think"(if you can call it that) is a just cause when they're actually just being troublemakers. Yes, such responsible behavior..


----------



## claes (Jul 13, 2021)

^^^some people take the internet way too seriously


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 13, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I didn't think Rudy was still practicing law but god damn.



That is the most bossest thing I have read this year.  +100 to you.



lexluthermiester said:


> I personally have zero tolerance for people who SJW on others without merit or cause.


Isn't SJW = social justice warrior?  Where does the social part mix with intellectual property justice?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 13, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Maybe that's something you need to do.


I work in court enough to know not to torture myself like that.


----------



## claes (Jul 13, 2021)

wait now lex is claiming he went to law school, too? Where does he find the time to be so alpha? : popcorn :


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 13, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I work in court enough to know not to torture myself like that.


While that's not the reason I left that profession, it was the most stressful line of work I'd done.


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 13, 2021)

NVidia obviously doesn't have a problem with TPU doing what they're doing with the files. End of story. Anything else is just arguing for the sake of arguing and serves no real purpose.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 13, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> However, I will admit to some flame-baiting(which is laughably easy given the pool of users) and bit of ridicule, unapologetically.


This is part of the reason why it's hard for me to take you seriously to be completely honest. I understand what you're saying, even if I disagree with quite a bit of it, but I don't think that flame baiting people is a good way to make a point. Also libel/defamation requires proving several things and is probably a pretty tough sell. The lack of "actual malice" makes that exceptionally difficult and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that. Also given that software licenses directly impact my livelihood and nVidia has a vested interest in hearing these reports, one could argue that this speech is covered under qualified privilege. Just my 2¢ which is probably worth very little.

Either way, I think the real result of all of this will be nothing. I doubt anyone will be doing any suing over this.


R-T-B said:


> I didn't think Rudy was still practicing law but god damn.


This made my day. I guess the bar really can be that low.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 14, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> but I don't think that flame baiting people is a good way to make a point


Maybe that was the wrong term. But whatever.


Aquinus said:


> defamation


Did I say defamation? I don't remember typing that.. Once again, context.


Aquinus said:


> The lack of "actual malice" makes that exceptionally difficult and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that.


1. Civil court burden of proof is not the same as criminal. A Plaintiff does NOT have to prove "beyond the shadow of a doubt", only by a preponderance of evidence.
2. Courts have and likely will again interpret actions like the ones you've taken as "maliceful intent".
3. As you have provided detailed situational context of your actions here, you leave little to the imagination. Such would be held against you.
4. As you have more or less made a full confession and more evidence would be easy to obtain through subpoena, you would have little to no defense.


Aquinus said:


> Also given that software licenses directly impact my livelihood and nVidia has a vested interest in hearing these reports, one could argue that this speech is covered under qualified privilege.


One might argue that, but there are other schools of thought. You clearly didn't follow legal procedure or you would have stated such. That means a great deal in a court of law, unlike the court of opinion in this thread where seemingly any drivel goes..


Aquinus said:


> Either way, I think the real result of all of this will be nothing.


And such was easily predictable, so why bother? What was the motivation?


Aquinus said:


> I doubt anyone will be doing any suing over this.


Perhaps, but that does not mean the @W1zzard does not have the cause or right. Try to remember that before doing something outside obvious legal procedure requirements. Perhaps consulting with a qualified attorney would help.. Just throwing it out there. What you, and any others did, does NOT fall under any form of "whistle blower" legal code, in part or in full. It was just causing trouble and doing harm, regardless of your claimed intentions.


----------



## claes (Jul 14, 2021)

Just lol libel from Internet forums someone really cares too much (hint: it’s not the law)


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 14, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Did I say defamation? I don't remember typing that.. Once again, context.



Let me remind you


lexluthermiester said:


> Your stated actions in this situation are legally libelous because you did not do them in the context of proper legal procedure.


And here a quote for good measure.  I didn't get the source as you dont care about sources.



> Defamation is an area of law that provides a civil remedy when someone's words end up causing harm to your reputation or your livelihood. Libel is a written or published defamatory statement, while slander is defamation that is spoken by the defendant. In this section, we'll explain what you need to prove if you're bringing a defamation lawsuit, and what to expect at each step of your case, including common defenses to a defamation claim.



But you knew that because you are the top lawyer in the country.  It your colleagues.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 14, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Maybe that was the wrong term. But whatever.
> 
> Did I say defamation? I don't remember typing that.. Once again, context.
> 
> ...


I appreciate the detail, but it's still turning a molehill into a mountain. You've also injected a lot of assumptions into this little tidbit, but I think @claes sums is up best.


claes said:


> Just lol libel from Internet forums someone really cares too much (hint: it’s not the law)


Also, you're the one that brought libel up.


lexluthermiester said:


> 4. Referencing point "3", if TPU could prove damages as a result of the actions taken, the users who made the reports could and would be libel for the damages done. TPU would have full rights to take legal action to seek compensation for those damages.


----------



## claes (Jul 14, 2021)

It’s hilarious his whole “defense” of TPU is premised on their being no damages and now TPU is suing for damages — if anything this thread probably only increases revenue


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 14, 2021)

claes said:


> It’s hilarious his whole “defense” of TPU is premised on their being no damages and now TPU is suing for damages — if anything this thread probably only increases revenue


No we covered that too.  Wizard says no ads.


----------



## claes (Jul 14, 2021)

Yeah but overall traffic contributes to the value of the homepage realty


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 14, 2021)

claes said:


> Yeah but overall traffic contributes to the value of the homepage realty


Yeah but if they read the thread...


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 14, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> You've also injected a lot of assumptions into this little tidbi


True, I did presume a few details...



Aquinus said:


> I appreciate the detail, but it's still turning a molehill into a mountain.


While that might be an exaggeration, there might also be some truth there. Then again, as was stated elsewhere, there have been cases that did mountains of damage over much less, thus the term "frivolous lawsuit"..


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 14, 2021)

sooo did we reach a conclusion yet?


----------



## qubit (Jul 14, 2021)

525 posts and still going strong. I've now run out of popcorn damnit!


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 14, 2021)

Most of them lack any substance and focus on popcorn.



ZoneDymo said:


> sooo did we reach a conclusion yet?


I noticed that when rebuttals about lawyers' expert testimony were provided with source material, the arm chair experts all quieted down and couldn't defend their positions anymore.

That said, I suspect they realized they were wrong and have accepted defeat.


----------



## qubit (Jul 14, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Most of them lack any substance and focus on popcorn.


They are actually a cutting satirical insight into the extreme pointlessness of these objections to the hosting of the DLL files and how the objectors have been going round in circles over them and perhaps should stop now.

Would you like some popcorn? I've got my favourite butterkist to share.


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 14, 2021)

Hey, I'm just here increasing my post count! Do you we get a special badge after 5k or something?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 14, 2021)

R0H1T said:


> Hey, I'm just here increasing my post count! Do you we get a special badge after 5k or something?


No badge, just popcorn.



qubit said:


> They are actually a cutting satirical insight into the extreme pointlessness of these objections to the hosting of the DLL files and how the objectors have been going round in circles over them and perhaps should stop now.


Oh here comes the circle!  How do we know it is pointless, because  nothing happened in 72 hours?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 14, 2021)

qubit said:


> They are actually a cutting satirical insight into the extreme pointlessness of these objections to the hosting of the DLL files and how the objectors have been going round in circles over them and perhaps should stop now.


I hope you never create any IP that's stolen under the guise of software licenses being pointless. I actually have a bigger issue with this mentality than actually sharing nVidia's DLLs to be honest. This is the kind of thing I would expect from people who pirate software and feel entitled to it.


----------



## qubit (Jul 14, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I hope you never create any IP that's stolen under the guise of software licenses being pointless. I actually have a bigger issue with this mentality than actually sharing nVidia's DLLs to be honest. This is the kind of thing I would expect from people who pirate software and feel entitled to it.


I don't pirate anything.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 15, 2021)

qubit said:


> I don't pirate anything.


I never said you did. It's just that kind of rationale I would expect from someone who did. I trust that you're better than that.


----------



## qubit (Jul 15, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I never said you did. It's just that kind of rationale I would expect from someone who did. I trust that you're better than that.


That's fine, I just thought I'd better clear that up, since you made a connection to it.


----------



## claes (Jul 15, 2021)

qubit said:


> I don't pirate anything.


EXcePT tHeSE DllS jk jk


----------



## stimpy88 (Jul 15, 2021)

Ahh, the old pirate accusation again...  Shiver me timbers...


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 15, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Ahh, the old pirate accusation again...  Shiver me timbers...


Read son.  There was no accusation.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 15, 2021)

stimpy88 said:


> Ahh, the old pirate accusation again...  Shiver me timbers...


That's not the first time he's mentioned or implied such. The fact that he keeps making that statement shows that he has no real understanding of the purpose of patent/copyright protections or what piracy really is..


----------



## claes (Jul 15, 2021)

Hey friends I’m just here to insult people thanks for reading


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 16, 2021)

My thigh hair stood up on end so I knew there was truth being posted somewhere.  Soon after, thin beads of sweat slowly began to form and I began to salivate over the prospect of being bathed in a shower of knowledge while being whispered sweet nothings.

Please go on my knight, my insides are waiting with anticipation.


----------



## Mescalamba (Jul 16, 2021)

Anyone asked nVidia about their opinion? Just idea.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 16, 2021)

claes said:


> Hey friends I’m just here to insult people thanks for reading


This thread is great!


----------



## erocker (Jul 16, 2021)

You have no idea how long I've waited to use this...


----------



## freeagent (Jul 16, 2021)

erocker said:


> View attachment 208292
> You have no idea how long I've waited to use this...


Lol I had to change it I couldn't leave it like that 

Was hoping nobody saw it


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 16, 2021)

Mescalamba said:


> Anyone asked nVidia about their opinion? Just idea.


I guess you didn't read the thread as that was the whole point.  If you want the legal side just ask lex.  His anonymous legal sources pretty much slammed the case shut with silver lined words of the highest quality.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 16, 2021)

There is a difference between insults and observations.


----------



## RealKGB (Jul 16, 2021)

Showing off our GIFs are we.



This took way too long to get down to a size that websites didn't throw out as too big; originally it was a 12-second clip, 30 FPS, 1080p, 9.7MB. It's now 2 seconds, 20 FPS, 936p, 2.5MB.

Yes it's just a screencap of a random part of the tree command.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 16, 2021)




----------



## Dredi (Jul 16, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> what piracy real is..


Are pirate ships somehow related to this? Please elaborate.

is the wikipedia page on online piracy factually wrong? How? Please do some fixes to it while you are at it.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 16, 2021)

Dredi said:


> Are pirate ships somehow related to this? Please elaborate.
> 
> is the wikipedia page on online piracy factually wrong? How? Please do some fixes to it while you are at it.


Shiver me timbers, I'm getting hot!


----------



## TheWonder500 (Jul 19, 2021)

NVIDIA released the DLSS SDK to the public.









						Get Started
					

Boosts frame rates and generates sharp images.




					developer.nvidia.com
				




I take it they don't care. End thread?


----------



## MentalAcetylide (Jul 19, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> There is a difference between insults and observations.
> 
> 
> View attachment 208293


South Park's "Hell on Earth 2006", heh. 

Think we can wrap this up and call it a day. No wrong doing.


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 20, 2021)

TheWonder500 said:


> NVIDIA released the DLSS SDK to the public.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually, this is more evidence that Nvidia does care. About letting others propagating DLSS.

And no, I don't think this will shut anyone here up.

That said, I believe that better widespread understanding of what DLSS does (and what it doesn't do) and how it works is a good thing in the long run by setting the standards bar higher. With AMD's FSR, this scenario looked pretty likely anyhow.

There are effective implementations of temporal scaling (DLSS or other) and really poor ones. This encourages developers to be more thoughtful about it. It's in Unreal Engine 5 and coming to Unity. There are probably other game engines in the mix (I'm not a developer myself).


----------



## chrcoluk (Jul 20, 2021)

Now all we need is RT 1.1 and mesh shader dll's so we dont need to update to a newer windows build for it.


----------



## qubit (Jul 20, 2021)

I wonder if we're going to get DX13 with W11 which won't be backported to W10. That would be similar to W12 not getting backported to W8.1 or W7.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 20, 2021)

TheWonder500 said:


> NVIDIA released the DLSS SDK to the public.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sigh... I guess you missed the part where you have to agree to the license before downloading it.


----------



## freeagent (Jul 20, 2021)

So..you did not get TPU in trouble as intended..

Anything you’d like to say to your fans?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

freeagent said:


> So..you did not get TPU in trouble as intended..
> 
> Anything you’d like to say to your fans?


Just that you missed the purpose of the thread.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jul 20, 2021)

All of this sound and fury and no change in outcome. How 2020 of everyone


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

Easy Rhino said:


> All of this sound and fury and no change in outcome. How 2020 of everyone


Did someone create another arbitrary settlement date?


----------



## qubit (Jul 20, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Did someone create another arbitrary settlement date?


No, but I have posted W1z's bail.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

qubit said:


> No, but I have posted W1z's bail.


I didn't think you'd have money after all the popcorn.


----------



## qubit (Jul 20, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> I didn't think you'd have money after all the popcorn.


Well quite, especially as I'd bought the premium one. But don't let on, mkay?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

qubit said:


> Well quite, especially as I'd bought the premium one. But don't let on, mkay?


And they say the covid recovery isn't strong.  How bout that.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 20, 2021)

Easy Rhino said:


> All of this sound and fury and no change in outcome. How 2020 of everyone


Nah. I think I said it earlier in this thread somewhere that if I've made people think about software licenses, then I've mostly succeeded. I really don't care what nVidia does to be completely honest. If they don't care, I'd like it if they loosened up their license a bit to actually reflect their intentions.


----------



## nguyen (Jul 20, 2021)

hopefully Nvidia is not gonna tie up W1zzard into human centipede   , South Park fan anyone?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

There is a world wide shortage of vanilla paste due to covid.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 20, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Nah. I think I said it earlier in this thread somewhere that if I've made people think about software licenses, then I've mostly succeeded.


That is a copout..


Aquinus said:


> I really don't care what nVidia does to be completely honest.


Then why make the effort? And don't try that "it was to make people think" nonsense. Come on, what was your real motivation?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 20, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> And don't try that "it was to make people think" nonsense.


I reported TPU to MS around the time the greymarket key sites came out as ads.  It wasn't easy, nor fun.

We are devs.  EULAs are our livlihood.  If you can't get why we take the actions we do in that context, it's not our fault.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> That is a copout..
> 
> Then why make the effort? And don't try that "it was to make people think" nonsense. Come on, what was your real motivation?


I don't understand why you can't accept his real motivation.  He has stated it unwaveringly throughout the thread but so many like you accuse him of lying and trying to sink TPU.  It's total bullshit and uncalled for. I love how you totally neglected his last line that also further explains his intentions.


Aquinus said:


> If they don't care, I'd like it if they loosened up their license a bit to actually reflect their intentions.


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 20, 2021)

What a sorry excuse for your action. 
I get protecting Intellectual Property, but I don't get why you did feel obligated to inform nVidia?
Did TPU obtain the DLSS DLL files from software that you provided them?

Just to be clear, in case you think TPU is full of pirates that need to be educated,
I care about licenses, I make shure every PC I run has properly licensed OS's and software, even if I hate how Microsoft operates nowadays.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 20, 2021)

Jacky_BEL said:


> I get protecting Intellectual Property, but I don't get why you did feel obligated to inform nVidia?


Because I would expect the same damn courtesy if it were my software.

With that said though, if my intent for it is to be open, I license it as such.


----------



## skizzo (Jul 20, 2021)

nguyen said:


> hopefully Nvidia is not gonna tie up W1zzard into human centipede   , South Park fan anyone?


 Human-cent-iPAD lmao!

I've never seen that movie it was spoofing, but omg does it look, well, just as messed up as I thought it would based on that episode!
But don't worry, I'm sure Nvidia and W1zzard both read the terms before accepting them! (or in this case, declining to become the Human-cent-iPad) Steve Jobs would be proud!


----------



## freeagent (Jul 20, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> but so many like you accuse him of lying and trying to sink TPU. It's total bullshit and uncalled for.


I have not called anyone a liar. I do question his initial motivation though. Now the attitude is blasé, but at the time there were some very different undertones that I picked up on. At the time the way I felt was, if this is his real stance, he has been paid already, and the company he works for owns whatever it is we are talking about in such a situation. So why make it his problem? I saw this as a stab.. that should have been a PM to start with. JMO though. I don't know anything, and am about as ignorant as they come.  At the same I am easy to train, and have a spark of intelligence.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

freeagent said:


> I have not called anyone a liar.



Luckily, I didn't quote you so it was in no way directed at you.


----------



## qubit (Jul 20, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I reported TPU to MS around the time the greymarket key sites came out as ads.  It wasn't easy, nor fun.
> 
> We are devs.  EULAs are our livlihood.  If you can't get why we take the actions we do in that context, it's not our fault.


You snitch!  

I remember in the 80s some teacher asked me to write a program for the BBC Micro to help seriously disabled kids with motor skills problems write sentences on the screen by moving a square around a letter matrix in a kind of spiral, can't remember much about how it worked now. The bit that got me, is that he said he'd pay me for it, but never did, even when I chased him a few times for it and he kept promising - and he acknowledged that the program was effective, too. Bastard. So yeah, I know what it feels like to be ripped off.

I remember putting the program on a 5.25" floppy and going round to his house on the bus to hand it to him, too. How times have changed lol. Can't remember what it was called now, either.

I still woulnd't have reported TPU though as the details and situation are very different here since we're talking about a multibillion dollar corporation and devs who have already been paid.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 20, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I reported TPU to MS around the time the greymarket key sites came out as ads. It wasn't easy, nor fun.


THAT was a different situation. In that situation there was a plausible concern for unethical business practice, which was later shown to be harmless.

The actions of Aquinus and anyone else who took it upon themselves to report TPU to NVidia had ZERO plausibility for wrong-doing to act on. Anyone who thinks W1zzard a fool who would host something like DLL files without first having checked into the matter and contacted NVidia to be sure TPU would not run afoul of NVidia's rights is a fool themselves.

The actions taken here were little more than a sad case of ignorant special-snowflaking and trouble-making. While I will not go so far as to call Aquinus a lair about his intentions, he is clearly ignorant to the real and factual particulars of the situation at hand, regardless of his claims of contractual obligations.



R-T-B said:


> We are devs. EULAs are our livlihood. If you can't get why we take the actions we do in that context, it's not our fault.


You assume that I am not a rights holder myself. You would be very wrong. The difference between us is that one of us understands the context and purview of rights protections, the purpose of them and how they ACTUALLY work in real life, and one of us does not.(again, let's wait for the stooges to turn that around..)

For any of you reading this to understand which side of that equation you fall into, ask yourself these two questions: 

Is TPU wrong for hosting the DLLs that are the subject of this thread? 

Has TPU violated ANY of NVidia's rights?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 20, 2021)

Shit, I thought we had come so far.

Who needs sports illustrated when you can just fantasize about lex getting all leathered up and teaching you a lesson.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 21, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> stooges


Interesting. Maybe I need to get myself some popcorn as I've clearly been missing out.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 21, 2021)

Watch out now, someone gonna wear out their rubber tweezers...


----------



## freeagent (Jul 21, 2021)

Spicy


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Is TPU wrong for hosting the DLLs that are the subject of this thread?
> 
> Has TPU violated ANY of NVidia's rights?


Maybe.

Yes.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 21, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Maybe.
> 
> Yes.


And there you are..


----------



## maxfly (Jul 21, 2021)

I am truly... truly... touched by the obvious concern shown for this multi billion dollar conglomerate and their poor defenseless EULA. sniff snuffle sniff Im fighting back tears for such a toothless corporation that clearly requires the help of a few proud, thoughtful forum crusaders! Whose repayment is to educate but ONE of the uncultured masses. Such a humble endeavor...


Just let it die, this thread is a joke.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2021)

It doesn't make a difference if it's a conglomerate or Joe the Plumber who midnights as a dev.  The legal principles that defends developers rights to their code are the same, and if you violate it for one, there's little to stop it from becoming an epidemic.  That's why enforcement matters.

I know people think we're being pendantic but I'm going to go out on a limb and say those people haven't done any signifigant coding worth licensing.


----------



## nguyen (Jul 21, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> It doesn't make a difference if it's a conglomerate or Joe the Plumber who midnights as a dev.  The legal principles that defends developers rights to their code are the same, and if you violate it for one, there's little to stop it from becoming an epidemic.  That's why enforcement matters.



So you would treat minor offense with no consequences the same as epidemic. I guess you have never committed even the smallest of offense in your life? like jaywalking? If you did you should commit yourself to jail good sir. 
You know MS doesn't really care about people pirating their OS because they wanted marketshare? probably the same here with Nvidia.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2021)

nguyen said:


> So you would treat minor offense with no consequences the same as epidemic.


A better analogy is whether we should charge the same a robber who steals money, or food.

Legally, they are both theft you know.  But the judge may see room for leniency.  That's not my place, I just know a crime when I see it.



nguyen said:


> I guess you have never commit even the smallest of offense in your life?


Not intentionally, but YMMV.  I'm sure I have in some obscure way but this is more than that as it's the very principle we depend on with respect to the rights of an author to his/her unique code.

If nvidia doesn't care, then neither do I.  However no one has established that with certainity yet.  A delayed response is not a waiver of rights.


----------



## nguyen (Jul 21, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> A better analogy is whether we should charge the same a robber who steals money, or food.
> 
> Legally, they are both theft you know.  But the judge may see room for leniency.  That's not my place, I just know a crime when I see it.
> 
> ...



I would treat every minor thing as minor and not blow it out of proportion because it affect me personally, that's just selfish talk.
Conversely major crimes should be prosecuted whether it affects me or not.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 21, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I know people think *we're being pedantic*


Do you think?


R-T-B said:


> A better analogy is whether we should charge the same a robber who steals money, or food.
> 
> Legally, they are both theft you know. But the judge may see room for leniency. That's not my place, I just know a crime when I see it.


Oh so now the implication is the that TPU & W1zzard are stealing from NVidia?



maxfly said:


> Whose repayment is to educate but ONE of the uncultured masses. Such a humble endeavor...


Oh, if that's what they are attempting, it's best they quit. They have no idea the circles that are being run around them..


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Oh so now the implication is the that TPU & W1zzard are stealing from NVidia?


Of course not, you ever heard of the usage of an analogy?

I assume you know well what I meant.  If not, please reread the post and context of said statement.



lexluthermiester said:


> Do you think?


I would hope people would try to understand our perspective but I know the human mind does not operate well that way, so yeah.



lexluthermiester said:


> They have no idea the circles that are being run around them..


Is that the 99 posts between the last time I posted here before today where you all moaned about what a shit thread this was, while me and Aquinus largely stopped posting?

Well, that was one kind of circle, but it more resembled a dog chasing his tail.

All the same, I at least feel I've said my piece.  Have fun.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 21, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I would hope people would try to understand our perspective


Oh, please.. We understand just fine. YOU all fail to understand that your efforts are as follows:
1. Not your ethical, legal or moral responsibility.
2. Wildly inappropriate outside proper legal procedure.
3. Wildly inappropriate to discuss in a PUBLIC forum.
4. Your actions are NOT covered by any form of "whistle-blower" type of legal protections.
5. Highly questionable ethically given your failure to follow proper legal procedure.

The people making the reports are not acting under any altruistic intentions, or they would have reported things the CORRECT way AND kept it confidential like you're supposed to. And those defending those same actions are doing no favors to anyone. It's just simple hooliganism, little more.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2021)

Do you even remember who filed the report 
 at this point lex?  Because it wasn't me and I still maintain your lawyer consult needs a bar check.

There is absolutely no requirement to keep suspected eula violations confidential...  and even if there were, the very existence of this thread defeats that argument, as it is evidence TPU solicited feedback.


----------



## VulkanBros (Jul 21, 2021)

Interesting debate - took me an hour to crunch through it  - not that I have something to contribute with - but this saga could be published in Mad Magazine


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 21, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> hooliganism


When you stop with the name calling, typing words in all caps, and spouting your _opinions_ about my intentions, then I _might_ take you seriously, Lex.

Didn't your mother ever teach you to treat others the way you want to be treated?


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 21, 2021)

VulkanBros said:


> Interesting debate - took me an hour to crunch through it  - not that I have something to contribute with - but this saga could be published in Mad Magazine


wot ? and Mad mag then subject to being sued for Plagerism   only in 'Merica


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 21, 2021)

I don't know if I am more scared by the prospect of Lex's attorneys being real or the fact people in this thread have the ability to vote for world leaders.

The ignorance is astounding.  The quality of character is humiliating.  They said the only thing that separates humans from apes is intelligence but I am starting to believe it is just habitat.


----------



## VulkanBros (Jul 21, 2021)

dorsetknob said:


> wot ? and Mad mag then subject to being sued for Plagerism   only in 'Merica



Not understood.....but then again, I am not from England 

Sidenote - why the heck does nVidia or the game publishers, not include this DLL in their driver updates / game patches/ updates, if it really matters?


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 21, 2021)

dorsetknob said:


> wot ? and Mad magazine >>>>  then subject to being sued for Plagiarism .................................only in 'Merica


Edited it for you

PS 
Ian Hislop is Considering Serializing this thread in Private Eye.
His Legal team are currently proof reading the thread

pps Private Eye is a Top Rated News Source and well trusted........................(  )


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 21, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Do you even remember who filed the report at this point lex?


You are defending them. You're not doing it to play "devils advocate" here either..


R-T-B said:


> Because it wasn't me and I still maintain your lawyer consult needs a bar check.


You can maintain whatever you wish, YOU are not the one with the law degree nor the one licensed to practice law. So there is that...


R-T-B said:


> There is absolutely no requirement to keep suspected eula violations confidential... and even if there were, the very existence of this thread defeats that argument, as it is evidence TPU solicited feedback.


Still haven't talked with an attorney then eh?



Aquinus said:


> When you stop with the name calling, typing words in all caps, and spouting your _opinions_ about my intentions, then I _might_ take you seriously, Lex.


Aww, how adorable. You assume I care about your feelings. I do not. And for context, there is a difference between calling a behavior "hooliganism" and directly calling someone a "hooligan". The difference is subtle, but distinct. Seems you failed to pick up on that.. Very interesting indeed.


Aquinus said:


> Didn't your mother ever teach you to treat others the way you want to be treated?


Irony. Clearly you are paying attention.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 21, 2021)

Q?  Is that you?



lexluthermiester said:


> You can maintain whatever you wish, YOU are not the one with the law degree nor the one licensed to practice law. So there is that...


To be fair, you haven't provided anyone with those credentials either.

The only 'evidence' you provided were excerpts from How to Practice Law by Rudy Giuliani.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Aww, how adorable. You assume I care about your feelings. I do not. And for context, there is a difference between calling a behavior "hooliganism" and directly calling someone a "hooligan". The difference is subtle, but distinct. Seems you failed to pick up on that.. Very interesting indeed.


At least I have beliefs. You apparently have none.


lexluthermiester said:


> Irony. Clearly you are paying attention.


Jesus. Here we go again.







moproblems99 said:


> The only 'evidence' you provided were excerpts from How to Practice Law by Rudy Giuliani.


Does Rudy know how to use the internet?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Does Rudy know how to use the internet?


Apparently, and he knows how to post here.  Strange avatar though.

Must have have confused it for LandscapePowerUp


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 22, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Apparently, and he knows how to post here.  Strange avatar though.
> 
> Must have have confused it for LandscapePowerUp


I guess that even Rudy knows how to use Google.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I guess that even Rudy knows how to use Google.


Strange considering a little google would have helped him out several times lately.


----------



## Kursah (Jul 22, 2021)

Disappointing.

*We're choosing to leave this topic open so you guys can discuss hosting DLSS DLL's, how you feel about that, vent, express, even have some constructive debates with those whom you disagree, not to be petty and toxic towards each other.*

Frankly, its very sad and disappointing to see senior members act this way, and is one of the reasons we end up having to close these topics. This is NOT how you make this community better. There's plenty of other places you can go to hate on others, don't bring that to TPU's doorstep, please. We don't come shit on your doorstep, stop doing it here ffs.

That being said, get back on topic, drop the petty BS, or move along, and find something productive & constructive to do here. If that's seemingly too hard and you choose to persist, do yourself a favor and stay out of this topic starting now to avoid any future interactions with moderation. 

Thanks.


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 22, 2021)

At this point I am starting to think that even people at nVidia may be getting a bit annoyed by all this.
nVidia can do without negative publicity being generated, which may affect them.
They didn't ask for this discussion. They have their imago to worry about. Remember the "Hardware Unboxed" debacle?

Maybe they just ought to make the DLSS DLLs available themselves for download to the public to end this.
But after time, these downloads tend to vanish. That's why it is a good idea for them to be aggregated at a techsite like TPU, just as with the graphics drivers.


----------



## burntruers (Jul 22, 2021)

Alright, I'm going to try and speak in a manner somewhat belying the fact that I've made an account here specifically to point out how dumb some of the ideas expressed in this thread are - please bear with me.

Working as a software developer may give you some insight into software licensing that others do not gain through their occupation. It may also give you an inflated sense of understanding of IP law relating to software, possibly to the extent that you would talk down to people that disagree with your warped perspective, maybe even to such a degree that you end up cultivating 25 pages of pure, hellacious suffering in the guise of a discussion on a forum.

There is simply no way that the mere possession of a DLSS binary would cause whoever holds it to be subject to the terms of the license agreement for the SDK used to create it. We could get into the weeds of why these terms do or do not automatically apply within the associated legal framework, but that's not actually necessary. Any person of reasonable intelligence and common sense would be able to imagine dozens of absurd hypothetical situations that would become possible if this were actually how these license agreements worked, and the statement that this is how they do work is indeed an extraordinary claim.

Anyone who wishes to make such an extraordinary claim regarding the technicalities of a particular aspect of IP law is, of course, free to do so in the setting of a casual discussion, but given how totally absurd it is, the burden of proof would surely lie with them. If I were going to put myself in that position, I'd want to make sure that I was _*actually a lawyer.*_

For the sake of my mental well-being, I've chosen not to diligently pore over all 25 pages of the thread to check if this point has come up already, but can I please state the extremely obvious? This being that the DLL file is completely useless unless deployed alongside a game or software application with a functioning DLSS implementation, along with compatible NVIDIA hardware? Further, that any piece of software that could possibly make use of this binary _was already shipped to the end user with an equivalent binary?_

Honestly, I normally would just read this and move on, but the idea that somebody would:

*1.* Seek out a non-existent problem,
*2.* Talk down to people that rightly tell them that the problem doesn't exist,
*3. *Report the gracious hosts of the community they're a part of to a powerful mega-corporation with the hopes of causing those hosts legal issues,
*4.* Upon realising that they were wrong the entire time, choose not to apologise nor admit that they were incorrect and have behaved inappropriately, but instead seek to moralise their actions, claiming that regardless of their failure to achieve their fundamentally corrupt goals, the overall exercise still served a higher purpose in educating regular people about the plight of software developers and their various responsibilities -

With all due respect, Aquinus.. take the piss. Take the absolute piss.

J


----------



## Mussels (Jul 22, 2021)

burntruers said:


> Alright, I'm going to try and speak in a manner somewhat belying of the fact that I've made an account here specifically to point out how dumb some of the ideas expressed in this thread are - please bear with me.
> 
> Working as a software developer may give you some insight into software licensing that others do not gain through their occupation. It may also give you an inflated sense of understanding of IP law relating to software, possibly to the extent that you would talk down to people that disagree with your warped perspective, maybe even to such a degree that you end up cultivating 25 pages of pure, hellacious suffering in the guise of a discussion on a forum.
> 
> ...


Yes, the bolded part was brought up by myself and others, as well as alluding to the fact we do this with GPU BIOS storage and crossflashing, for i believe well over a decade with no issue.
Nvidia just released an SDK for DLSS open to all, as well.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

Jacky_BEL said:


> At this point I am starting to think that even people at nVidia may be getting a bit annoyed by all this.
> nVidia can do without negative publicity being generated, which may affect them.
> They didn't ask for this discussion. They have their imago to worry about. Remember the "Hardware Unboxed" debacle?


I don't think NVidia cares. Would bet money on it. Why would they? This is brand exposure, be it brimming with unpleasantness, that does not cast a poor light on them directly or indirectly. This doesn't even look bad for TPU or W1zzard. The only people that look bad are those doing the shoveling...



Jacky_BEL said:


> Maybe they just ought to make the DLSS DLLs available themselves for download to the public to end this.


But they have. The DLLs in question can be readily downloaded from NVidia. That's the whole point of this thread. Certain users think that mixing and matching DLLs is somehow wrong or unlawful, which is total nonsense. The DLLs in question literally and functionally *can not* be used outside of the context of their intended purpose, so at no point is NVidia being harmed, cheated or even lightly inconvenienced. Their rights are not only perfectly intact, but are actively being protected directly because of how the DLLs are used.



Jacky_BEL said:


> But after time, these downloads tend to vanish. That's why it is a good idea for them to be aggregated at a techsite like TPU, just as with the graphics drivers.


Exactly, and NVidia knows this. TPU isn't the only site that mirrors or hosts downloads for NVidia. These particular users are claiming that such violates NVidia's rights and that they've made reports based on a supposed "contractual obligations" which is meritless monkey-poo in it's own right.



burntruers said:


> Alright, I'm going to try and speak in a manner somewhat belying of the fact that I've made an account here specifically to point out how dumb some of the ideas expressed in this thread are - please bear with me.
> 
> Working as a software developer may give you some insight into software licensing that others do not gain through their occupation. It may also give you an inflated sense of understanding of IP law relating to software, possibly to the extent that you would talk down to people that disagree with your warped perspective, maybe even to such a degree that you end up cultivating 25 pages of pure, hellacious suffering in the guise of a discussion on a forum.
> 
> ...


Well said!

And Welcome to TPU!


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

All I'll say is they didn't outright tell Aquinus that they didn't care.  So they either blew him off in a rather shitty way or they actually put some thought into it.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Still haven't talked with an attorney then eh


I would be embarassed bringing that summary you provided up with one.  And I do have access.  But not if I bug them with crap like this.



Aquinus said:


> Does Rudy know how to use the internet?


He is at least capaple of operating as some sort of "buttdial modem" I think.


----------



## Hachi_Roku256563 (Jul 22, 2021)

We are almost a month into this debate
I can't be bothered to read all 25 pages of this
but surely nvidea would have released some statement by now
For the record, I think that the dlls are perfectly fine as you can get certain dlls all over the internet


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

Isaac` said:


> We are almost a month into this debate
> I can't be bothered to read all 25 pages of this
> but surely nvidea would have released some statement by now
> For the record, I think that the dlls are perfectly fine as you can get certain dlls all over the internet


I don't disagree they probably don't care.  But that ultimately isn't what the thread turned into.


----------



## Hachi_Roku256563 (Jul 22, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> I don't disagree they probably don't care.  But that ultimately isn't what the thread turned into.


cant that be taken as its fine to keep the files up and is completely legal
cause you can bet your dollar is a company thinks something is being stolen they will DMCA that shiz


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 22, 2021)

Isaac` said:


> We are almost a month into this debate
> I can't be bothered to read all 25 pages of this
> but surely nvidea would have released some statement by now
> For the record, I think that the dlls are perfectly fine as you can get certain dlls all over the internet


They didn't need to issue a statement.

The first step likely would have been an DMCA takedown notice directly and privately communicated to the TPU operator(s). TPU would have the choice to comply or ignore this DMCA request.

The next step would like be a cease-or-desist order from Nvidia's legal team (likely not advertised) followed by an escalation of increasingly publicly visible interaction.

None of that has happened. Since the DLSS files are still available it is likely that Nvidia never sent TPU any sort of takedown request.

We have been through this before in this discussion.

There is zero evidence that Nvidia had any issue with TPU hosting the DLSS dlls. After all, TPU hosts a variety of other Nvidia binaries (like device drivers and software utilities).

I'm sure five pages from now, I will be posting the same thing to others who still haven't figured this out.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I would be *embarrassed* bringing that summary you provided up with one. And I do have access. But not if I bug them with crap like this.


Yes, that is the right word.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

Isaac` said:


> cant that be taken as its fine to keep the files up and is completely legal
> cause you can bet your dollar is a company thinks something is being stolen they will DMCA that shiz


Fine to keep up and completely legal aren't the same thing.  I doubt Nvidia cares.  But that doesn't mean it is or isn't legal.



lexluthermiester said:


> Yes, that is the right word.


I'm glad we all see eye to eye that Rudy's Paper Napkin book of law doesn't fly here.


----------



## Hachi_Roku256563 (Jul 22, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Fine to keep up and completely legal aren't the same thing. I doubt Nvidia cares. But that doesn't mean it is or isn't legal.


If they dont care its legal
if it was illegal they would care



cvaldes said:


> I'm sure five pages from now, I will be posting the same thing to others who still haven't figured this out.


yeh i know right when they leave things alone this long its probably legal I feel like if they take out the bioses hosted on the site also


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

Isaac` said:


> If they dont care its legal
> if it was illegal they would care


That is an excellent summary!


----------



## qubit (Jul 22, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Q?  Is that you?


Me? I have no idea what you're referring to. Apologies if you meant someone else.



burntruers said:


> Alright, I'm going to try and speak in a manner somewhat belying of the fact that I've made an account here specifically to point out how dumb some of the ideas expressed in this thread are - please bear with me.
> 
> Working as a software developer may give you some insight into software licensing that others do not gain through their occupation. It may also give you an inflated sense of understanding of IP law relating to software, possibly to the extent that you would talk down to people that disagree with your warped perspective, maybe even to such a degree that you end up cultivating 25 pages of pure, hellacious suffering in the guise of a discussion on a forum.
> 
> ...


So. Well. Said. What a great first post on TPU. Hopefully, it won't be your last one, either.

I have an outsized bag of premium popcorn I can share with you, if you like? 

And welcome to TPU.  Seriously, not all conversations are like this on here.



Kursah said:


> We're choosing to leave this topic open so you guys can discuss hosting DLSS DLL's, how you feel about that, vent, express, even have some constructive debates with those whom you disagree, not to be petty and toxic towards each other


Indeed, I do wonder why people get so toxic on forums - TPU is hardly the only one; it's endemic.

Even on something like Facebook where one isn't anonymous and often has their real face as their avatar they have a go like this. Perhaps it's because they're not physically next to the person that they're insulting and thus have nothing to fear about being thumped by them, ie violence? I can't think of a better reason.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

qubit said:


> Me? I have no idea what you're referring to. Apologies if you meant someone else.


No, he meant me. It was a barely cohesive attempt at being clever.


----------



## Hachi_Roku256563 (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> That is an excellent summary!


i do belive this is the first time we have met an agreement on these forums


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 22, 2021)

I have read the accompanying SDK licence agreement and nowhere is stated that nVidia will refund the postage stamp if ever you feel compelled to write them. What kind of agreement is that.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

Isaac` said:


> i do belive this is the first time we have met an agreement on these forums


Fair enough. When you're right, you're right. Your summary was excellent!


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

Jacky_BEL said:


> I have read the accompanying SDK licence agreement and nowhere is stated that nVidia will refund the postage stamp if ever you feel compelled to write them. What kind of agreement is that.


Who the hell would use the postal service is the better question...



lexluthermiester said:


> That is an excellent summary!



That's not how the law works at all.  But it is the practicalities of the matter and as I think no one really cares anymore, I too vote this be closed.  This thread has become an attempt to mock any legitimate attempt to understand, and as it doesn't matter anymore  why keep it?

@W1zzard, for the love of god man make it stop.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> Who the hell would use the postal service is the better question...


Lots of people, I do it weekly if not daily and not just packages. Your attempt at a point failed.


R-T-B said:


> That's not how the law works at all.


You think not, huh? The United States Federal Courts would disagree with you.




__





						Groklaw - Digging for Truth
					





					www.groklaw.net
				



Dig in.. But I warn you, the devil is in the details..


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> You think not, huh? The United States Federal Courts would disagree with you.


That's patent law and it's a whole different animal.  Of course, you knew that.



lexluthermiester said:


> Lots of people, I do it weekly if not daily and not just packages. Your attempt at a point failed.


I mean, seriously, when an email would suffice?  It was a joke anyways man...  you really are illustrating why this needs to be closed.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> That's patent law and it's a whole different animal. Of course, you knew that.


Like I said, the devil is in the details. And there is A LOT more than just patent law available for review there. Pay careful attention to the SCO vs IBM data and documentation. Oh, and for the record, while the circumstances differ, the legal context is the real kicker. These two "animals" are not so different.


R-T-B said:


> I mean, seriously, when an email would suffice?


Emails don't always get to the right people. Physical letters delivered to the legal dept of a large corporation however generally do. Why? Because they are legal documents of consequence and review is required by law. That is why the mail is still used. If you had the experience with the legal system that you claim, you would know this detail.


R-T-B said:


> It was a joke anyways man...


Oh, sure it was...


R-T-B said:


> you really are illustrating why this needs to be closed.


Irony, again.


R-T-B said:


> @W1zzard, for the love of god man make it stop.


IF he were going to do that, he would have done it 16 pages ago when a number of us(myself included) suggested it. He WANTS this conversation to happen and it should be plainly, painfully obvious why to everyone who does not have their head in the sand, up their bum or both.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 22, 2021)

Kursah said:


> Frankly, its very sad and disappointing to see senior members act this way,



Usually that's me. Though i do agree, i would have thought senior members would have grown out of the need for a dummy long ago, let alone throwing them at each other.

Maybe this thread should just be closed, i think it has *definitely* run it's course.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 22, 2021)

Gruffalo.Soldier said:


> Usually that's me. Though i do agree, i would have thought senior members would have grown out of the need for a dummy long ago, let alone throwing them at each other.
> 
> Maybe this thread should just be closed, i think it has *definitely* run it's course.


Clearly I struck a nerve because I stopped quite some time ago. I just check back to see how much shit has been flung in my absence.  

Honestly, I've been very clear about my beliefs about this. If nVidia really doesn't care if their stuff is redistributed, they should update the license and call it a day.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 22, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I just check back to see how much shit has been flung in my absence.


? By Nail biters that don't wash their hands ????????????


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

qubit said:


> And welcome to TPU.  Seriously, not all conversations are like this on here.


Don't fill him with lies, he's new.



R-T-B said:


> That's not how the law works at all. But it is the practicalities of the matter and as I think no one really cares anymore, I too vote this be closed. This thread has become an attempt to mock any legitimate attempt to understand, and as it doesn't matter anymore why keep it?


Just want to note I said that 20 pages ago.



lexluthermiester said:


> You think not, huh? The United States Federal Courts would disagree with you.
> Groklaw - Digging for Truth  Dig in.. But I warn you, the devil is in the details..


OMG!



lexluthermiester said:


> Emails don't always get to the right people. Physical letters delivered to the legal dept of a large corporation however generally do. Why? Because they are legal documents of consequence and review is required by law. That is why the mail is still used. If you had the experience with the legal system that you claim, you would know this detail.


Are you saying legal department are legally required to read all the spam they get, like ads?


----------



## freeagent (Jul 22, 2021)

I thought it was informative.. I should have made my comments after not before I read so my apologies for that.


----------



## qubit (Jul 22, 2021)

moproblems99 said:


> Don't fill him with lies, he's new


Haha stop it!


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

I forwarded Lex's legal summary to a Personal Injury attorney I was working with this morning from Fuller and Fuller group, on our private ms teams chat.

His reply amused me:






It's a dated meme Sir, but it checks out.

PS:  Don't take this as serious legal advice.  It's a meme photoreply for god sake.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I forwarded Lex's legal summary to a Personal Injury attorney I was working with this morning from Fuller and Fuller group, on our private ms teams chat.
> 
> His reply amused me:
> 
> ...


There case settled.  From one non-anonymous legal expert compared to another.

I hearby bang my gavel and announce we are back to square 1!


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

He said he wasn't even going to start to dissect it, but the parts on "Libel" (he said it would be "tort") were particularly flawed.  He didn't really want to comment on the whole dll law thing.

I'd link him here but I like my working relationships.  I probably shouldn't even have named the group, but I am waking up, and I know the individual would not care too much at least.


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 22, 2021)

from wikipedia about "Legal aspects of file sharing"

The Court held that "Merely making a copy available does not constitute distribution....The statute provides copyright holders with the exclusive right to distribute "copies" of their works to the public "by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending." 17 U.S.C. ...106(3). Unless a copy of the work changes hands in one of the designated ways, a "distribution" under ...106(3) has not taken place." The Court also expressly rejected the 'offer to distribute' theory suggested in _Barker_, holding that "An offer to distribute does not constitute distribution".

Any bearing on TPU hosting the DLSS DLL files?


----------



## basco (Jul 22, 2021)

is this still a thang !
summer time and heat is not good for everybody


----------



## moproblems99 (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> He said he wasn't even going to start to dissect it, but the parts on "Libel" (he said it would be "tort") were particularly flawed.  He didn't really want to comment on the whole dll law thing.
> 
> I'd link him here but I like my working relationships.  I probably shouldn't even have named the group, but I am waking up, and I know the individual would not care too much at least.


I know it wasn't clear in my post, but I appreciate your additional detail in the previous post.  At least showing and effort you didn't pull it out of your ass.  

I'd like to make the suggestion we start doing a Facebook type thing where problematic posts that are clear misinformation could be flagged.

Imagine this thread?



Jacky_BEL said:


> from wikipedia about "Legal aspects of file sharing"
> 
> The Court held that "Merely making a copy available does not constitute distribution....The statute provides copyright holders with the exclusive right to distribute "copies" of their works to the public "by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending." 17 U.S.C. ...106(3). Unless a copy of the work changes hands in one of the designated ways, a "distribution" under ...106(3) has not taken place." The Court also expressly rejected the 'offer to distribute' theory suggested in _Barker_, holding that "An offer to distribute does not constitute distribution".
> 
> Any bearing on TPU hosting the DLSS DLL files?


Pretty interesting because they argued in court long ago that making mp3s available was not a good thing.


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 22, 2021)

Not that it matters in this case, but mp3's had monetary value because the original music was sold ,  the standalone DLL is in a freely available download, so there is no monetary damage.

Does that make any sense?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

Jacky_BEL said:


> Not that it matters in this case, but mp3's had monetary value because the original music was sold ,  the standalone DLL is in a freely available download, so there is no monetary damage.
> 
> Does that make any sense?


I don't know, that's an interesting take.  It would seemingly limit TPU's damages to almost nothing in that instance, but wouldn't mean that they are strictly "legally clear."  They could still be ordered to stop, they just wouldn't have to pay any real restitution.

I think the bottom line at this point though is everyone realizes, the die has been cast and unless TPU is asked to stop, it won't.  And that's probably fine.  We've all notified the people we felt obligated to and anyone who feels they need (or need not) to act now certainly can.  We all feel good now.  Is that such a bad thing?

And we ALL need to acknowledge that this is effectlively /r/legaladvice for w1zzards amusement.  If he really needs help, he can consult a lawyer.  None of this qualifies or should pretend to.


----------



## Jacky_BEL (Jul 22, 2021)

If one is going to notify suspected acts of "distribution" to a corporate legal department because one feels legally obligated, than one needs to know the legal notion of "distribution".
Especially if one boasts to "know how to read a freaking license".

Clearly "distribution" is different in commercial legal terms than in everyday language.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I forwarded Lex's legal summary to a Personal Injury attorney


Because of course they would know about copyright law. Now to be fair, they would need to know about contract law.


R-T-B said:


> (he said it would be "tort")


True.


R-T-B said:


> I was working with this morning from Fuller and Fuller group


Wait, THIS Fuller & Fuller?








						Personal Injury Attorney Serving Olympia & Tacoma | Fuller & Fuller
					

Experienced injury lawyers handling car & truck accidents, and other personal injury claims. Contact Fuller & Fuller for a FREE case review.




					www.fullerlaw.com
				



Yeah, *there's* a group of attorney's you want to take advice from. LMAO


R-T-B said:


> I probably shouldn't even have named the group


Oh, you think?


----------



## maxfly (Jul 22, 2021)

I hate to break to you guys cuz i know your enjoying the back and forth so much(the neanderthal in me would like to see you go at it in a ring for a couple rounds) but honest to god,
no
one
cares.
TPU still has the dlls posted. The sites reputation is intact despite  the snitching. All is good on the northern front.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 22, 2021)

so how about that lawsuit, is it there yet, or are you still flinging shit at each other in this typical passive aggressive pussy manner?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

spnidel said:


> passive aggressive


To be fair, the mods frown on direct aggression. 



spnidel said:


> pussy manner?


Over to you claes..


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Wait, THIS Fuller & Fuller?


Yes, to be fair, they are in court a lot.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> To be fair, the mods frown on direct aggression.


don't care, not an active member of this community, nor am I being paid to post, if I end up getting banned that's OK


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

spnidel said:


> don't care, not an active member of this community, nor am I being paid to post, if I end up getting banned that's OK


Oh, my bad, I didn't mean you personally. Was speaking generally.



R-T-B said:


> Yes, to be fair, they are in court a lot.


I'm sure you're right.


----------



## spnidel (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Oh, my bad, I didn't mean you personally. Was speaking generally.


no worries


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm sure you're right.


I try not to judge.  It's important to be impartial in my line of work.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2021)

R-T-B said:


> I try not to judge.  It's important to be impartial in my line of work.


And yet you persist in this thread. Can you see the contradiction?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 22, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> And yet you persist in this thread. Can you see the contradiction?


No.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 22, 2021)

I thought only monkeys throw shit at each other. agree to disagree or something purleeeze


----------



## 64K (Jul 22, 2021)

If Nvidia hasn't responded by now then they probably don't care.


----------



## Kursah (Jul 22, 2021)

The end.


----------

