Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 13th Feb 2014 23:38 UTC

Another day, another fear-mongering 'Android is closed!'-article at Ars Technica. After Peter Bright's article last week (sharply torn to shreds by Dianne Hackborn), we now have an article with the scary title "New Android OEM licensing terms leak; 'open' comes with a lot of restrictions".

The title itself is already highly misleading, since one, the licensing terms aren't new (they're from early 2011 - that's three years old), and two, they're not licensing terms for Android, but for the suite of Google applications that run atop Android.

This article makes the classic mistake about the nature of Android. It conflates the Android Open Source Project with the suite of optional proprietary Google applications, the GMS. These old, most likely outdated licensing terms cover the Google applications, and not the open source Android platform, which anyone can download, alter, build and ship. Everyone can build a smartphone business based on the Android Open Source Project, which is a complete smartphone operating system.

Thread beginning with comment 582933
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

As far I understand the contracts leaked:
* the Android OS is open
* the usage of the Android logo is restricted

But, this is old news.


Reply Score: 3

tkeith Member since:

Exactly the first article was Ars making a huge reach to try and argue a pointless topic. The second is just click bait with information that virtually everyone familiar with Android already knows. Ars Technica has really gone downhill, I'm not sure if they are just looking for page views or someone there just really doesn't like Android.

Reply Parent Score: 3