We are Just Launching Click A Bargain

Forums › Startups › We are Just Launching Click A Bargain

1 | 2 | 3

46 posts

Geek

Reply # 610166 16-Apr-2012 18:31
You might want to slow the slider at the top down a little. Just by a couple of seconds. Seems to move on very quickly. Apart from what others have said, very nice looking site. I wish you the best of luck with it!

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610283 16-Apr-2012 23:34
Waterfront: You might want to slow the slider at the top down a little. Just by a couple of seconds. Seems to move on very quickly. Apart from what others have said, very nice looking site. I wish you the best of luck with it! Hi Thank you, We will be changing the layout around a little so the slider will be one thing we will be changing. While the site itself has taken months to design, we are focusing on getting things such as features added to make it more user friendly. We are also going to be branding certain products under our company name pretty much like vodafone and 2 degrees do. In the distant future we will also be looking at adding other areas to the business such as our own sim cards, pricing plans and other telecommunication services such as land-line, internet and VoIP services. However our main focus at present is to get the retail side of things up and running properly first. With all purchases made with us, every customer is automatically sent a $20 voucher for the next purchase as an incentive to keep customers coming back.

LennonNZ

Just A Geek
1582 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 610287 16-Apr-2012 23:52
and the last question you didn't answer.. Do you supply any GPL source code for all the Android Tablets/Phones you sell (and they include an offer for this as well)? If not, have you checked the legalities of selling them?

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610290 17-Apr-2012 00:12
LennonNZ: and the last question you didn't answer.. Do you supply any GPL source code for all the Android Tablets/Phones you sell (and they include an offer for this as well)? If not, have you checked the legalities of selling them? No We currently do not provide the source code and this would probably be better answered by the manufacturing company we are dealing with in respects to the tablets and android phones. Yes we have checked the legality of selling them also. Sorry i missed that question.

LennonNZ

Just A Geek
1582 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 610310 17-Apr-2012 06:59
Sigh... "Passing off" the responsibility is something you cannot do. I would seriously check out the licenses for the software on the Android units - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html + any other licences involved. Selling illegally licensed Android Phones (which you are doing now (IMHO) - as you cannot supply the source code (for any GPLV2 licensed software on the phone) and are not offering it with the phone) will easily get you closed down.

kingjj

Baby Get Shaky!
808 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 610354 17-Apr-2012 09:17
Few thoughts on the website: On the contact page it states: "Our staff are not super human and only work between the hours of Monday to Friday 9am to 6pm 6 days a week excluding public holidays". So is it Mon-Fri or 6 days per week? (Mon-Sat?) On the Returns Policy page it states: "If an item is faulty, it will fall under our Warranty Policy as described below and will not be eligible for a refund" than further down it says " if a repair is not possible or feasible, we will arrange a replacement item, if a replacement is not possible we will arrange a credit or refund". So a refund is possible but only at the sellers discretion or other replacement methods fail? Overall the website is clean and tidy, but it does not a once over by a professional for spelling and grammar mistakes (as you've stipulated you are already arranging this). I think here may be some confusion when selling mobile phones, especially as the brands are not known in NZ. Perhaps if you could introduce a buyers guide for mobile phones outlining each NZ network's features, frequencies and possibly including basic information for setting up the phone with each network it might go a long to way convincing the non-techie buyer. Otherwise I forsee a lot of buyers coming to sites such as this because they are incapable of finding out the correct settings for their phones themselves. Best of luck, will follow the site with interest!

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610461 17-Apr-2012 12:14
LennonNZ: Sigh... "Passing off" the responsibility is something you cannot do. I would seriously check out the licenses for the software on the Android units - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html + any other licences involved. Selling illegally licensed Android Phones (which you are doing now (IMHO) - as you cannot supply the source code (for any GPLV2 licensed software on the phone) and are not offering it with the phone) will easily get you closed down. Sigh We have re-searched we have checked laws and we are not breaking any. I suggest you read up a little more concerning things. It's worth noting that Google tends to prefer the BSD Licence, and have placed the majority of their code under it - so others distributing Google contributions or on other products without the source is well within the terms of the licence of most of Android, just not the kernel.

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610464 17-Apr-2012 12:16
jamway: LennonNZ: Sigh... "Passing off" the responsibility is something you cannot do. I would seriously check out the licenses for the software on the Android units - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html + any other licences involved. Selling illegally licensed Android Phones (which you are doing now (IMHO) - as you cannot supply the source code (for any GPLV2 licensed software on the phone) and are not offering it with the phone) will easily get you closed down. Sigh We have re-searched we have checked laws and we are not breaking any. I suggest you read up a little more concerning things. It's worth noting that Google tends to prefer the BSD Licence, and have placed the majority of their code under it - so others distributing Google contributions or on other products without the source is well within the terms of the licence of most of Android, just not the kernel. Further to add For the most part, Google doesn't release their code under GPL, but under more permissive licenses, such as the Apache license. Thus, Google doesn't have much standing to sue over copyright infringement. Also, Google already suffers significantly from people threatening patent lawsuits against Linux; they don't want to do anything to encourage the perception of "use Linux and get sued". I can't see any possible rationale under which Google would find it in their best interests to sue Android device vendors over the GPL.

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610470 17-Apr-2012 12:29
jamway: jamway: LennonNZ: Sigh... "Passing off" the responsibility is something you cannot do. I would seriously check out the licenses for the software on the Android units - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html + any other licences involved. Selling illegally licensed Android Phones (which you are doing now (IMHO) - as you cannot supply the source code (for any GPLV2 licensed software on the phone) and are not offering it with the phone) will easily get you closed down. Sigh We have re-searched we have checked laws and we are not breaking any. I suggest you read up a little more concerning things. It's worth noting that Google tends to prefer the BSD Licence, and have placed the majority of their code under it - so others distributing Google contributions or on other products without the source is well within the terms of the licence of most of Android, just not the kernel. Further to add For the most part, Google doesn't release their code under GPL, but under more permissive licenses, such as the Apache license. Thus, Google doesn't have much standing to sue over copyright infringement. Also, Google already suffers significantly from people threatening patent lawsuits against Linux; they don't want to do anything to encourage the perception of "use Linux and get sued". I can't see any possible rationale under which Google would find it in their best interests to sue Android device vendors over the GPL. And to further add Lennon You can argue that cheap tablets from China are infringing simply because nobody knows better. But what's HTC's excuse? They've clearly decided that there's a benefit in holding back their source code releases, balancing this against the risk of being sued. They know full well what they're doing. If compliance was free they'd ship the source at the same time as they shipped the binaries. Other significant vendors are also fully aware of their obligations but choose to ignore them anyway. So not sure why you have chosen to bring this up to be honest! We have researched laws very very closely and are aware of what we can and cannot do. I suggest taking this issue up with HTC also and other companies too that are being brought daily with no complaints. Sorry to sound a little rude, but morally speaking you would also need to focus the same questions to bigger companies too, wouldnt you agree?

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610472 17-Apr-2012 12:34
jamway: jamway: jamway: LennonNZ: Sigh... "Passing off" the responsibility is something you cannot do. I would seriously check out the licenses for the software on the Android units - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html + any other licences involved. Selling illegally licensed Android Phones (which you are doing now (IMHO) - as you cannot supply the source code (for any GPLV2 licensed software on the phone) and are not offering it with the phone) will easily get you closed down. Sigh We have re-searched we have checked laws and we are not breaking any. I suggest you read up a little more concerning things. It's worth noting that Google tends to prefer the BSD Licence, and have placed the majority of their code under it - so others distributing Google contributions or on other products without the source is well within the terms of the licence of most of Android, just not the kernel. Further to add For the most part, Google doesn't release their code under GPL, but under more permissive licenses, such as the Apache license. Thus, Google doesn't have much standing to sue over copyright infringement. Also, Google already suffers significantly from people threatening patent lawsuits against Linux; they don't want to do anything to encourage the perception of "use Linux and get sued". I can't see any possible rationale under which Google would find it in their best interests to sue Android device vendors over the GPL. And to further add Lennon You can argue that cheap tablets from China are infringing simply because nobody knows better. But what's HTC's excuse? They've clearly decided that there's a benefit in holding back their source code releases, balancing this against the risk of being sued. They know full well what they're doing. If compliance was free they'd ship the source at the same time as they shipped the binaries. Other significant vendors are also fully aware of their obligations but choose to ignore them anyway. So not sure why you have chosen to bring this up to be honest! We have researched laws very very closely and are aware of what we can and cannot do. I suggest taking this issue up with HTC also and other companies too that are being brought daily with no complaints. Sorry to sound a little rude, but morally speaking you would also need to focus the same questions to bigger companies too, wouldnt you agree? We also can release the source code, but choose not too. So i guess this helps with your question.

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610476 17-Apr-2012 12:41
kingjj: Few thoughts on the website: On the contact page it states: "Our staff are not super human and only work between the hours of Monday to Friday 9am to 6pm 6 days a week excluding public holidays". So is it Mon-Fri or 6 days per week? (Mon-Sat?) On the Returns Policy page it states: "If an item is faulty, it will fall under our Warranty Policy as described below and will not be eligible for a refund" than further down it says " if a repair is not possible or feasible, we will arrange a replacement item, if a replacement is not possible we will arrange a credit or refund". So a refund is possible but only at the sellers discretion or other replacement methods fail? Overall the website is clean and tidy, but it does not a once over by a professional for spelling and grammar mistakes (as you've stipulated you are already arranging this). I think here may be some confusion when selling mobile phones, especially as the brands are not known in NZ. Perhaps if you could introduce a buyers guide for mobile phones outlining each NZ network's features, frequencies and possibly including basic information for setting up the phone with each network it might go a long to way convincing the non-techie buyer. Otherwise I forsee a lot of buyers coming to sites such as this because they are incapable of finding out the correct settings for their phones themselves. Best of luck, will follow the site with interest! Sorry missed your comment mate :) Thanks for pointing further things out. Its a work in progress so to speak :) Thanks for commenting though.

LennonNZ

Just A Geek
1582 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 610478 17-Apr-2012 12:43
The Linux Kernel on Android Devices is GPLv2 but a lot of other other stuff is Apache (and other) licencing. I was only talking about the GPLv2 licensed software on the Android (i.e. the kernel) Thus if you are selling/distributing/whatever an Android Phone you MUST do the stuff the GPLV2 licence says which (you have said) you are not. The GPLv2 Licensing goes all the way from the people who make it -> the end user and each part in the chain must Agree to it. It sounds like (and you are) just fobbing it all off. I know many people who have "copyright" on the Linux kernel and even I have contributed stuff to it many years ago so in theory I have the same rights to claim copyright on the kernel. These people have no problems with people using it as long as they follow the very simple GPLv2 "rules" I don't want to have an argument about it all. Follow the GPLv2 Licence and you will be ok.. Don't Follow it and suddenly you may get some nice letters from lawyers.

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610484 17-Apr-2012 12:52
LennonNZ: The Linux Kernel on Android Devices is GPLv2 but a lot of other other stuff is Apache (and other) licencing. I was only talking about the GPLv2 licensed software on the Android (i.e. the kernel) Thus if you are selling/distributing/whatever an Android Phone you MUST do the stuff the GPLV2 licence says which (you have said) you are not. The GPLv2 Licensing goes all the way from the people who make it -> the end user and each part in the chain must Agree to it. It sounds like (and you are) just fobbing it all off. I know many people who have "copyright" on the Linux kernel and even I have contributed stuff to it many years ago so in theory I have the same rights to claim copyright on the kernel. These people have no problems with people using it as long as they follow the very simple GPLv2 "rules" I don't want to have an argument about it all. Follow the GPLv2 Licence and you will be ok.. Don't Follow it and suddenly you may get some nice letters from lawyers. Fair comment, and I totally agree with with some of what you are saying. It just ticks me off though mate when someone trys to stated laws being broken or licences being breached when that person has a website linked to their profile that promotes Jail Breaking Iphones. Yes I am new in this line of business, however learning very quickly in what we can and cannot do. If it is a simple issue then source coding can and will be released with the products. However at this time until i seek further advice from our own lawyers we will choose not to release it. I am not arguing at all, so sorry if it comes across that way. But i posted about our site to see what improvements can be made on the business I am creating and did not think i would end up having to defend my actions surrounding GPL Licences. You have achieved the purpose of your post, I am looking into this further so thank you :)

Klipspringer

1298 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 610486 17-Apr-2012 13:00
LennonNZ: It sounds like (and you are) just fobbing it all off. I know many people who have "copyright" on the Linux kernel and even I have contributed stuff to it many years ago so in theory I have the same rights to claim copyright on the kernel. These people have no problems with people using it as long as they follow the very simple GPLv2 "rules" I don't want to have an argument about it all. Follow the GPLv2 Licence and you will be ok.. Don't Follow it and suddenly you may get some nice letters from lawyers. Give it a break ... The op is asking about some feedback for improvements for the website Offense can never be given, only taken ...

jamway

56 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 610495 17-Apr-2012 13:06
BraaiGuy: LennonNZ: It sounds like (and you are) just fobbing it all off. I know many people who have "copyright" on the Linux kernel and even I have contributed stuff to it many years ago so in theory I have the same rights to claim copyright on the kernel. These people have no problems with people using it as long as they follow the very simple GPLv2 "rules" I don't want to have an argument about it all. Follow the GPLv2 Licence and you will be ok.. Don't Follow it and suddenly you may get some nice letters from lawyers. Give it a break ... The op is asking about some feedback for improvements for the website No its fine, But thank you for posting. I am pretty new and need to learn every possible aspect of the business I am building. So any type of input is good.

1 | 2 | 3