Macvidcards: radio silence after sending unflashed GTX 1080

[yurc]

And then sell many mac EFI cards on eBay.

Some E-bayer does it, but i don't know if MVC dumped one or not.

In Asia, importing goods Mac Pro related is PITA. Most of parts like SSUBX and MVC flashed goodness are from west countries. which is absolutely shipping hell. Luckily, there's Hong Kong E-bayer as solution and he sell flashed cards too, and not limited for NVIDIA cards, but also AMD cards too, so probably he was discovered to reproduce what MVC did.

 

[goMac]

B stealing from A, doesn't give C the right to rob B.

Legally he wouldn't have a leg to stand on because of that. Someone can't steal something he doesn't own from him.

If I sue someone else for stealing a car that I stole myself, I'd get laughed out of court.

The only party that has standing in any of this would be Nvidia. But his threats to sue others are empty, which is why he has not done so.
[doublepost=1519028199][/doublepost]

To me, what he is doing is similar to custom car modifiers who buy, modify, and then sell complete vehicles - their designs and modifications are protected by intellectual property laws. You can't just buy one of their cars, take casts off their bodykit parts, and start selling your own versions, on the grounds that the original unmodified car wasn't their design.

Software is different. Reverse engineering software is not covered.

Basically, if Nvidia was selling cars, they make you agree (in the user agreement) you will not open the hood and and alter the car. Unenforceable for cars, so far enforceable for software.

The other problem with this metaphor is you ARE allowed to do exactly what you said. You are allowed to copy what a custom car modifier does. Unless that car modifier had a patent, which MVC wouldn't be eligible for.

That's essentially what aftermarket parts for a car are. Someone has broken down the manufacturer part and copied it, and there is nothing illegal about that.

Custom car manufacturers make their business off the service, not the parts. Which goes back to what I said earlier. Is MVC selling a service, or his ROMs?

 

[mattspace]

The other problem with this metaphor is you ARE allowed to do exactly what you said. You are allowed to copy what a custom car modifier does. Unless that car modifier had a patent, which MVC wouldn't be eligible for.

No, you're generally not. The individual parts a custom fabber creates would usually be covered by copyright as designs. Taking a cast off a product someone makes, and effectively creating an exact replica is a textbook IP violation. That's why replica furniture can only legally copy designs that are out of copyright, and why Europe recently moved the copyright window for designed objects from 25 to 70 years after the creator's death, which has put the boot into the "Replica Eames" industry.
[doublepost=1519030523][/doublepost]

Legally he wouldn't have a leg to stand on because of that. Someone can't steal something he doesn't own from him.

But his changes to the code probably do belong to him, since copyright law often recognises multiple co-existing copyrights within a single "work". The unmodified parts would belong to Nvidia, the modifications, and modifications only, would belong to MVC.

As for the no reverse-engineering, that's always going to be an open for debate point if the reverse engineering is for compatibility purposes, rather than, for example, countering anti-piracy protections.

 

[AndreeOnline]

I have no stake in this and no special sympathies, apart from with people who don't get what they pay for—that's not right.
Here are a few A, B and C scenarios that's I've seen cross posted or insinuated above, sometimes with implied similar meaning, but that are very different. The letters stand for M: manufacturer, T: tuner/modifier and C: customer. List one:

1. T buys card from M. T then sells used, unmodified card to C at market price. Price can be higher than new due to let's say cryptos.
2. T buys card from M. T is an artist and paints hockey team logos on the fans. T sells painted cards to hockey fan C for higher than retail price.
3. T buys car from M. T chip tunes the electronic ignition and turbo chargers. T sells more powerful car for a higher price to enthusiast C.
4. T buys card from M. T modifies card to be compatible with Macs. T sells rare card to Mac owner C for a higher price.
5. C buys card from M. C ships card to T, who modifies card according to C's wishes. C pays T for service performed.
6. T buys Operating System from M. T strips all consumer related functionality from M's ****** OS and makes it super awesome, fast and reliable. Many happy Cs buys the improved OS from T at 'retail + customisation' and lives relatively happy for a while.

In all of the cases above, the original manufacturer's stake in the product has been covered by the fact that the cards/cars were all bought from M at M's price. List two:

1. T illegally downloads M's software from internet. T sells copies of software for bargain price to many Cs who are too afraid or "ignorant" to download themselves.
2. T steals cards from M's warehouse. T modifies cards and sells them for higher than retail to Cs who can't find similar cards in the retain chain (due to modification).
3. C buys M's software. C turns to T, who says he can improve it – and he does. C and T then make copies of the new software and sell them together as 'new and improved', sharing the profit.

Both of these lists can be almost infinite in length. The difference is that in one list, the manufacturers stake is covered by each instance of the product being paid for to M. Yet, through licensing agreements, some modifications (like 6 in the first list) are strictly illegal anyway.

None of this is to point a finger at who's right or wrong, but there's been some overlap in different points of view, I think.

 

[steveOooo]

I bought a flashed AMD 7950 from Mac Vid Cards in December 2015 – I received this (from LA to UK) in Jan 2016 – soon after I discovered it was faulty with glitches, kernal panics and random restarts. I received a full refund from MVC but this didnt include my expenses in shipping the item back (around £20) and I also wasnt refunded the £9 customs ‘admin’ fee – though I got the customs charge refunded (cant remember how much this was).

So overall, I was unlucky by receiving a dud – perhaps something went pop in transit as it did travel a very long distance.

http://www.unboxfresh.com/computing...eplaced-with-a-amd-r9-380-for-macpro-51-2010/

 

[mattspace]

Both of these lists can be almost infinite in length. The difference is that in one list, the manufacturers stake is covered by each instance of the product being paid for to M. Yet, through licensing agreements, some modifications (like 6 in the first list) are strictly illegal anyway.

That's why I keep coming back to "extant instances" - MVC isn't increasing the total number of instances of Nvidia's copyrighted software, which is why Nvidia likely isn't exercising their, and only their, right to go after him.

If MVC was using his modded firmware to power counterfeit Nvidia GPUs that he was having made (eg made from real spare parts, off the books in the Nvidia factory), very different story.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

But his changes to the code probably do belong to him

In the words of firmware modders, they flip switches in hex editor. They don't have access to the original source code. They are not writing in C.

 

[h9826790]

What if EVGA or MSI did what MVC does, and sold the card as a Mac Edition?

Lou

That will be great, a licensed (both from Nvidia and Apple) ISO 9001 certified manufacture sell a new Mac Edition card (like what they did with the GTX680). It's too bad that Apple intentionally kill this kind of upgrade from us.

 

[rawweb]

After reading this thread makes you worry about re-selling when you're done with it in fear that the coon goes after you!

OP, have you had any luck?

 

[mattspace]

in fear that the coon goes after you!

The what? That’s a brand of cheese here...

 

[jbarley]

This is what first comes to mind...

 

[Fl0r!an]

So many people talking about stuff they don't understand...

Your ideas of flashing GPUs is still stuck in the Fermi/Kepler era, where we had official "Mac Edition" GPUs. Yes, back in these days it was possible to dump this rom, apply some minor modifications (some of which where still difficult to find) and flash it to a similar GPU from the same family.

This is no longer valid in Maxwell/Pascal era, since there's no official "Mac Edition" ROM to dump. Instead, they've developed their own EFI driver on top of the stock (unmodified!) Nvidia UEFI video driver. This does not involve any modifications of Nvidia's copyrighted software, they've developed their own software and placed it on the EEPROM beside Nvidia's software. It's virtually like downloading an additional application to your computer.

I cannot see any copyright infringement there, and additionally I can't see any reason why they shouldn't protect their own IP. And on top of the legal side, we should be aware that there definitely wouldn't be any "Mac Edition" Maxwell & Pascal cards without their work...

But all of this is obviously no excuse for bad customer support.

 

[ActionableMango]

I just bought a GTX 1080 card from Macvidcards, and when I received the card, it turns out that he didn't flash it with the modified firmware.

He isn't here any more. I suggest posting on Netkas. I've seen 3 or 4 other complaints here. Hope you get your issue resolved.

-------

BTW - If anyone wants a MVC-flashed GTX 980, I never did get around to selling mine. It works great. And I can be reached almost every day here. If you look at my post history I think you'll see that I am a trustworthy enthusiast. And if you are in Seattle area I'll even help you install it. Here is my marketplace post.

 

[dfnum2]

Obviously I do not see any ethical violation with MacVidCards modifying cards for profit. I am happy to pay to be able to reap the benefit.

However, given that he charged me a premium for the flashing service, but did not provide the service, I also see no ethical violation in getting the image from someone who has it, and flashing the card myself. Obviously I would prefer if MacVidCards just fixed the problem quickly, but I am not sure that will happen.

So, again, if anyone has a flashed card and is willing to share the image, please PM me. I am happy to provide proof of my purchase, and my correspondence with MacVidCards.

 

[VAGDesign]

Obviously I do not see any ethical violation with MacVidCards modifying cards for profit. I am happy to pay to be able to reap the benefit.

However, given that he charged me a premium for the flashing service, but did not provide the service, I also see no ethical violation in getting the image from someone who has it, and flashing the card myself. Obviously I would prefer if MacVidCards just fixed the problem quickly, but I am not sure that will happen.

So, again, if anyone has a flashed card and is willing to share the image, please PM me. I am happy to provide proof of my purchase, and my correspondence with MacVidCards.

If I were you, probably I would give him some time 1-2 weeks to correct the mistake OR I would hunt him down with every possible legal way.

Don’t forget that he has to correct a human made mistake AND you also have the right as customer to get a refund of a product that you purchased and it’s not as advertised by the seller.

Simple and clear

 

[Cindori]

This discussion has already been had:

http://forum.netkas.org/index.php?&topic=2245.0

(Rominator = MacVidCards)

 

[vworks]

Selling this kind of stuff is always taking a risk.
This would not stand in a court.
I could not imagine this guy stipulating that he has the 'copyright'...

 

[Flint Ironstag]

He's always made good (eventually) in the past. As stated, try him at netkas forums, and try posting on his blog.

 

[rawweb]

He's always made good (eventually) in the past. As stated, try him at netkas forums, and try posting on his blog.

'Eventually' is really bad customer service, IMO, especially in an era where it's become less and less necessary to have flashed cards. You'd think he would work harder to keep the customers he has. I don't think one should have to try to reach a business via some forum to receive proper customer service.

I tried him via email some months ago and wasn't offered a response. If he's going to behave in this matter, he should consider closing up shop. At least my email was a question, OP has skin in the game.

 

[jbarley]

The OP could try the route I used to get his attention and finally my refund.
I made him aware that I'd located his file on the Los Angles BBB and I was considering filing a complaint with them as others had done.
Shortly thereafter he coughed up.
https://www.bbb.org/losangelessilic...173/reviews-and-complaints?section=complaints

 

[AlexMaximus]

This is what first comes to mind...

View attachment 751833

Super!

I just love this forum. Hahahahah

 

[lowendlinux]

'Eventually' is really bad customer service, IMO, especially in an era where it's become less and less necessary to have flashed cards. You'd think he would work harder to keep the customers he has. I don't think one should have to try to reach a business via some forum to receive proper customer service.

I tried him via email some months ago and wasn't offered a response. If he's going to behave in this matter, he should consider closing up shop. At least my email was a question, OP has skin in the game.

IIRC it's a side gig, he's got a real job also.

 

[ActionableMango]

I don't think one should have to try to reach a business via some forum to receive proper customer service.

Nobody thinks that. When I suggested posting at Netkas I was trying to suggest an alternative communication channel where OP might have more success. It was not meant to excuse complete lack of communication through normal channels, which is obviously unacceptable for a business.

 

[vetruvian]

Hi All,

I just bought a GTX 1080 card from Macvidcards, and when I received the card, it turns out that he didn't flash it with the modified firmware. No boot screen, blank until login screen.

I emailed him and he asked what firmware version is reported by System Report. Sure enough, it was "VBIOS 86.04.3b.00.84", which is a stock version, according to the Nvidia website. I reported the result, and never heard back, despite several additional polite reminders over the past month.

Has anyone had a similar experience? Basically, I got a used video card for the price of a new card, without manufacturer or merchant warranty. That wouldn't bother me if it were flashed and backed by Macvidcards, but clearly something is amiss with him. Has anyone else had the same experience?

Does anyone have a GTX1080 flashed with his firmware who might be willing to dump the binary and send it to me? I can provide proof of purchase to prove I'm not trying to pull a fast one.

Many thanks,

Dave

I had a very similar situation about 3 months ago. The flashed 1080 I purchased would not play nice with Windows 10 via bootcamp. I have about a decade of experience with Macs, am a software developer, and have probably installed/setup well over 60 machines at this point. I've always been capable of troubleshooting almost anything. I emailed him and got a very condescending response. The conversation went back and forth for about two weeks. It often took him 2-3 days to respond. Eventually I got sick of his defensive and condescending replies and ended up returning the card. The return process alone took about 3 weeks. I almost had to contact my bank to refute the original charge.


It sucked taking the hit on the restocking fee, but it was better than keeping a $700 card that didn't work properly from a guy that clearly doesn't care about his customers.

 

[dfnum2]

If I were you, probably I would give him some time 1-2 weeks to correct the mistake OR I would hunt him down with every possible legal way.

Don’t forget that he has to correct a human made mistake AND you also have the right as customer to get a refund of a product that you purchased and it’s not as advertised by the seller.

Simple and clear

I've been giving him 1-2 weeks for over a month now. I don't want to hunt him down. I have a card that functions as originally intended, only I paid a $200 premium for this used card. I don't want a refund.

I want a card that works with the Mac EFI for boot screens, etc. That's what I paid for.

Repeated emails have done nothing. I doubt appealing to his sense of decency or trying to shame him in forums will prod him to action. It's not looking likely that he will do anything at all. It is more likely that someone out there may be willing to dump the firmware and send it to me, so that's what I'm hoping for, and asking for. Eventually, if someone is willing to share, I will have the card I paid for.

Simple and clear.