Slashdot Mirror


Google Demands Microsoft Pull YouTube App For WP8

First time accepted submitter exomondo writes "Google has given Microsoft until May 22nd to pull their Windows Phone 8 YouTube app from the marketplace and disable it on customer devices. It not only includes a built-in ad blocker but also allows users to download videos and doesn't impose device-specific streaming restrictions outlined in the YouTube Terms Of Service. A Microsoft spokesperson said in part: 'YouTube is consistently one of the top apps downloaded by smartphone users on all platforms, but Google has refused to work with us to develop an app on par with other platforms. Since we updated the YouTube app to ensure our mutual customers a similar YouTube experience, ratings and feedback have been overwhelmingly positive. We'd be more than happy to include advertising but need Google to provide us access to the necessary APIs. In light of Larry Page's comments today calling for more interoperability and less negativity, we look forward to solving this matter together for our mutual customers.'"

41 of 716 comments (clear)

  1. I can't wait to see this battle by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I predict Microsoft will lose, and lose hard.

    They don't have an inherent right to access youtube. It's not in the constitution.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      MS:Your Honor, we created the App in good faith using the API's available, since those API's do not allow us to add the functions Google is requesting we can not add those features until they make available API's capable of doing so. We are happy to add those features as soon as the API is available we would also willingly remove the app if Google provided a feature complete replacement.
      Judge: Why aren't the required API's available?
      Google: Ummmm....
      Judge: Case dismissed

    2. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by dingen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The point is that Microsofts application isn't using publicly available API's, they are abusing YouTube and violating their terms. Just because Google doesn't provide API's to allow you to make something that meets their conditions doesn't mean you may violate those conditions. It simply means Google doesn't want to present YouTube through anything but their own applications.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    3. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google: our terms of service clearly state that storing downloads for any other purpose than buffering is not permitted.
      Judge: (to MS) So you ignored the terms of service in building your application?
      MS: Well, yes, but we just wanted a good user experience
      Judge: And my grand-daughter wants a pony. I find you in violation of the TOS, your app must be pulled until you can show it complies.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    4. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Judge: And my grand-daughter wants a pony. I find you in violation of the TOS, your app must be pulled until you can show it complies.

      You forgot to add, "...and may God have mercy on your souls."

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Normally I'd agree, but in this case it really seems like Microsoft is trying to meet the needs of their customers and Google is not cooperating with them in an attempt to squeeze them out of market share. I'm all for sticking it to M$, but when it hurts the consumer ultimately that really makes Google no better than they are.

    6. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That might fly for the advertising, but including a download functionality requires a deliberate effort - Microsoft is willfully including a tool with no functionality except to facilitate in the violation of Google's license agreement, and thus copyright. If this ever turns into a court case, MS would probably lose - but they could still drag it on long enough to cost both sides a few million dollars in legal fees, and get a lot of good press if they spin it right.

    7. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by 7x7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't forget, MS gets somewhere between $5 and $8 for every Android device sold due to patent licensing. There is nothing accidental going on here from either side.

    8. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by ilsaloving · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When this is exactly what Microsoft has been doing to everyone else for the past 20 years? Yes, I do fail to see this as a problem.

      Karma's a bitch.

    9. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by stiggle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their customers can use the YouTube website - same as everyone else who doesn't have a pre-built app installed or for their platform. Just because you can hack YouTube's website and write a wrapper around your hacks to provide the content doesn't mean its legit.

      Isn't accessing web content through means other than the published API or intended URL a hacking offense with prison time after conviction?

    10. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Informative

      Karma's a bitch.

      Karma also has no standing with the courts.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    11. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by dingen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which might be a valid point if they didn't provide an application to access YouTube for their biggest rival: iOS. But they do, so apparently Google has no problem providing an application for a competing platform when there are a lot of people using that platform. I think the main reason Google doesn't make a YT-app for WP (or BlackberryOS for that matter) is because the market share is in the single digits and therefore it isn't worth the hassle.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    12. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by elashish14 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nudge, nudge - you already can.

      https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    13. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Then why did they add the feature to download videos? That was a conscious choice to violate the terms and conditions.

    14. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They are using the API, the API doesn't provide ads. Google say's they won't make an app. So Microsoft uses the API to make one. So Google comes back and says that apps built using their API don't meet the required terms of service.

    15. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pretty sure the requirement to follow the ToS comes before any obligation on the part of Google to provide an API. "Having APIs available" isnt an inherent right, either.

    16. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The API comes with terms of service. Saying it's OK to ignore them is like saying A DDOS attack is perfectly fine since it too uses the API.
      I think what Microsoft done is no less then an exploit. And unlike some script kiddie, this is for money.

    17. Re:I can't wait to see this battle by GodInHell · · Score: 4, Informative

      Breach of contract, copyright infringement, trademark infringement, unauthorized access to a computer system and circumventing security systems under the DMCA, shall I go on?

    18. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by DuckDodgers · · Score: 4, Informative

      In this particular case, Microsoft isn't asking Google to develop the application, just to give Microsoft access to the APIs so that Microsoft can develop the application. Google is not doing that, even though they've given Apple access to the same APIs. So taken by itself, Microsoft is in the right and Google is in the wrong.

      But the rumor is that Google is doing this as a "fuck you" to Microsoft because Microsoft has filed patent lawsuits against most of Google's Android partners and is running the "Scroogled" anti-Google publicity campaign. This is just a way for Google to fight back.

    19. Re: I can't wait to see this battle by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Uh, no. An API is not subject to copyright, and so you can't sue someone for writing code to an API or reimplementing that API. That has absolutely nothing to do with whether you can use a specific service in a specific way. Google could not stop someone else implementing the YouTube APIs on a different media hosting site.

      I think Microsoft has been quite clever here. They're now in the situations where they're giving their customers something that they want, and Google is telling them that they can't. They can't really lose: if they can keep offering the app in the same format, then they can provide a better experience than other platforms. If they can't, then they have some good material for their next round of anti-Google adverts.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. Sounds familiar... by Controlio · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow. So Microsoft is mad because someone else won't give them details on a closed API?

    What a difference a decade makes. How's it feel, Microsoft?

  3. Wait... by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Funny

    So Microsoft appears to have made the perfect youtube client? Sonofabitch. When I had limited mobile data, I dreamed for a simple youtube client that could cache several videos for off-line or repeated watching. Of course, Apple won't build a client like - they would rather you not even know youtube existed so you would just buy iTunes everything.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Wait... by amaurea · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well said!

      This is similar to making a DVD player without region locks - it makes the player much more useful for its actual users, but pisses off the movie distributers because they want to control how the DVDs are used. In this case, Microsoft has created a youtube player that is better for the user in two important ways (no ads, which the user doesn't want to see, and the ability to store the video for later). This is something I would have expected the open source world to provide; I'm amazed to see a company like Microsoft do it. But I'm sure the programmers responsible for making this user-friendly (in the right sense of the word, not the "ooh shiny" sense) program will soon be punished for his obstinacy.

      The ability to block advertisements and download movies is provided by web browser addons, so people championing Google in its fight against this windows phone program would also have to come out against those addons. I hope that isn't as prevalent a view here as it seems from most of the comments so far.

    2. Re:Wait... by rroman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, it is similar but not the same. When you buy dvd, you own it and should be able to do anything with it, because you paid for it. When it comes to youtube, you didn't pay anything, but the bandwidth and the servers Google uses aren't for free. They need to be able to generate revenue somehow.

      Unfortunately, the ads on youtube are so annoying and so disturbing, I had to install adblock and I'm not very happy about it. I feel like I should pay Google somehow back for using youtube, but when advertisement banner pops up over subtitles and I'm not able to read them, or 15 seconds intro delays me from watching 1 minute video I can not withstand it anymore.

    3. Re:Wait... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Funny

      or 15 seconds intro delays me from watching 1 minute video

      ha, I've got you beat - I got a 1:30 ad in front of an 0:45 video!

      wait, no, I lost.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. Hypocrites by trimpnick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft strongarms phone manufacturers on unknown patent claims that android supposedly infringes but when they infringe ToS from Google and are told to change or remove the app, they say it's just Google not wanting to play ball. Good job Microsoft...

  5. Pot, meet Kettle by ZarathustraDK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If only they'd apply the same open-minded fervor to stuff like .docx, directx and a million other things under their wings...

    --
    If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
  6. Re:Feels good by Vanderhoth · · Score: 4, Funny

    So all 6 WM8 customers are happy. Good on them.

  7. Doesn't Google get it? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't Google get it? Microsoft is ABOVE all rules and standards.

    What a joke. If Google wasn't living up to a Microsoft EULA the whining from Redmond would be unbearable where I am at from Indiana.

    While there is cross-corporation wank going on here it does seem that Microsoft arrogance is coming out here again.

  8. Re:Hey, Google - FUCK YOU by auLucifer · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not googles decision to block the content, it's the content owners. Google has been taken to court by big media and have requirements they must meet to allow content owners to restrict access. As far as I remember if google are to continue providing video with big media they have to actively stop clients that download music. This isn't google trying to screw you, it's **AA...

    --
    If I was witty I'd put something funny here but, as it stands, I am not and have just wasted seconds of your life
  9. Re:Anything to get more customers by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your implication is that Google is being evil because they're preventing Microsoft from taking market share from Google by using Google's services. It's hard to imagine a more one-sided and asinine analysis.

    I think Microsoft are just upset they're screwgled because nobody wants Windows 8 or Windows phones and everyone knows it.

  10. Re:Anything to get more customers by FireFury03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If this it what will take Microsoft to get more traction in the mobile market, so be it.

    A Youtube client that blocks ads and allows downloads, what else could we ask for??

    Who's being evil now???

    Evilness doesn't really come into it... Microsoft has written software that uses a third party service in a way that that third party's T&Cs disallow. You're free to avoid services on the grounds that you don't like their T&Cs, but you don't get to just ignore the T&Cs, especially when you're operating commercially.

  11. Re:Feels good by qbast · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or redirects all WM8 clients to goat porn.

  12. Re:Anything to get more customers by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your implication is that Google is being evil because they're preventing Microsoft from taking market share from Google by using Google's services. It's hard to imagine a more one-sided and asinine analysis.

    Well, wait a minute now. If it was some bunch of open source geeks making an app that download's YouTube videos and strips the advertisements, and Google came down as hard, I think we'd hear squeals of outrage and demands for Google not to be "evil".

    But because it's Microsoft, fuck them, right?

    Now, I can understand this sentiment completely, but let's not pretend that this same "one-sided and asinine analysis" has not been used by everybody on every side of these issues.

    At the bottom, this is why having a company control the ecosystem for any platform is a very bad idea. Because we want little companies trying to make things more useful by breaking big companies' models. That's how progress works. The notion that we have to create some protected reserve where the biggest companies can enjoy guaranteed success forever without having to face any competition is really what's asinine.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  13. Re:Anything to get more customers by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, wait a minute now. If it was some bunch of open source geeks making an app that download's YouTube videos and strips the advertisements, and Google came down as hard, I think we'd hear squeals of outrage and demands for Google not to be "evil".

    But because it's Microsoft, fuck them, right?

    The nature of the difference is in the purpose or intent of the work, which in this case is to permit violation of Google's AUP for Microsoft's profit (no one will take them seriously without Youtube access.) Specifically, Microsoft has willfully taken these actions for financial gain.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  14. Anyone else here noticed? by JustNiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of the posts here are making arguments and suggesting actions that were exactly the same as the ones that generated loud complaints on Slashdot when it was about Microsoft using proprietary crap to lock out Linux/Open Source.

    I don't like Microsoft at all, but supporting Google acting more like them is no answer either.

    1. Re:Anyone else here noticed? by Luthair · · Score: 4, Informative

      Technically Youtube has a mobile website which Windows Phone users already had access to so it isn't really similar at all.

  15. Where are Carmen Ortiz's threats of incarceration? by schwit1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft is violating Google's terms of service, which according to the DOJ is a felony covered under the CFAA.

    If it was applicable to Aaron Swartz ...

  16. Re:Anything to get more customers by jader3rd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who's being evil now???

    The company that's providing a way to view ad supported content, ad free, is being evil.

  17. Re:Load of idiots by hjf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, but slashdotters don't understand one simple thing:

    COMPANIES ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS.

    They blame MS for being/having been evil, sleazy, monopolistic and any other adjective they can throw at them. Google is "good" because they give us free stuff. And that free stuff is also good. "Boohoo microsoft was once mean to me and i hate them. The googly is my BFF 3".

    They don't see that google is as monopolistic as they come. Buying everyone. And anyone they can't buy, they compete and put out of business. They own search, video distribution (in a sleazy way that pays fractions of a cent to "authors"), mobile communications, location, maps, google street view. They can (and do) go through your email. There's google voice so they can (and they do) listen to your phone. And a million things more.
    But Google will, sooner or later, become "evil". Of course, a company can't be "evil". A company just "is". Larry/Sergei (assuming they're the "gooddoers") won't be at the top forever, and the top will, someday, change. The new management will see the kind of stuff they're sitting on. Half the planet's names, locations, browsing habits, call logs, emails, EVERYTHING you can ever dream of. How do we know they won't sell it to Syria, Russia or Thailand? For all we know, they give it up for free to the US government.

    You can be friends with Joe Mechanic, the guy that's been fixing your car for the past 20 years, and you know he's honest and he's never failed you. Joe Mechanic is a person. Google is not. Microsoft is not. Any "BRAND" is NOT your friend.

    So, in short. Companies aren't people. They can't be your friends. When you deal with a company, you do it in their own terms. Use them. Abuse them as much as you can, and move on to the next one. If someone else comes up with a better deal, go with them and don't look back. Don't let "20 years of good service" get in the way. It wouldn't matter to them (google pulls the plug in any services they want, whenever they want to). This is not being evil. This is just doing business. Just like when you switch brands in the supermarket.

  18. Re:Feels good by Lithdren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    http://xkcd.com/1102/

    Yup...fastest growing...