Mobile Application Distribution Agreement

[SimonC]

Hi,

I understand that OEMs that wish to sell devices with Android pre-installed must sign a Mobile Application Distribution Agreement with Google if they want to include Google's Mobile Applications, including Google Play. There is an interesting article about this here:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/02/new-android-oem-licensing-terms-leak-open-comes-with-restrictions/

Given that android-x86 includes Google Play (amongst other apps) in its downloads, is the android-x86 project licenced by Google? If not, does that put users of android-x86 at risk, as they are using unlicenced IP?

Thanks,

Simon

[jdw6]

and what exactly does android-x86 project sell???

[fgdn17]

they are an OEM....I thought it was a patch/hobby project????

On Monday, June 16, 2014 8:35:50 AM UTC-4, SimonC wrote:

[dscm]

so every hobbist in the world who wants to use android and install gapps, or use the build from android-x86 needs to sign some agreement????

that seems a stretch

of course if they try to build a product out of it and sell it that's a different case all together no..?

On Monday, June 16, 2014 8:35:50 AM UTC-4, SimonC wrote:

[Christopher Price]

This topic has been discussed in-depth on this list previously, I would encourage you to search and read past discussions.

Essentially, Android-x86.org is using Google Play in an unlicensed manner. It is not clear if Google will take legal action or not, but Google is not complying with OHA rules by allowing Android-x86.org to distribute Google Play.

That said, it's up for OHA members to complain and for Google to comply with its own rules. Google Play has been bundled with Android-x86.org for well over a year, and Google has not taken any action.

Personally, I think it's a mistake for Android-x86.org to include Google Play (or other binaries like libhoudini) without a license to do so. It prevents OEMs from interacting with the Android-x86.org community, for fear of breaching their agreements with Google. This is what OEMs have told me personally.

Full disclosure: I am an Android OSV, so my opinions here may be considered biased.

Christopher Price

ConsoleOS.com

[Mike Ross]

That makes no sense at  all,  And Google wont be able to stop it Packaged or not,  I have an android phone, And there's enuff play store spoofers out there (Even on the store itself), That I can download ANY app I want and install it on my X86.....  Why would anyone want to cripple an Open Source OS, That's growing at the rate this one is? I'm sorry but I say they should be telling you (And anyone else trying to make money off this) where to go and how to get there,  and releasing drivers and anything else needed to keep this growing,  and if it's their rules, they can change them.....

I didn't know about any of this till you started TRAMPING around Android X86,  And I can almost guarantee your not here to help the project, especially when money is involved...  So I can see you standing up and PUSHING google to do things that NONE of us here want done.....

SO WHY ARE YOU HERE?  I'll Tell you,   THE MONEY,  Or you wouldn't be Linking to your page,  and I for one would not even give you the single HIT that you'd get from me clicking that link!

Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android-x86" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-x86...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to andro...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-x86.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[mike r]

"The agreement has no doubt changed since these documents were signed, and the document states that Google can change many of these requirements at any time"

[Christopher Price]

If you read the old discussions, you'll see that there are various opinions on this. As someone who has a vested interest, I'm not actively participating in this discussion. I merely replied to summarize the situation, and alert people that past threads have gone through every aspect of this discussion...

... including the ones you just raised.

I don't think discussing it further would be more productive, if the original poster has comments he feels would be beneficial - it may be best for him to bring up the discussion from a few months ago and reply to that directly.

Christopher Price

ConsoleOS.com