Database Users

Google hits Cyanogen with cease-and-desist letter

http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/24/google-hits-android-rom-modder-with-a-cease-and-desist-letter/
So this is interesting: apparently Google's hit the developer of the Cyanogen modded Android ROM with a cease-and-desist letter, asking him to stop distributing the closed-source Google apps like Gmail, Maps, and YouTube. What's a little strange is that Cyanogen is targeted at "Google Experience" devices like the G1 and myTouch, so it's not like Google is really protecting anything here -- leading us to wonder if they're just using the copyright argument to shut down a popular mod that's tempted over 30,000 users into rooting their phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sure am dissapointed in google right now.

Is Google turning into Microsoft? WTF! Cyanogen has done nothing but help make a lot of people into Android fanatics. What happened to the idea behind open source? I for one am behind Cyanogen 100%, in any way I can help.

donepate said:
What happened to the idea behind open source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the problem is that he is distributing closed source applications. ie. you tube, gmail etc.
if you read the story here... http://androidandme.com/2009/09/hacks/cyanogenmod-in-trouble/
it makes more sense.
[20:20] <cyanogen> no they are talking specifically about the closed-source google apps
[20:20] <cyanogen> and how i am not licensed to distribute them
[20:20] <cyanogen> my argument is that i only develop for google-experience devices which are already licensed for these apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Is is just me or is http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ down?

And now his site is down
I hope he continues modding - he can always do it without the close source apps and leave it to us to acquire them on our own.

his site isn't down Ive been on it today. I think it's picking up publicity traffic now so its a bit slow. Hopes this gets sorted out.
Good for him. (the publicity traffic that is)

driskl said:
his site isn't down Ive been on it today. I think it's picking up publicity traffic now so its a bit slow. Hopes this gets sorted out.
Good for him. (the publicity traffic that is)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure enough, I can access it again.

All respect and support to Cyanogen.
If the issue is really about those proprietory apps, then I'd just remove them, and keep going!
Big props @Cyan

I was on his irc channel last night, and he was apparently already talking to people about substituting for open source apps....
Let`s hope so!!

I just downloaded Save Cyanogen from the market and signed a petition.

I'd just assume he replace the closed source apps with Open ones and drop Gmail all together, I don't have any much use or trust them anyway.
Go go gadget hotmail calendering, contacts

Stop knocking him and employe him!
Come on Google make use of the talents of some of these developers, personally I find his work more stable than my Vodafone rom

Official Google statement
Code:
http://bit.ly/1YFWlA

anyone know where I can download cyanogen?
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/downloads/stable-rom says not found.
never mind... found it with google

I just don't understand the main reason that google is going after cyanogen for. Currently right now there are the HTC devices and Google branded devices that can run this software. So while cyanogen himself don't have the license to distribute the software it is being installed on devices that would have the software on it anyway. I would also argue if this is the problem for Google they should provide a way for end users to download these needed applications directly without needing to go back to a main rom. Is the contacts sync which syncs to google proprietary? That would be something that really can't being taken out of the OS i don't think. I just believe that Google is being unreasonable and at the same time shooting themselves in the foot with this action.

ive read in a couple of places that this is the end of android. Thats the dumbest thing ive ever read. And ive read a lot of really dumb stuff

DMaverick50 said:
ive read in a couple of places that this is the end of android. Thats the dumbest thing ive ever read. And ive read a lot of really dumb stuff
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is dumb, its not great, but hardly the end. Just means its pushed underground, which doesn't help the devs, users or Google

Of course it's not the end of Android, but it surely will have a huge impact on the platform. Google just killed a great chunk of community and things will never be the same again.

It's probably Google's way of seeing what would happen if they pushed. Kind of a "test the waters" thing. Sad to see it go this way. I had high hopes for Android but all that glitters......

heres from the dream forum.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=4615831#post4615831

what other choice does google give us?

I bought a g1 last year. I rooted my phone. I fell in love with android and the great community behind it. I am an avid cyanogen mod user.
Google basically ripped out the great fun, learning experimence, and day to day usage i now have in android.
I know how this community feels about 'warez'. I know how this community feels about cyanogen and his contribution to not only us but an 'open source' environment to cell phones.
Well basically what i am getting to is that cyanogen may be legally wrong but what if a developer were to release roms behind closed doors? To torrents and newsgroups and not officially have a face behind said rom. If a developer were to do that, would xda support threads pretaining to that rom? Would all of us still download and love a rom like we do now? Or am i just wrong for getting to that?
If this thread is deleted i understand, but to me i will abandon android if it fails to prosper by the community like true open source software is intended.

Give it time, there are work arounds for ROM makers. Google distributes these applications freely, which means all ROM developers have to do is remove those apps from the ROMs, and give you an application which installs them.
The Android scene is not dead. This sucks, but we will get over it, even without Google's help.

*edit, gary beat me to it..this is in re: to the original post
your not reading before you type...
Google is pissed about him including certain components that were not official yet or closed source. We get over that, and we are back in business. Everyone is way over-reacting, just wait...they will get it figured out. He just cant legally be quite so cutting-edge anymore

I've hard talks of a script that will automatically DL the apps that aren't allowed, I hope that happens soon .

I understand work arounds and what not but do i not have the legal right to use googles closed source apps now that i bought my g1? It is like buying a new car from ford and then ford telling manufacturers of aftermarket products (like air filters or tires) they cant sell them because ford owns the patent to the left head light circuit and it in some legal sense interfers.
A new set of tires on my car is just as damn harmful as using a cyanogen made rom on my phone. I own the hardware, i should be able to do with it as i see fit. Cyanogen doesnt make his roms available to those who dont already own an android licensed product and doesnt do his work for profit that google doesnt see.
They have a legal right yes, but why excersize that legal right when only those who support you already (and if you download cm roms you will more then likely be a future supporter) will end up with the crap end of the stick.
All the crap recently with apple and google voice i have thought to myself that apple will be getting what they deserve by sure to come fines from the fcc. Now google punches us all in the stomache for supporting them and their alledged open source cause. None of us here, including cyanogen, did any actual wrong. If it plays out how it is apparent they want it, everyone loses.

~~Tito~~ said:
I've hard talks of a script that will automatically DL the apps that aren't allowed, I hope that happens soon .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
our could we just not back up and put theme proper place in the update zips?

rondey- said:
I understand work arounds and what not but do i not have the legal right to use googles closed source apps now that i bought my g1? It is like buying a new car from ford and then ford telling manufacturers of aftermarket products (like air filters or tires) they cant sell them because ford owns the patent to the left head light circuit and it in some legal sense interfers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your analogy is flawed because software cannot be treated the same as tangible items. Anyway, the issue at hand is not your license to use Google's closed-source apps, it is the unauthorized distribution of these apps by "ROM" cooks.

It's more than just a few apps that are closed source, though; many of the fundamental pieces that allow the phones to function are proprietary, such as sync, the LED control, the radio control... Take it all out and you have a phone that can't phone.

danguyf said:
It's more than just a few apps that are closed source, though; many of the fundamental pieces that allow the phones to function are proprietary, such as sync, the LED control, the radio control... Take it all out and you have a phone that can't phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You really need to listen to the previous post. Anything that is required for our phones to run is not at question. Mod and distribute away. Led control , radio control, is not at question.
"That’s why we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube, Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are Google’s way of benefiting from Android in the same way that any other developer can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market, and others are pre-installed on some phones through business deals. Either way, these apps aren’t open source, and that’s why they aren’t included in the Android source code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us just like it would any other business, even if it’s done with the best of intentions."
Its the apps that are in question, not the underlying drivers, api's, libraries. So please and anyone else let's not overreact. Lets try to each help find a way to make this a non issue.

Johnny Blaze said:
You really need to listen to the previous post. Anything that is required for our phones to run is not at question. Mod and distribute away. Led control , radio control, is not at question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, LED, radio, SPL... that's all HTC's property. Even the leaked NBH files that allowed this scene to flourish solely belong to HTC.
So although Google's decision does not affect them, they still fall under the same category of "oh crap...".

This is bad news. The phone is essentially useless without the Gmail app (for sign-in on initial boot as well as contact sync) and Android Market (for downloading any apps). Then take Google Maps out of the picture, and may as well throw the phone out and get an iPhone. At a minimum, this means the days of custom ROMs are over.

RueTheDay said:
This is bad news. The phone is essentially useless without the Gmail app (for sign-in on initial boot as well as contact sync) and Android Market (for downloading any apps). Then take Google Maps out of the picture, and may as well throw the phone out and get an iPhone. At a minimum, this means the days of custom ROMs are over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is actually not true at all. The Gmail app is something that is currently being worked on. Google maps isn't that great (but it's available in the market) Like it's been said, give it time. This is just a hiccup that we'll all get over. Soon.

RueTheDay said:
This is bad news. The phone is essentially useless without the Gmail app (for sign-in on initial boot as well as contact sync) and Android Market (for downloading any apps). Then take Google Maps out of the picture, and may as well throw the phone out and get an iPhone. At a minimum, this means the days of custom ROMs are over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your hyperbole not only singles you out as an ignorant fool, it also highlights the fact you have no idea where the true innovations in Android are. It is not having native GMail or Youtube clients (which are nice), it is in things like dalvik and the ipc framework. These are pieces of code that do not have anything to do with whether Google apps are present or not on the phone (or if it even is a phone).

Idea (regarding google apps and devs)

I saw (I can't remember where and even tried googling for a while and couldn't find it again) a website that lists packages for phone manufacturers. One was like, stock (like what's on the g1 w/"with google" branding) another one was custom ui etc (I am assuming the package used for motoblur and rosie). < or something that that effect.
Now my point: I am not sure the cost of these licenses, but I was thinking maybe one entity (xda for example). Could purchase a license (with donation money) and allow devs like cyanogen, maxisma, drizzy, jac etc operate under that license.
Not this is just an idea, I don't know too much about licenses and how they work etc. its just an idea to discuss.

CBowley said:
I saw (I can't remember where and even tried googling for a while and couldn't find it again) a website that lists packages for phone manufacturers. One was like, stock (like what's on the g1 w/"with google" branding) another one was custom ui etc (I am assuming the package used for motoblur and rosie). < or something that that effect.
Now my point: I am not sure the cost of these licenses, but I was thinking maybe one entity (xda for example). Could purchase a license (with donation money) and allow devs like cyanogen, maxisma, drizzy, jac etc operate under that license.
Not this is just an idea, I don't know too much about licenses and how they work etc. its just an idea to discuss.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats a stopgap until Google decides to change the agreement for their closed source software. the real solution is a fully open source flavor of android with proprietary repositories (a la Ubuntu)

alapapa said:
thats a stopgap until Google decides to change the agreement for their closed source software. the real solution is a fully open source flavor of android with proprietary repositories (a la Ubuntu)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a stop gap, this would actually be effective, as it would legally allow them to include those apps in the ROMs.
But, how much those licenses cost is a whole nother world.

Yeah, I posted this very suggestion in one of the first threads created about this topic. I even have some ideas about funding and possible non-profit status for the organization that acquires the license for distribution... but it was lost in the *****ing and moaning.

Yes I believe that would be a viable option as far as licensing goes there are a set terms to them that after has been agreed to like a contract can't change we would be fine. But as the case with Blizzard entertainment they can change and most likely will all the time. I aggree best option would to be make a full open source option that would allow us to operate without the google apps but that is very tricky as well, for service especially like YouTube that has terms of use and unless sactioned by them they don't want you using that service. It was for that reason why youtube downloader was pulled from the market and also violated ToS for downloading. No other youtube app has really poped up. Another solution like has pointed out in dev forum is to back them up from a google image already on the device. They specially said we can't distribute them. Currently I am trying to find the terms for it if any one can find for me that would be great. Another idea that I have was to make an application that would allow user to install what ever custom rom without google apps then find the approriate image from google for the device rom is installed on. Download that image ROM file and extract out google apps and install on the device. Since was ment for that and I or xda won't be distrubting the apps that might fall as acceptible in their terms. If anyone can find the terms I would greatly appreciate it.

TheArtiszan said:
Yes I believe that would be a viable option as far as licensing goes there are a set terms to them that after has been agreed to like a contract can't change we would be fine. But as the case with Blizzard entertainment they can change and most likely will all the time. I aggree best option would to be make a full open source option that would allow us to operate without the google apps but that is very tricky as well, for service especially like YouTube that has terms of use and unless sactioned by them they don't want you using that service. It was for that reason why youtube downloader was pulled from the market and also violated ToS for downloading. No other youtube app has really poped up. Another solution like has pointed out in dev forum is to back them up from a google image already on the device. They specially said we can't distribute them. Currently I am trying to find the terms for it if any one can find for me that would be great. Another idea that I have was to make an application that would allow user to install what ever custom rom without google apps then find the approriate image from google for the device rom is installed on. Download that image ROM file and extract out google apps and install on the device. Since was ment for that and I or xda won't be distrubting the apps that might fall as acceptible in their terms. If anyone can find the terms I would greatly appreciate it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well if flash comes out next month we wont need the youtube app.

Lol have you tried hero w flash. Slow as hell

well that not the official version so it hard to say. yeah did but the hero builds seem slow to me.

Jacheroski2.1 was pretty quick once swapper and everything was setup correctly

TheArtiszan said:
Lol have you tried hero w flash. Slow as hell
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea but adobe plans to release flash 10 for android as early as october

I read that Cyanogen or someone is already working on a workaround..kinda. A backup program which will backup your currently legal device apps, and upon install of his bare-bones rom, restore the original device apps.
Things will be close to the same. Just a bump in the road. They should know, people will always find a way. Legal or not.

A Discussion with Google??

I want to start this discussion because I haven't seen it anywhere and I read several Android forums. I love the platform and it's "openess" but it seems that requirements from Google fall just short of making this the best platform ever for handsets.
We are all screaming at Motorola about the signed bl but we aren't focusing enough on the greater issue. The Android license from Google seems to allow this or maybe it is less specific to Google than to some other entity but I don't speak lawyerese so i'm not sure. Anyway, here is what I keep reading from Motorola...
"The use of open source software, such as the Linux kernel or the Android platform, in a consumer device does not require the handset running such software to be open for re-flashing. We comply with the licenses, including GPLv2, for each of the open source packages in our handsets"
My point of discussion is this, why aren't we asking Google what they can do? Why can't Google simply state that "we will not allow our software to be damaged in this way"? Why do they allow Verizon, at&t, Motorola, HTC or anyone else manipulate their software in a way that brings so much resentment? Is it not in Google's best interest to force this platform to remain open? I realize this is a double edged sword because open means people can do what they want, which holds true for companies also but I think that everyone realizes that Google's intent was that this would benefit everyone, not just the companies.
Also, everyone seems to forget that HTC is messing around with trying to lock down the NAND. Just because geniuses get past the protection doesn't mean that HTC isn't trying. If the Droid X is a huge success, even with this restriction in place, then what makes any of you think that the rest will not follow suit?

Because open means that you can do whatever you want with it. There is nothing stopping anyone from using it, modifying it for their own uses, and putting it in any device that would support it. That's why a company can strip down all of Google stuff from it and put Bing if they want to, and Google wouldn't be able to complain. The whole point of open and free software is that you compete by actually being the best at something. You keep Google stuff in Android because well, they work best.
Now, when you put Android in a device you manufacture, you do have the rights to do whatever you want with the device. This seems to be a hardware protection on top of the software ones. You know how DRM'd mp3 stop working? well, it's not much different, except that now there is physical damage.
True, these measures defeat the whole purpose of being open, but what the heck. Being truly open means making a great product, and then not complaining when someone grabs it and beats you with it. You have are always competing to deliver the best product, and that's why open is awesome.
Who was it that said: "I can't agree with what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?

Open goes both ways. The company (Motorola) has every right to lock down the bootloader and prevent others from flashing.
You guys are looking at it as if Motorola did this to prevent people from flashing custom roms. The real reason they did it was to prevent others from stealing their rom and porting it to another phone. If you like the "ninjablur" UI, you need to buy the DroidX.

Ryan Frawley said:
Open goes both ways. The company (Motorola) has every right to lock down the bootloader and prevent others from flashing.
You guys are looking at it as if Motorola did this to prevent people from flashing custom roms. The real reason they did it was to prevent others from stealing their rom and porting it to another phone. If you like the "ninjablur" UI, you need to buy the DroidX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, I don't agree. I'm pretty sure one could extract those widgets if you really wanted to. (They "Ain't all that" if you ask me. - And yes, I did buy an X yesterday and love it. Just ain't crazy about those widgets).
I think the real reason this is locked down is to prevent custom ROM/Root access to enable tethering. There are other issues I'm sure, but at the top of the list is to protect that revenue Big Red is trying to generate.
As to Google 'Stopping' the carriers from locking this down, please understand that if the carriers can't protect their revenue streams, they simply won't allow the phones on their network, and that would hinder the growth of the OS in general.
Don't take any of my words as endorsement of VZW/Moto actions. I'll be first in line to flash/root my phone when/if its ever possible. I'm just a realist. VZW wants $20/month for WiFi Tether. They are going to do as much as reasonably possible to keep you from doing that for free.
In a related note, 2.2 Froyo does tethering natively. I expect this to be crippled/disabled when we get our update in a couple of months.

I don't agree with the idea that companies would stop supporting the platform. The Droid has been a cash cow for verizon and it is an open book. Google could easily ask that their platform remain open for all to enjoy.
Beyond that, if Google allows them to gimp their OS then Google has created something entirely for the benefit of companies and not at all for the general population. I don't believe this is true. I think that the changes will start with Android v3.0. Google will start getting more pissy about custom crap especially if it makes their product seem worse and increase the chance that Android will be looked upon negatively.

Despiadado1 said:
I don't agree with the idea that companies would stop supporting the platform. The Droid has been a cash cow for verizon and it is an open book. Google could easily ask that their platform remain open for all to enjoy.
Beyond that, if Google allows them to gimp their OS then Google has created something entirely for the benefit of companies and not at all for the general population. I don't believe this is true. I think that the changes will start with Android v3.0. Google will start getting more pissy about custom crap especially if it makes their product seem worse and increase the chance that Android will be looked upon negatively.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its the same problem with windows, the OS gets blamed for what hardware vendors do to it... we see this $400 computers getting compared to Apples $1500+ computers and thats some how proof windows sucks, I never had problems with Vista being slow, but people and there $400 computer did.
The problem with Android, specifically the scrolling smoothness, is the vendors custom Android OS setups...

FtL1776 said:
Its the same problem with windows, the OS gets blamed for what hardware vendors do to it... we see this $400 computers getting compared to Apples $1500+ computers and thats some how proof windows sucks, I never had problems with Vista being slow, but people and there $400 computer did.
The problem with Android, specifically the scrolling smoothness, is the vendors custom Android OS setups...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair, I think the scrolling smoothness is half crappy hardware and half Android's lack of hardware acceleration.

Mikerrrrrrrr said:
To be fair, I think the scrolling smoothness is half crappy hardware and half Android's lack of hardware acceleration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No some custom roms fix those issues because they enable the hardware acceleration, which again shows that Google really should crack down on some of these custom versions of Android on phones.

Zaphod-Beeblebrox said:
Actually, I don't agree. I'm pretty sure one could extract those widgets if you really wanted to. (They "Ain't all that" if you ask me. - And yes, I did buy an X yesterday and love it. Just ain't crazy about those widgets).
I think the real reason this is locked down is to prevent custom ROM/Root access to enable tethering. There are other issues I'm sure, but at the top of the list is to protect that revenue Big Red is trying to generate.
As to Google 'Stopping' the carriers from locking this down, please understand that if the carriers can't protect their revenue streams, they simply won't allow the phones on their network, and that would hinder the growth of the OS in general.
Don't take any of my words as endorsement of VZW/Moto actions. I'll be first in line to flash/root my phone when/if its ever possible. I'm just a realist. VZW wants $20/month for WiFi Tether. They are going to do as much as reasonably possible to keep you from doing that for free.
In a related note, 2.2 Froyo does tethering natively. I expect this to be crippled/disabled when we get our update in a couple of months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Motorola has said so itself. The reason Droid X is locked down is because they don't want people stealing their custom UI. Widgets are only part of this UI. The inability to flash custom roms is merely a consequence of protecting their UI.

FtL1776 said:
No some custom roms fix those issues because they enable the hardware acceleration, which again shows that Google really should crack down on some of these custom versions of Android on phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. Didn't know that.

Porting S Voice to other device. Is this Illegal??

I have been a fan of XDA and appreciate the development and support the devs provide. But last few days a thought is bugging me continuously. We saw a lot of posts about S Voice and other apps being ported to other devices. Specially for S Voice, I believe that it's illegal as this could potentially cause Samsung to lose sales. My views:
1] We know that this is re-designed vlingo. vlingo is available in market, S Voice is NOT. Clear indication that they (as in Samsung) don't want the app to be used with other devices and they are not willing to sell it separately. Using vlingo from market is NOT same as using S Voice.
2] Did Samsung give us the permission to use/modify and distribute the app?
3] There is some infrastructure costs associated with running the services. It costs money to install and maintain servers and network. I work in enterprise storage management, so I am aware of costs associated with such massive infrastructure. Who pays for the non-SGS3 devices using the services?
4] Did Samsung every promise that SGS2/Nexus or other phones will get S Voice? So, why should we assume that other Samsung-device owners have the divine right to use a feature meant for SGS3?
5] It is one of the main USP for SGS3. Check here. This is listed as the top-most feature in the SGS3 product page. Hacking this app to be used with other phones is going to harm the phone sale. Is that not clear enough?
6] When Samsung started blocking connections from other devices - was that not an indication that they want the service exclusive for SGS3?
7] How is this different from movie piracy? The uploader never gains anything, but the studios/producers lose money.
8] What if Samsung starts locking their device in future with locked bootloaders/DRM/encryption because of such activities? Can we then blame Samsung for locking the devices?
9] Android is open source - but why assume that every feature in any Android is also open source? If someone can show me that S Voice is open source software, I will retract my statement.
It's sad that most people here equate freedom with piracy. Freedom and piracy are not same thing. Such act in the name of open source and community-feeling does not make it right. Maybe Samsung won't do anything about it -- but it does NOT make this act any better. It will just prove that Samsung considers this to be a petty nuisance (I am not using the word crime as I know nobody is doing this for any monetary gain).
Though I support open initiative with regards to Android, but I can't support such act.
Last check this statement from Samsung in VERGE
An initial test version of S Voice which was found online has been blocked as Samsung Electronics does not want consumers to judge the quality of the voice feature based on a test version. When the product is launched, users of GALAXY S III will be able to fully experience S Voice.

Exactly my thoughts. Though I am not sure what can be done to stop it.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

rd_nest said:
I have been a fan of XDA and appreciate the development and support the devs provide. But last few days a thought is bugging me continuously. We saw a lot of posts about S Voice and other apps being ported to other devices. Specially for S Voice, I believe that it's illegal as this could potentially cause Samsung to lose sales. My views:
1] We know that this is re-designed vlingo. vlingo is available in market, S Voice is NOT. Clear indication that they (as in Samsung) don't want the app to be used with other devices and they are not willing to sell it separately. Using vlingo from market is NOT same as using S Voice.
2] Did Samsung give us the permission to use/modify and distribute the app?
3] There is some infrastructure costs associated with running the services. It costs money to install and maintain servers and network. I work in enterprise storage management, so I am aware of costs associated with such massive infrastructure. Who pays for the non-SGS3 devices using the services?
4] Did Samsung every promise that SGS2/Nexus or other phones will get S Voice? So, why should we assume that other Samsung-device owners have the divine right to use a feature meant for SGS3?
5] It is one of the main USP for SGS3. Check here. This is listed as the top-most feature in the SGS3 product page. Hacking this app to be used with other phones is going to harm the phone sale. Is that not clear enough?
6] When Samsung started blocking connections from other devices - was that not an indication that they want the service exclusive for SGS3?
7] How is this different from movie piracy? The uploader never gains anything, but the studios/producers lose money.
8] What if Samsung starts locking their device in future with locked bootloaders/DRM/encryption because of such activities? Can we then blame Samsung for locking the devices?
9] Android is open source - but why assume that every feature in any Android is also open source? If someone can show me that S Voice is open source software, I will retract my statement.
It's sad that most people here equate freedom with piracy. Freedom and piracy are not same thing. Such act in the name of open source and community-feeling does not make it right. Maybe Samsung won't do anything about it -- but it does NOT make this act any better. It will just prove that Samsung considers this to be a petty nuisance (I am not using the word crime as I know nobody is doing this for any monetary gain).
Though I support open initiative with regards to Android, but I can't support such act.
Last check this statement from Samsung in VERGE
An initial test version of S Voice which was found online has been blocked as Samsung Electronics does not want consumers to judge the quality of the voice feature based on a test version. When the product is launched, users of GALAXY S III will be able to fully experience S Voice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung will have known about this,
If they explicitly didnt want it to be shared with other android phones they could have prevented this easy in one of 2 ways,
1. integrate it into touchwiz framework
2. link the phones imei or unique identifier to the app and set up a database on the servers, similar to siri's protection.
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution. I dont think they mind this because they have NO competitor in the Android market and are far superior to any other OEM that produces android phones.
PS. The Android OS is open source but there are many applications that have closed source to protect their business. Touchwiz source is never fully open sourced and neither is Sense.
I remember a year ago with the CM team asking for help from Samsung for little bits of protected code to get the camera fully functioning on the stock android rom (CM7 ROM).
JD

JupiterdroidXDA said:
Samsung will have known about this,
If they explicitly didnt want it to be shared with other android phones they could have prevented this easy in one of 2 ways,
1. integrate it into touchwiz framework
2. link the phones imei or unique identifier to the app and set up a database on the servers, similar to siri's protection.
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution. I dont think they mind this because they have NO competitor in the Android market and are far superior to any other OEM that produces android phones.
PS. The Android OS is open source but there are many applications that have closed source to protect their business. Touchwiz source is never fully open sourced and neither is Sense.
I remember a year ago with the CM team asking for help from Samsung for little bits of protected code to get the camera fully functioning on the stock android rom (CM7 ROM).
JD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My view is that we took the application and made it compatible with other devices, Samsung never explicitly gave the permission.
Maybe they thought it would be easier to upgrade the app if it's not integrated into the TW. But I fear such activity may force them to become less dev-friendly in future.
It's a different story if in future they make the code available for CM9 or other projects separately. I just hope not, but the way it's being spread over the internet, I fear they will react in some way. Also throws a bad light over XDA.

JupiterdroidXDA said:
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They obviously didn't want it to be freely available because they have blocked it now.
Anyway, I don't get this mentality that if something is not impossible to take, it's ok to take it.

I will ask about the validity of ripping/porting the samsung apps and post back to this thread. If there is anything illegal about it (and im not sure there is unless the apps have been licensed specifically to the Galaxy S3) then any links on xda will be taken down.
I cant do anything about the rest of the internet though lol.
Mark.

mskip said:
I will ask about the validity of ripping/porting the samsung apps and post back to this thread. If there is anything illegal about it (and im not sure there is unless the apps have been licensed specifically to the Galaxy S3) then any links on xda will be taken down.
I cant do anything about the rest of the internet though lol.
Mark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much appreciated. I wanted this to be brought to the notice of MODs. Nobody wants XDA to be in bad light for such a petty affair.
As for the apps (specially S Voice) being exclusive to SGS3, I think so. That's what I infer from Samsung's statement in Verge:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/22/3037943/samsung-blocking-s-voice-app-leak
But please do verify with relevant authorities and take appropriate actions (if required).

Mac OS X doesn't require a product key, but that doesn't mean my friend can just use my installation DVD legally, it all depends on the T&C's
The fact Samsung have blocked it for other devices should give an indication of their decision towards people using this software on another device. They may not send the FBI to kick down your door and arrest you, but cracking it to spoof a SGSIII for example would probably get a DMCA take-down notice pretty quickly. They almost certainly won't want all and sundry freely enjoying one of the big features of their new flagship device.

I have e-mailed Samsung PR dept on their views about this issue. Not sure if they check their Inbox

Unless we hear otherwise from Samsung, we will follow the normal site policy. In this case (though it is an edge case) for the moment we're allowing it.

If this is the case, then all devs who port roms from other models are in breach also.
Is this thread trying to stop dev work, and has the OP loaded the program, if he has shame on him for going against his beliefs, now let us and the devs get on with it.:what:
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Edit: phone model is Arc, now why did I change the prop build?

OP - Care to share how this is any different from all of the Sense ports to other devices? It's not.
I also like how you thanked Mark for checking into this - and that you were waiting to hear.... And then not even an hour later you go and contact Samsung PR? It sounds to me like you have an ax to grind.

I think everything that needs to be covered has been