In order to send GlassOS to a calc, the OS must be signed with a signing key that was calculated and published to various places. With the availability of the keys came opposition by TI.

I don't distribute GlassOS as a signed 8xu nor do I provide detailed info at signing. What do everyone here think about the legalities and morals here? Would I be able to distribute a signed 8xu? Should I put out info on signing the OS properly? Should I point to where the keys are? (They are publicly available, but again, I don't want to get onto the bad end of TI).

Remember, this isn't asking would it be nice for end users, this is whether or not it would not warrant any complaints.

Well, I agree with your thinking.

However, I think that perhaps you should point to a tutorial on signing an os. If that will get you on the bad side of TI, then don't do it! No reason to open a can of worms if you don't have to.

I'm no lawyer, but if there was any official statement / notorized contract published by TI, read it like a hawk - they can do everything they said they would do in the contract. If there wasn't, then there's absolutely nothing they can do to you.

Uh, what about the DMCA notices that TI sent?

You have lots of options, but BrandonW is probably the go-to guy on this. Pester him on IRC and report back here so we know what he says about it.

There's nothing wrong with publishing the signing keys (I went toe-to-toe with TI on this legally and won, so there's precedence for this thinking).

There's also nothing wrong with distributing your own OS signed with their key. It's a necessary step to running privileged code on the device.

The only thing that's not okay is releasing a signed, modified version of TI's OS.

Sign your 8XU and release it. And, for 84+/SE owners running boot code 1.03 or higher, link them to a safe patch for removing the 2048-bit RSA check. If there's a problem with the patch itself, let the patch owner deal with it.

My own patch (http://brandonw.net/calcstuff/epicfail.zip if memory serves) zeroes out some bytes from TI's boot code 1.03, and checks the MD5 hash against a known good table before the patching -- so it's safe (it'll only ever patch boot code 1.03 for the 84+ and 84+SE), includes no TI copyrighted code, and is absolutely necessary for running your own code on the device.