Slashdot Mirror
Google Apps License Forbids Forking, Promotes Google Services
Sockatume writes "If you want to ship a phone with Google's apps on it, you need to license them. A copy of the OEM licensing agreement from 2011 was recently leaked, and Ars Technica provides a summary. Amongst the rules: a company licensing Google Apps can't act in a way that would fragment Android, but must also maintain the platform's open-ness; most of Google's services must be included; Google apps must be defaults, and placed within a couple of clicks of the default home screen. No surprises, but it's interesting to see the details laid out."
Tying apps to phones might be illegal by Sherman Act: using dominance in mobile device OS market as leverage in the device app market.
--- Nothing clever here: move along now...
Wasn't Android derived from Linux?
And isn't Linux GPL?
What's going on here? Why is Google allowed to limit what others can do with GPL code?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Google calls out implanting "any viruses, worms, date bombs, time bombs, or other code that is specifically designed to cause the Google Applications to cease operating" as being banned in approved devices.
It's both interesting and very sad that this has to be spelled out in a license agreement, makes me think that they've run into OEMs purposefully building 'bombs' to keep people buying new phones.
DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
Grow up Google is just as much of a greedy soulless cunt as Microsoft or Apple. Get over it.
You're right, the Apple license to allow me to use iOS and Apple apps on my own phone brand is MUCH more open. At least according to my unicorn lawyer.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
I just wish you could uninstall Google apps...even Microsoft allows you to skinny up its default OS installs nowadays.
"Open"
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
You're right, the Apple license to allow me to use iOS and Apple apps on my own phone brand is MUCH more open. At least according to my unicorn lawyer.
He said HONEST not OPEN
So this is going to make Nokia doing an Android device even more awkward when Microsoft finishes the purchase.
Because no way in hell Microsoft are going to want that.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
You are free to use the Darwin Kernel and make your own GUI.
opensource.apple.com
What about the ability to unlock the bootstrapper? My Motorola phone, which came out while Motorola was owned by Google, doesn't allow me to unlock the bootstrapper. No exploit exists, so no CyanogenMod for me... and Motorola's last OS update was to 4.1.2 over a year ago, and I purchased the phone with that version.
I don't see how you can say there is a requirement to "maintain the platform's open-ness" when the company you own doesn't keep their devices open.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
http://www.jolla.com/ - for example - is one example of a vendor selling a phone that can run android apps - on top of 'normal' linux - without preinstalling the normal google play market. (because they can't - as what they are doing in making the linux side more open means it's not vanilla android anymore)
Why is this news? This has been known for a very, very long time.
Android is Android and Google apps are Google's apps.
I guess folks really are as stupid as they appear.
Tell me what you believe...I'll tell you what you should see.
And AOSP is one heckuvalot more than just a kernel.
I always shop for a phone that is supported by Cyanogenmod for that very reason.
I use Android. I think the Maps app is pretty good. I like it. That's the one I would miss.
Other than that.. nothing. There just aren't any Google apps or services(*) which matter. I think OEMs are over-agonizing on this. Just don't sign the contract, and your phone will be nearly as good as all your competitors in most ways, and better in other ways.
When people say "Android isn't really free, because..." please don't finish your sentence with a list of pretty much worthless (or trivially-replaced) stuff-that-isn't-free. That's almost like complaining "I tried switching my uranium enrichment plant to ReactOS but it wasn't compatible with Stuxnet, so I switched back to Windows."
Except for that Maps thing. But maybe someone else has a mapping (native, not web) app that uses OSM by now. Haven't looked. That'd be hilarious if the list of precious Google apps was zero items long instead of one.
* Services: well ok, of course I still do use Google for searching the web. They are definitely still best (and by a wide margin, it's not even close) whenever I do the blind test. But my computer's maker didn't need any license for that. Any web browser will do. That's my (the user's) problem, not the phone maker's problem.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Agreed... in my case, installing CM is supported for the firmware that the phone had when I bought it.
I hadn't gotten around to installing CM yet, and Motorola sent out a "minor" update, one that didn't change the OS version. While I was typing text on the phone, the update dialog popped up and my thumb was already heading toward the "Update Now" button. It was too late... it immediately rebooted and began installing the update that "fixed" the exploit.
Because of that little number by Motorola (its fairly sneaky update dialog coupled with killing bootstrapper unlock) means I'll probably never buy another Moto phone again, and honestly I've just about had it with Android in general given that quite a few other Android OEMs act the same way or worse (at least Moto uses nearly-stock UI).
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
I refer you to the first sentence of TFA:
> If you want to ship a phone with Google's apps on it, you need to licence them
Alice and George murder Bill. The cops suspect them and interrogate them in separate rooms.
Cop #1: Alice, did you murder Bill?
Alice: Yes.
Cop #2: George, did you murder Bill?
George: No.
Alice and George are both guilty, yet Alice is more honest than George.
Why'd you buy a phone that couldn't be rooted? And why are you blaming Google? I'm sorry if this sounds callous, but seriously, I don't get it. I don't buy iPhones because they are a closed system. I don't buy locked Android phones because they are hard to update. What led you to decide to buy a locked phone when unlocked phones were readily available?
As for the App issue, it's actually extensively rebutted in the comments to the article. Bottom line: Ars Technica clickbait.
Jolla? You know you wanna. :)
That really sucks—sorry!
Google doesn't want people forking Android, though they had no problem forking Java to create it
Rooting and unlocking a bootloader are two completely separate things.
The whole reason to fork a project is because some dickhole in control of the project who refuses to implement your feature/fix/patch. Now Google is effectively saying, "We will decide everything".
Motorola Droid Razr? There are CM releases for it that utilize kexec instead of modifying the bootloader.
Not in the sense you probably mean, no.
The Android kernel is a Linux kernel. That part is true. But, a Linux kernel is far from sufficient for building an Android device or running Android apps.
Porbably slightly off-topic but isn't this the argument RMS used for 'GNU/Linux' instead of 'Linux'?
Captcha: persist
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
My phone is rooted. It's not bootloader unlocked.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Razr HD xt926 with firmware 9.18.79. I haven't looked at the kexec option. If CM works with that, I'll definitely be happy. Thanks for the pointer!
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Somebody mod this person up!
Right. And he pointed out that there's nothing that says you have to license those apps. You can build a perfectly good, workable Android phone that has zero Google apps on them. This agreement has nothing that stops you from doing that.
Google = Apple with that closed stance
Ouch. I don't been to be a downer, because I love competition and consumer choice, especially in the computing market.
But, I gotta say. This "other half" gimmick is about the most idiotic thing I have ever seen. Trying to sell themes, backgrounds, etc., by manufacturing hardware backs with RFID chips? Seriously?
Phone! I'm in a bad mood. "Applying bad mood theme. Done."
Or am I missing something?
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
When did they hire Dan J. Bernstein? Making up stupid licensing policies that prevent his code from being adapted was *his* trademark! We'll know it's him if he decides that all of his application's directories go in "/".
For those who don't know, Dan wrote djbdns, qmail, and daemontools, all of which had good ideas but failed to be generally used because of Dan's funky "you can't publish modified code, only my original code and your patches which the end user must compile themselves" nuttiness.
Or am I missing something?
Yeah, pretty much everything. :)
While the NFC tag is a gimmick, TOH also has pins for the I2C bus, an interupt pin & charging pins.
Like this, you can make TOHs with additional hardware, like keyboards, e-ink displays, aditional sensors, bateries, bigger flashes, gaming buttons, etc.
So basically the first real extensible smartphone. :)
Gees relacks phat boi! Weeve oll mayde spalling misstakes.
I gess you're prefekt? Tossa!
Except that no, you can't on an iOS device. Those things are locked right down. Jailbreaks don't allow running an alternative OS like on an Android device with an unlocked boot loader.
Yeah, whatever, I can never keep the various euphemisms straight, but the point is that you wanted to be able to install your own firmware, and you bought a phone made by a manufacturer that didn't want you to do that, when you could have bought a phone from a manufacturer who was happy to let you do that. Effectively, you rewarded Motorola for screwing you over. My reason for asking is that I honestly don't get why people who want to mod their phones buy phones that the manufacturer doesn't intend to allow you to mod. Even if you can get around it, why bother? If we reward manufacturers who allow us to mod our phones, and carriers that will let us use those phones, the market will punish manufacturers and carriers who don't, to everybody's benefit. It really saddens me to see people shooting themselves in the foot like this, because it's not just your foot you're shooting.
Why'd you buy a phone that couldn't be rooted?
That you stop to interrogate this one user as if he'd violated some law shows just how blinding self-selection becomes... you've forgotten that we don't sign a contract to follow all these tenets you hold unthinkable to ignore. Just because we are slashdotters does not mean we're ALL zealots.
1) I had never purchased from Motorola. I came off one WinMo phone and 2 iPhones. I just wanted a Verizon Android phone and what I saw from reviews said it was a very good model. And it was. Remember, at the time it was completely bootloader unlockable, it shipped with near-stock Android, and it was upgraded from 4.0 to 4.1 within a couple of months.
2) Motorola was bought by Google and most people, including myself, felt that Motorola was going to become more open as a result. Instead the opposite happened.
3) Very few Android OEMs have a hardware advantage over Motorola. I'm not paying twice as much for half the hardware capabilities and poor build quality just so that I can feel safer that I can unlock in the future.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Tying contracts are specifically forbid by anti-trust laws. It only comes into play when one can show a monopoly or near monopoly. Android might have enough market share to qualify, it only needs to be the dominate player.
You can't use our hammers if you also don't use our nails and our boards and buy them all from our web store.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
There's alternatives to Google Maps out there for Android. There are alternate app stores as well. You don't have to deal with Google's mind numbing tracking of your every action but it's not as "convenient" as some people would like.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
You're welcome
This is known from the beginning. Anyone who ever worked on Android is very well aware of this license.
License is very simple: android is free, Google apps and Google services are not.
Saying that this license make android closed system is ridiculous. Look at Amazon and zillion of Chinese mobile makers building their devices on android for free without using Google apps and without connecting them to Google Play.
So you bought a phone because it had a particular security problem which you intended to exploit, and then you're upset because Motorola fixed the security on the phone? Seriously, there's a small number of people who considered that vulnerability a feature, and many more who would consider it a bug. If you want to exploit a bug in your phone's software, never, never, allow an update.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Did you not read that I didn't intend to update? The popup appeared and I hit "Update Now" before I even realized it happened.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
The notice appeared. You hit it with your thumb. Presumably, if you hadn't accepted that update you wouldn't have gotten it.
If you don't intend to update, keep that thumb on a leash. Read and think first.
So, what was Motorola doing wrong? They offered an update that was good for almost all of their clientele. It closed a security hole. Are they supposed to put in a screen asking if you're sure you want the update?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I was typing. The button appeared on top of the character I was already in the act of pressing.
Your solution is that I don't type with my phone. Screw that.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Are they supposed to put in a screen asking if you're sure you want the update?
Yes!
My phone normally asks me if I'm sure I want to reboot. But it doesn't ask when the update will take 5 times as long as a standard reboot, my phone isn't plugged in, and most importantly it is a firmware update and no OEM can be absolutely certain it won't brick or permanently wipe the data on my phone. That makes no sense at all.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Isn't this precisely what Ouya has done? They run their own app store and unless you root it (which is encouraged) you can't use the Google App Store to load apps.
That which is not dead may eternal lie,and in strange aeons even death may die
My Nexus 5 has excellent build quality. Motorola was deliberately locking bootloaders—this was common knowledge four years ago. Verizon is a poor choice of provider, precisely because they have such draconian policies about handsets.
What you're saying is that you want open, but you aren't willing to punish vendors who give you closed. That's your prerogative, but complaining about it here isn't going to change anything. If you want open, that has to be your priority, because it is _very_ hard to get. And yes, you will pay extra for it. It absolutely sucks that this is the case, but it is a fact of life, and the cell phone manufacturers and providers frankly could give a fuck if we don't like it, because the "we" who don't like it isn't voting with our feet.
BTW, to all the nice folks who modded my previous post "flamebait," I guess that's your prerogative, but that really isn't what I'm trying to do here. And it doesn't look like bondsbw thinks I am either, or he would either have flamed me, rather than responding seriously, or ignored me. But whatever. Slashdot moderation, etc.
I considered the Nexus 5 but there were 2 things I wanted that it didn't have: expandable memory and Verizon support. I really didn't care about expandable memory, it was more that it didn't have enough stock. I had been on AT&T for several years and I was fed up with their service and many of my friends in my area praised Verizon's, so I was set on switching for months. (Unfortunately the joke's on me, my house is in pretty much the only bad spot in our city.)
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
do a factory reset, it will revert to original ROM, without the update...
The N editions had Media Player removed. [source].
Look it up before you write bullshit again