Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 17th Sep 2010 23:12 UTC
Legal Yesterday's news regarding the lawsuit Skyhook has filed against Google seems to have made quite an impact here and there. If you read through the complaint (at Daring Fireball), Skyhook makes some interesting claims about how Google abuses its position to strongarm OEMs into using Google Location services, but the big claim, something everyone seems to overlook, is this one: Skyhook says Google tried to gain access to Skyhook's data.
Order by: Score:
CDD Section 8.12
by tedmorgan on Fri 17th Sep 2010 23:45 UTC
Member since:

Discusses the only requirements around location

Reply Score: 2

by WorknMan on Sat 18th Sep 2010 00:10 UTC
Member since:

It seems to me that Google is like the darling of the tech industry, but articles like this make me nervous. With as much effort as it has taken to try and put Microsoft in its place, how much harder is it going to be with Google, once their transition to the dark side is complete?

Reply Score: 3

Corporate moto
by Nicholas Blachford on Sat 18th Sep 2010 00:50 UTC
Nicholas Blachford
Member since:

I'm wondering should the Google corporate moto be updated.

"Google: Be evil"

It sounds so much cooler.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Corporate moto
by qroon on Sat 18th Sep 2010 08:26 UTC in reply to "Corporate moto"
qroon Member since:

So this is not true anymore? ;)

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Corporate moto
by vodoomoth on Wed 22nd Sep 2010 17:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Corporate moto"
vodoomoth Member since:

This scared me when I saw it a few days ago. I started wondering what proof do we have that by entering our passwords in browsers, we are not unknowingly surrendering control of parts of our lives?

I mean, I have 170+ secondary email addresses on my Yahoo account. This means at least as many registrations on websites, forums, etc. But I only have three passwords. A weak one I really don't care about, that I use on all secondary addresses, another one for my PC accounts and a third strong one for my main email accounts. In case I have other passwords, I just send myself an email with the website, username and password.

I thought about all that while reading the comic strip and it was... unsettling.

Reply Score: 1

Awesome read!
by asharism on Sat 18th Sep 2010 01:36 UTC
Member since:

Thanks Thom for this great piece. This is why I keep coming back to OSNews time and time again.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Awesome read!
by on Sat 18th Sep 2010 09:23 UTC in reply to "Awesome read!" Member since:

I second that, this is why no other site compares! ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Awesome read!
by vodoomoth on Wed 22nd Sep 2010 16:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Awesome read!"
vodoomoth Member since:

A second seconding here.
Thanks Tom! This is the best story I've read on OSnews. Very articulate. I'm impressed.

Reply Score: 1

stacks of depositions.
by noschool on Sat 18th Sep 2010 02:17 UTC
Member since:

i bet the worst thing about this for guys at both companies is waking up on a Sunday morning and hearing the kids playing and staring at a 3' high stack of black legal binders before you even sip a cold bit of joe ;(

well.. at least its not another patented troll!

Reply Score: 2

RE: stacks of depositions.
by Soulbender on Sat 18th Sep 2010 03:07 UTC in reply to "stacks of depositions. "
Soulbender Member since:

I have a hard time feeling sorry for corporate lawyers.

Reply Score: 6

Help! The free market is working!
by Soulbender on Sat 18th Sep 2010 03:06 UTC
Member since:

So...they previously lost one big mobile player and now another. and all of a sudden there's legal proceedings abound. Wow, what a coincidence, eh?

Reply Score: 4

Same old story in the "free market"
by bannor99 on Sat 18th Sep 2010 03:32 UTC
Member since:

those who can do, and those who can't, sue.

Reply Score: 5

No Googlery
by orfanum on Sat 18th Sep 2010 06:05 UTC
Member since:

Google will be the next Catholic Church

Soon it will be claimed, asserted, demonstrated and defended that there is and can be no knowledge without them.

Time for someone to nail a new 95 Theses to Google's home page on the intrinsic and sacrosanct value of the relationship between the individual and his or her Information.

No Googlery!!!!

Reply Score: 2

RE: No Googlery
by Soulbender on Sat 18th Sep 2010 06:40 UTC in reply to "No Googlery"
Soulbender Member since:

What makes you think the Lutheran church is any better?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: No Googlery
by orfanum on Sat 18th Sep 2010 07:05 UTC in reply to "RE: No Googlery"
orfanum Member since:

I am saying - let's reinforce the concept of individual conscience, if you like, as the agent, not the corporate body. Even Cardinal Newman said:

"Certainly, if I am obliged to bring religion into after-dinner toasts, (which indeed does not seem quite the thing) I shall drink to the Pope, if you please, still, to Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards"

So, I say, "I drink to unconstrained Information and knowledge first, Google's global needs second (if at all)"

Reply Score: 2

Well done, my dear Watson.
by aargh on Sat 18th Sep 2010 19:22 UTC
Member since:

Well done, my dear Watson.

Reply Score: 1

Good Analysis
by benali72 on Sat 18th Sep 2010 21:34 UTC
Member since:

Good analysis, Thom. You've isolated the key point that all the other articles seemed to have missed. Data is gold, and Google wants it!

Reply Score: 2

by TechGeek on Sat 18th Sep 2010 22:47 UTC
Member since:

I have some questions after reading your article Thom. How can an agreement be a secret agreement if you haven't seen it yet? Unless you mean its between Google and third parties, but not Skyhook. In which case, how do we really know it exists? Lets face it. Google owns Android. It can do what ever it wants with it. While the software may be open, the branding is NOT. Just like Red Hat. Just like Fedora. Now, we KNOW that other services can be used on these phones. The real question is: Does Google treat everyone the same? If so, then Skyhook hasn't got a chance. Google doesn't own a monopoly in the phone space, so its not like Skyhook had to go with Google in the first place.

Reply Score: 2

by No it isnt on Sun 19th Sep 2010 14:58 UTC
No it isnt
Member since:

I can understand if Google didn't allow Motorola et al to use Skyhook instead of Google's location services: it would break third party apps relying on it. Then you'd have an actual problem of fragmentation instead of just the usual FUD. Google would have a lot of unhappy customers downloading apps they couldn't use. Yes, Google's services are tightly integrated into the platform.

Now, if Skyhook's tech was supposed to be an addition to Google's, on the other hand, then that's a different story. But that doesn't seem to be their complaint.

Reply Score: 2

The really salient point of the blog post
by zebrandao on Mon 20th Sep 2010 14:10 UTC
Member since:

I give up. What is the serious grammar mistake?

Reply Score: 1

KLU9 Member since:

Me too.

Sorry, I mean: I do too.

Oops, I mean: So do I.

Reply Score: 1