[gguruusa]

Originally Posted by OregonLAN

FONT=Times New Roman]When it comes to Microsoft branding their software, how can that not be acceptable? After all, they created the software. Tens of thousands of man hours went into the development of the software used on the phone. Did you write Windows Mobile? Most of what’s done here is deleting, replace and modifying parts of the existing OS. If you physically replaced the OS with your own creation, I would have no room to comment and this argument would be moot.[/FONT]

Exactly. What most people do here is closer to OEM branding than it is manufacturing (kinda like Sprint putting their name on HTC's phone - except Sprint paid for the right).

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][COLOR=lightblue]While I have never physically hacked/cracked and application, I do know what’s involved. First off, you can never decompile an application back to its original state. Once the application has been compiled into system code (ASM), it can only be decompiled so far.

Wrong.

While I respect the individual’s ability to hack the program, I still find it distasteful to include a visual splash screen or modify the program to give credit to the individual responsible for hacking it. Furthermore, I find it more distasteful for the groups responsible for distribution to include their own .nfo files within the project having really done nothing but downloading it from a FTP, Torrent or WEB site.

That's much less distasteful than actually modifying the programs. You want to say you found program xyz and here it is, more power to you. You want to remove my trademarks and substitute your own...well...that's why the legal profession does so well. Rom building, however, is fairly different. In rom building, there isn't any confusion over who made the OS or really even the apps (unless you have a NFSfan rom). The artistry of the chef is more about what and how than anything else. If you don't like their artwork, feel free to make your own rom with your own artwork - it isn't hard.