Google Serves a Cease-and-Desist On Android Modder

Several readers sent in word that Google has served a Cease and Desist order to Cyanogen, one of the most prolific Android modders: his CyanogenMod is enjoyed by 30,000 users. The move is puzzling. Gizmodo wonders what Google's game is, and Lauren Weinstein calls the move "not of the high 'Googley' caliber" that one would expect of the company.

Comments

License missing

[sopssa]

Google Maps, Google Talk and Gmail and so on require a license to distribute them. Cyanogen doesn't have one. Google C&D's because of that. Case closed.

Re:License missing

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Google is clearly within their rights to C&D over those applications. The curious question, though, is "why would they do so?". Cyanogen is distributed for phones that shipped with those apps anyway(so it isn't as though there is any huge pile of licensing revenue on the table here), and copyrights, unlike trademarks, don't have to be defended unless you want to.

There must be some reason why Google would risk upsetting a group made up, more or less, of self-selected enthusiasts of Android and its continued development, in exchange for no obvious money. Is Google confident enough in the value of its apps that it sees those Google specific apps as a future distinguishing feature for Android phones, one that OEMs will pay good money for? Are potential telco partners pissed that Cyanogen is something eminently worth rooting your handset for?

The existence of their legal right is uncontroversial; but I find their potential motives a bit baffling.

Re:License missing

[BlueBlade]

Like the parent said, that only applies to trademarks and not to copyright.

Re:License missing

[ajs]

It's pretty clear that Google goes way out of its way to provide APIs and guidance on using its stuff as a third party, so I suspect that there's specifics in this C&D that aren't just "you used our service." Specifically, if they were re-packaging Google's logos or the like, then there's real copyright concerns there.

Re:License missing

[Chelloveck]

Like the parent said, that only applies to trademarks and not to copyright.

You mean trademarks like Gmail(tm) and the Google(tm) logo? Which are almost certainly being distributed as part of those apps?

Re:License missing

[cptdondo]

I can't RTFM right now - slashdotted - but the TOS for using Google Maps for example is very explicit and very limited. (You can only use Google Maps from within browser, and you cannot cache the images.) Google doesn't necessarily own the data; they have licensing agreements with data providers. So Google has to uphold its agreement with the data providers.

While I personally have abandonded using Google Maps for my project because of the license - something I find frustrating and disappointing - it is, after all, the agreeement Google must live by and enforce.

Le Shocque!

[Rydia]

Google a giant company, not your BFF.

Film at 11.

Re:Le Shocque!

[interval1066]

I think google needs to review its own corporate philosophy again. The "Ten things we know to be true" page apparently is just a sort-of loose guide line and not a hard list of rules:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/tenthings.html/
Rules 1, 4 & 6 especially appear to be mere lip-service for us puny consumers to follow, not really applicable to google. I also again reiterate my belief, as mistaken it may be, that in a lot of these cases its possible that the retained corporate lawyer stable is justifying its existence by exercising corporate rights that may actually not be in the best interest of the corp.

What is confusing?

[fermion]

If Cyanogen is "passing around Google's closed-source apps like Google Maps, Google Talk and Gmail", then google has every right, even a responsibility, to stop it. It does not matter that it only runs on google authorized hardware, Cyanogen has not been given the right to distribute the software. What happens if Cyanogen, or some other person, decided to modify the Talk so that all numbers dialed were reported to third party advertisers? Not only would google lose their share of the advertising dollars, but I am sure most would hold google liable. Same thing if maps intentionally lead people to drive off a cliff. Right holders have a obligation to control distribution, and I don't trust those who don't control distribution.

Leaving this issue aside, it does seem that Android is not the open savior that every thought it might be. Given that for a cell phone to work it must have towers, and that the towers are controlled by private enterprise in search of profit, and that large firms tend to sue each other as part of the competitive process, any completely open phone is unlikely to thrive in the marketplace. If google were no a commodity vendor, then I would say that an open phone might work. But given they want tens of millions of customers, there is going to be a compromise of open software and control.

Simplish solution

[IMarvinTPA]

Stop distributing those apps in the ROM!
Add an app to retrieve them from the original (backup) version of the phone.

SafeTex: Copying copyrighted textures from original Quake to custom commercial levels without incident. IE Don't distribute what's already there.

IMarv

say what?

[macbeth66]

"not of the high Googley' caliber"

Does anyone really believe that Google is the "do no evil" company that it used to be, pre-IPO? It has become just as suspect as any big company. The bigger problem is that people don't even see Google for what it is. It is like MS all over again.

OK. Just my $.02 worth, I guess

Re:say what?

[MozeeToby]

They try, they don't always succeed, sometimes they fail miserably, but they do try. Which is better than 99% of the companies out there.

Re:Capitalism means crisis

[PhreakOfTime]

Neither do fiat currencies. They all end up crumbling in exactly the same way.

Did your history book also mention that?

So, since ALL systems of humanity eventually fail, wouldnt it be more important to look at the quality of life that exists under these systems for the brief periods that they exist?

Proves the point

[Qubit]

Google is sending a C&D because someone is distributing closed-source Google apps (like GMail, Google Maps, etc...) without a license.

This is why I want a phone that runs only Free Software in the base install. If I know that the base functionality is open and free, that means I can take that base set of software and modify it and distribute it to other people without worry of getting a C&D letter like this one.

Free Software licenses are a great way to CYA. Sure, they do a number of other things for you as well, and they aren't always the best at dealing with software patents, but they CYA a lot more than most proprietary licenses I've seen.

Heres my 2 cents

[Anonymous Coward]

Cyanogen has been modding for awhile without any trouble from Google. Recently he released a rom that was basically android 1.6 in full, including the new improved version of android market, way before the rest of android users will get it. I think thats what Google is mostly bent out of shape about, hopefully they can reach some sort of peaceful agreement that allows cyanogen to keep modding. His roms are great and make the g1 a powerful device.

Re:Do no evil?

[ceoyoyo]

Wrong end. When you're talking about something that needs to use a network to be useful, you've got to start at the network. The device is the LEAST important part. As long as the phone company gets to say what does or does not run on their network the devices will do what they need to meet those requirements.

It's kind of funny actually - Apple releases a closed phone but doesn't sick the lawyers on any of the hackers. Google releases an "open" phone but does sick the lawyers on the hackers.

Lawyers against dev community == bad idea

[dwight_hubbard]

Bottom line most developers are going to care less about why google is sending lawyers after their community than the fact that they may have to deal with that crap if they develop for Android. Since there are groups producing similar mods to Windows Mobile firmwre, this Cease and Desist has the potential to make the open source mod community around android less vibrant than the community around the Microsoft's closed source OS. Which is a real shame.

If Google doesn't do some rapid damage control they're liable to find their development community moving over to other Open Source phone OSes that don't send lawyers after their development community.

Are they actually modified?

[JSBiff]

Seems to me that the most reasonable compromise, for all involved, is for Google to allow redistribution without modification of their closed source software. Yes, Google has the legal right to make cyanogen stop distributing, but how does that benefit Google? Lots of 'proprietary' software are distributed as .zip or .exe files which the license allows you to make verbatim copies of. This is slightly different, because the software is incorporated as part of a ROM image, but as long as the software inside the ROM image isn't modified, Google should just let him distribute. He's not hurting them in any real way.

Re:GPL Violation?

[daskinil]

Umm, Linux is the same way, developers have the freedom to write a closed source app for it. Which is good. Otherwise I wouldn't have matlab on linux. Which is an industry standard for many engineering applications. So this is really not too news worthy, Google has closed source apps and open source apps. Just because a company has some OSS apps, doesn't mean they can't defend the rest of their apps.

A few details

[rickb928]

From TMONews:

"20:03] google just cease and desisted me
[20:15] cyanogenmod is probably going to be dead
[20:16] i'm opening a dialogue with them
[20:20] no they are talking specifically about the closed-source google apps
[20:20] and how i am not licensed to distribute them
[20:20] my argument is that i only develop for google-experience devices which are already licensed for these apps
[20:20] so we'll see what they say
[20:20] maybe we can work something out
[20:24] maps, market, talk, gmail, youtube"20:03] google just cease and desisted me
[20:15] cyanogenmod is probably going to be dead
[20:16] i'm opening a dialogue with them
[20:20] no they are talking specifically about the closed-source google apps
[20:20] and how i am not licensed to distribute them
[20:20] my argument is that i only develop for google-experience devices which are already licensed for these apps
[20:20] so we'll see what they say
[20:20] maybe we can work something out
[20:24] maps, market, talk, gmail, youtube"

Probably he will have to drop those apps. This will make loading Cyanogen a little more difficult. Next, will Google prevent him from using those apps to test his distro, or will they make it impossible to run them under his ROMs?

Somehow, this is beginning to look like the end of Google the Nice. The beginning of the open Google the Evil.

Kinda sad, but now that Android is important, the game changes.

Re:Capitalism means crisis

[nedlohs]

You mean like China?

Solution

[geirt]

Google, please hire Cyanogen. He is clever!

This is a serious problem

[hidden]

At least on the Rogers Dream (Canadian version of the G1) Cyanogen and similar are the ONLY way to run the phone well..

With the stock firmware timestamps are broken (as in text messages showing up in the wrong time zone, making the sorting of a conversation all wrong) and Performance is miserable.
By contrast Cyanogenmod more than solves these problems, transforming it from a badly flawed phone that makes Android look really BAD, to an excellent that makes android look great.
I'm not exaggerating when I say that, given what a poor job rogers has done resolving serious bugs like the timestamp one, I would never buy another android phone from Rogers, if I were going to be stuck using the stock firmware. However, as long as the modder community remains in play, I am a happy user who would be happy to buy a new device that came out.

I guess my point is, if google starts to shutdown the modders, they really are actually pushing customers (well, at least one) away.

Re:Do no evil?

[manekineko2]

What's even more funny is that Microsoft, a company hardly synonymous with openness, has long tolerated ROM modders doing the exact same thing on Windows Mobile. Heck, it's far more extreme, as ROM modders on Windows Mobile have been building ROMs off of unreleased versions of WinMo 6.5.1 and including things like Microsoft Office for WinMo in its entirety, and Microsoft hasn't complained.

Meanwhile, the self-annointed Do-No-Evil Google with its open Android system is releasing the lawyers.

When both Apple and Microsoft are more open than you are, even only about a certain aspect of your product, that's not a good sign. It's sad, but Windows Mobile is really the most open mainstream mobile OS out there these days.

It's because of the Market app

[Orange Crush]

His latest ROM has the new market app which isn't only closed-source, but it's unreleased closed source. Google doesn't want their stuff going into the wild until they say so.