8 ms·

Google and Alibaba Continue Warring Over Acer Phone

35 points by joshus 14y ago

allenbrunson 14y ago
Here's my own personal perspective. I am very thoroughly in Apple's camp. I have owned several iPhones, an iPad, and more Macs than I can count. This is what I use personally, and what I program for. Although I don't use Android myself, I'm glad it exists. It keeps Apple on their toes. I don't think Apple will make much of a dent in the Android ecosystem, despite the fact that Steve Jobs apparently wanted to. But now it's turning out that Google faces some of the same issues as Apple, doesn't it? The Android ecosystem is generally more open than iOS, but now we see that it has its limits. Personally, I think Google is doing the right thing here. If this secondary phone OS really does contain a lot of Android frameworks, as they claim, then I think Google is right to be upset about this. Interesting to see what the fan base's general reaction is going to be to this.
- onetimeuse001 14y ago
  Personally, I think Google is doing the right thing here. If this secondary phone OS really does contain a lot of Android frameworks, as they claim, then I think Google is right to be upset about this. If Google open sourced them, boo-hoo. If not they can sue Alibaba. Android got a lot of benefit of the doubt for being open source, now they're changing their tune. Not good at all. If Android runs 67% anti-trust isn't going to be happy at all, imagine if MS had threatened Samsung, Sony etc with the loss of any Windows licensing if they worked with Android. It's similar enough
- lucian1900 14y ago
  Alibaba pirated google apps and put them on their appstore. That's different. Android can be forked just fine.
  - allenbrunson 14y ago
    sure, it can be forked. Not even Google is disputing that. They're just saying that, if you want to fork it, you don't get to be in Google's "handset alliance" anymore.
  - tedivm 14y ago
    The pirated app thing was brought up after the fact, and really has nothing to do with the original issue- that google is strong arming a company to prevent a competing OS from being released. Besides, claiming that Alibabi supports piracy because there are pirated apps in their store is the same as saying Google supports malware because their stores have sold infected apps.
    - will_work4tears 14y ago
      That's not what I got. My understanding of the situation was that Google is saying Alibaba can't claim to be Android compatible if they are not. Alibaba is saying they are claiming no such thing, but their marketplace seems to not reflect that claim. They aren't trying to prevent a competing OS at all.
    - lucian1900 14y ago
      But since Alibaba themselves put the pirated google apps on their store, I'd say that's quite a different situation than Google Play having malware.
  - Xuzz 14y ago
    The Google Play store has plenty of pirated apps on it all the time, which you often have to DMCA Google for any chance of getting taken down. I don't think that's a big difference here.
- bookwormAT 14y ago
  "The Android ecosystem is generally more open than iOS, but now we see that it has its limits." No, this is not about Android. Acer joined a "don't fork Android" club, and now Google told them that if they support a fork they have to leave the club. Android remains completly free and open source.
onetimeuse001 14y ago
My understanding, outside of corporate spin: Google is essentially preventing Acer and others that benefit from OHA to do any work with the likes of Amazon and Alibaba that use an Android fork. You work on any non-Google approved Android and you are frozen out of Android, even if they are different product. Do I understand this correctly? If so, I do not like it.
option_greek 14y ago
Here is a statement of Andy Rubin on this: https://plus.google.com/112599748506977857728/posts/hRcCi5xgayg https://plus.google.com/112599748506977857728/posts/hRcCi5xg... Apparently, they even have pirated google apps. How Alibaba/Acer claim moral high ground on this is beyond me.
- josephlord 14y ago
  So take action against the pirates. Don't bully your partners away from competing platforms.
  - kumarm 14y ago
    [So take action against the pirates.] You are expecting to after a Chinese Pirates in China and win?
    - josephlord 14y ago
      If you have emailed Aliyun and asked them to take it off then absolutely they are doing wrong leaving it on there. I haven't seen any information about what needs to be done to submit apps or if there is any review process (which should at least have caught the obvious Google apps). If they don't remove it fairly promptly then yes maybe Google can take some action. I would expect that with clear cases of copyright infringement that Google at least could take a case. In the mean time update your app to detect when it is running on Aliyun and include a half screen promotion for China's leading real Android phone.
      - kumarm 14y ago
        So I have to keep searching if a Chinese company is pirating my apps? (How would I even know?). They had the apps for a while and we knew about it only because google called them out. How about you ask the guy who stole your car (After figuring out who stole it) and if they don't return it to you, then complain to police?
        14y ago
recoiledsnake 14y ago
Andy Rubin: >So there’s really no disputing that Aliyun is based on the Android platform and takes advantage of all the hard work that’s gone into that platform by the OHA. >So if you want to benefit from the Android ecosystem, then make the choice to be compatible. Its easy, free, and we’ll even help you out. But if you don’t want to be compatible, then don’t expect help from OHA members that are all working to support and build a unified Android ecosystem. How "open" is something if you can't fork it and be left in peace to negotiate with the OEMs to ship it? Aliyun is already missing the Google Play Store and the official Google apps. The "don't expect help from OHA" line is especially ironic given that Acer scheduled a press conference to announce making Aliyun phones before being strong armed by Google into canceling it. Acer really had no choice, Android has 67% of the market and iOS has the other 30%. Losing early access to code and access to the Google Play store and Google apps will basically kill their handset business because the competition like Samsung, HTC, Sony, Motorola etc. will have those advantages. They would basically have to quit the handset market outside China to make Aliyun phones for the Chinese market. Forking is a fundamental tenet and in many cases the lifeblood of open source. If you don't want that, put that in the license and do not call it "open" instead of artificial after-the-fact restrictions like this. If you make something open, people are going to eventually do something with it that you may not like. What next, forbid retailers from selling Aliyun phones or threaten to pull all Android devices from them? The only differences I see between this and Microsoft's OEM restrictions against other OSes in the 90s is that Android is not a monopoly(though it is effectively one for Acer), and that Android is open source(again, Acer doesn't really have much leverage to go on it's own with Android code).
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  It's really quite simple. Acer is part of the OHA, so they have to follow OHA rules. It has nothing to do with Android, and everything to do with the OHA. If they want to use Android in any way they want, they can leave the OHA.
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    The chilling effect on Android forks is the same, while it is funny that the Open Handset Alliance doesn't seem to be really open. All the major phone OEMs are part of it, meaning that Android forks will have hardware and marketing support cut off from them. >If they want to use Android in any way they want, they can leave the OHA. And basically quit the handset market, as described in the GP post. Isn't that like saying if Compaq wanted to ship BeOS or dual boot machine, it could forgo getting the OEM incentives that Dell, HP etc. received from Microsoft?
modeless 14y ago
"Aliyun App Store Confirmed To Be Distributing Pirated Android Apps" http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/09/15/aliyun-app-store-confirmed-to-be-distributing-pirated-android-apps-many-from-another-pirate-site/ http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/09/15/aliyun-app-store-con...
- josephlord 14y ago
  Who uploaded them? Has anyone sent takedown requests? I've no idea of the process for their store but without more information that doesn't prove them bad anymore than pirate content on YouTube makes Google the bad guys.
- kumarm 14y ago
  Many of our apps are listed there. As a policy we don't submit our apps in any store other than Google Play Store for android as we believe in having one Android platform is beneficial for community (Including Amazon Store). Take down notice? Where to send it? So Hire a lawyer in China to fight them? How long will that battle go on and are we too naive to assume we can fight Alibaba and win in China under their law? I am glad Andy picked this fight.
voidr 14y ago
I think Google's position is reasonable: either Alibaba make Aliyun OS pass the Android compatibility tests, or remove the Android app runtime.
- josephlord 14y ago
  Sounds like what Oracle wanted Google to do with Java/Dalvik/Android. Can you explain why you think this is different or if you thought Oracle should have got their way?
  - voidr 14y ago
    The difference is that you are free to use the Android CTS, unlike the Java TCK, which had a Field Of Use restriction that did not allow using it for mobile. The big difference is that you can do whatever you want with Android and it's components, but don't expect any help, from the OHA if you are making something incompatible.
    - josephlord 14y ago
      Does that really help? Sun offered a different platform for mobile which Android is a massive deviation from. J2ME was rubbish but does that change their rights. Is the defence of this action that Google aren't quite as unreasonable as Oracle? Is that the standard we hold "don't be evil" to? The legal tool being used is different but it definitely seems anti-competitive.
      - magicalist 14y ago
        It means you aren't beholden at all to Google to be an "Android compatible" device, you just need to pass the freely available compatibility test. Ask the Apache Harmony guys if that's only slightly less unreasonable than Sun/Oracle.
  - felipeko 14y ago
    Google is using Java language and its API, not JVM or its libs. Google never called Android a Java compatible or Java. Google has written all of its libs and the Dalvik VM. Now look at this story, it's a company claiming to be Android compatible and using Android runtimes. All they did was a fork and customization of Android. Not there's anything wrong with that, but if you are a member of OHA you agree not to do it. So there you go: Google never agreed to anything, Acer did. Google wrote code and used non-copyrightable part of Java, Alibaba did not (but they still didn't do anything wrong). Google got sued, Acer/Alibaba did not.
andrewcooke 14y ago
in case anyone else is confused, the issue seems to be this: * there is a group called the open handset alliance (OHA), formed by google and others, that gives certain benefits to hardware makers. to be a member of that group you have to commit to not release incompatible versions of android. * alibaba have created software for a smartphone that acer were going to release, called aliyun. * everyone seems to agree that aliyun is not compatible with android (in the sense required by the OHA agreement). it can, however, run some android applications. * the disagreement is about whether or not aliyum is a "version of android". if it is, then google can kick acer out of the OHA (which acer does not want; hence the phone would be blocked). alibaba is arguing that it is not (in particular, it does not use the dalvik vm), so acer should be free to release the phone and remain in the OHA.
nitrogen 14y ago
The troubling thing I see in all this is that, if Google gets all contract hardware manufacturers to join the OHA, then there will be nobody to manufacturer your Android OSP hardware.
mun2mun 14y ago
Google is threatening Acer to not make phone based on Aliyun OS while Haier Group who is another member of OHA have already shiped an Aliyun OS phone[1]. No question of "fragmentation" were asked back then. Hypocrisy at its best. [1] http://www.generalatlantic.com/en/news/article/1838 http://www.generalatlantic.com/en/news/article/1838 Edit: See http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html for list of OHA members.

35 points by joshus 14y ago

Here's my own personal perspective. I am very thoroughly in Apple's camp. I have owned several iPhones, an iPad, and more Macs than I can count. This is what I use personally, and what I program for. Although I don't use Android myself, I'm glad it exists. It keeps Apple on their toes. I don't think Apple will make much of a dent in the Android ecosystem, despite the fact that Steve Jobs apparently wanted to. But now it's turning out that Google faces some of the same issues as Apple, doesn't it? The Android ecosystem is generally more open than iOS, but now we see that it has its limits. Personally, I think Google is doing the right thing here. If this secondary phone OS really does contain a lot of Android frameworks, as they claim, then I think Google is right to be upset about this. Interesting to see what the fan base's general reaction is going to be to this.

onetimeuse001 14y ago
Personally, I think Google is doing the right thing here. If this secondary phone OS really does contain a lot of Android frameworks, as they claim, then I think Google is right to be upset about this. If Google open sourced them, boo-hoo. If not they can sue Alibaba. Android got a lot of benefit of the doubt for being open source, now they're changing their tune. Not good at all. If Android runs 67% anti-trust isn't going to be happy at all, imagine if MS had threatened Samsung, Sony etc with the loss of any Windows licensing if they worked with Android. It's similar enough
lucian1900 14y ago
Alibaba pirated google apps and put them on their appstore. That's different. Android can be forked just fine.
- allenbrunson 14y ago
  sure, it can be forked. Not even Google is disputing that. They're just saying that, if you want to fork it, you don't get to be in Google's "handset alliance" anymore.
- tedivm 14y ago
  The pirated app thing was brought up after the fact, and really has nothing to do with the original issue- that google is strong arming a company to prevent a competing OS from being released. Besides, claiming that Alibabi supports piracy because there are pirated apps in their store is the same as saying Google supports malware because their stores have sold infected apps.
  - will_work4tears 14y ago
    That's not what I got. My understanding of the situation was that Google is saying Alibaba can't claim to be Android compatible if they are not. Alibaba is saying they are claiming no such thing, but their marketplace seems to not reflect that claim. They aren't trying to prevent a competing OS at all.
  - lucian1900 14y ago
    But since Alibaba themselves put the pirated google apps on their store, I'd say that's quite a different situation than Google Play having malware.
- Xuzz 14y ago
  The Google Play store has plenty of pirated apps on it all the time, which you often have to DMCA Google for any chance of getting taken down. I don't think that's a big difference here.
bookwormAT 14y ago
"The Android ecosystem is generally more open than iOS, but now we see that it has its limits." No, this is not about Android. Acer joined a "don't fork Android" club, and now Google told them that if they support a fork they have to leave the club. Android remains completly free and open source.

onetimeuse001 14y ago

My understanding, outside of corporate spin: Google is essentially preventing Acer and others that benefit from OHA to do any work with the likes of Amazon and Alibaba that use an Android fork. You work on any non-Google approved Android and you are frozen out of Android, even if they are different product. Do I understand this correctly? If so, I do not like it.

option_greek 14y ago

Here is a statement of Andy Rubin on this: https://plus.google.com/112599748506977857728/posts/hRcCi5xgayg https://plus.google.com/112599748506977857728/posts/hRcCi5xg... Apparently, they even have pirated google apps. How Alibaba/Acer claim moral high ground on this is beyond me.

josephlord 14y ago
So take action against the pirates. Don't bully your partners away from competing platforms.
- kumarm 14y ago
  [So take action against the pirates.] You are expecting to after a Chinese Pirates in China and win?
  - josephlord 14y ago
    If you have emailed Aliyun and asked them to take it off then absolutely they are doing wrong leaving it on there. I haven't seen any information about what needs to be done to submit apps or if there is any review process (which should at least have caught the obvious Google apps). If they don't remove it fairly promptly then yes maybe Google can take some action. I would expect that with clear cases of copyright infringement that Google at least could take a case. In the mean time update your app to detect when it is running on Aliyun and include a half screen promotion for China's leading real Android phone.
    - kumarm 14y ago
      So I have to keep searching if a Chinese company is pirating my apps? (How would I even know?). They had the apps for a while and we knew about it only because google called them out. How about you ask the guy who stole your car (After figuring out who stole it) and if they don't return it to you, then complain to police?
      - 14y ago

recoiledsnake 14y ago

Andy Rubin: >So there’s really no disputing that Aliyun is based on the Android platform and takes advantage of all the hard work that’s gone into that platform by the OHA. >So if you want to benefit from the Android ecosystem, then make the choice to be compatible. Its easy, free, and we’ll even help you out. But if you don’t want to be compatible, then don’t expect help from OHA members that are all working to support and build a unified Android ecosystem. How "open" is something if you can't fork it and be left in peace to negotiate with the OEMs to ship it? Aliyun is already missing the Google Play Store and the official Google apps. The "don't expect help from OHA" line is especially ironic given that Acer scheduled a press conference to announce making Aliyun phones before being strong armed by Google into canceling it. Acer really had no choice, Android has 67% of the market and iOS has the other 30%. Losing early access to code and access to the Google Play store and Google apps will basically kill their handset business because the competition like Samsung, HTC, Sony, Motorola etc. will have those advantages. They would basically have to quit the handset market outside China to make Aliyun phones for the Chinese market. Forking is a fundamental tenet and in many cases the lifeblood of open source. If you don't want that, put that in the license and do not call it "open" instead of artificial after-the-fact restrictions like this. If you make something open, people are going to eventually do something with it that you may not like. What next, forbid retailers from selling Aliyun phones or threaten to pull all Android devices from them? The only differences I see between this and Microsoft's OEM restrictions against other OSes in the 90s is that Android is not a monopoly(though it is effectively one for Acer), and that Android is open source(again, Acer doesn't really have much leverage to go on it's own with Android code).

w1ntermute 14y ago
It's really quite simple. Acer is part of the OHA, so they have to follow OHA rules. It has nothing to do with Android, and everything to do with the OHA. If they want to use Android in any way they want, they can leave the OHA.
- cooldeal 14y ago
  The chilling effect on Android forks is the same, while it is funny that the Open Handset Alliance doesn't seem to be really open. All the major phone OEMs are part of it, meaning that Android forks will have hardware and marketing support cut off from them. >If they want to use Android in any way they want, they can leave the OHA. And basically quit the handset market, as described in the GP post. Isn't that like saying if Compaq wanted to ship BeOS or dual boot machine, it could forgo getting the OEM incentives that Dell, HP etc. received from Microsoft?

modeless 14y ago

"Aliyun App Store Confirmed To Be Distributing Pirated Android Apps" http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/09/15/aliyun-app-store-confirmed-to-be-distributing-pirated-android-apps-many-from-another-pirate-site/ http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/09/15/aliyun-app-store-con...

josephlord 14y ago
Who uploaded them? Has anyone sent takedown requests? I've no idea of the process for their store but without more information that doesn't prove them bad anymore than pirate content on YouTube makes Google the bad guys.
kumarm 14y ago
Many of our apps are listed there. As a policy we don't submit our apps in any store other than Google Play Store for android as we believe in having one Android platform is beneficial for community (Including Amazon Store). Take down notice? Where to send it? So Hire a lawyer in China to fight them? How long will that battle go on and are we too naive to assume we can fight Alibaba and win in China under their law? I am glad Andy picked this fight.

voidr 14y ago

I think Google's position is reasonable: either Alibaba make Aliyun OS pass the Android compatibility tests, or remove the Android app runtime.

josephlord 14y ago
Sounds like what Oracle wanted Google to do with Java/Dalvik/Android. Can you explain why you think this is different or if you thought Oracle should have got their way?
- voidr 14y ago
  The difference is that you are free to use the Android CTS, unlike the Java TCK, which had a Field Of Use restriction that did not allow using it for mobile. The big difference is that you can do whatever you want with Android and it's components, but don't expect any help, from the OHA if you are making something incompatible.
  - josephlord 14y ago
    Does that really help? Sun offered a different platform for mobile which Android is a massive deviation from. J2ME was rubbish but does that change their rights. Is the defence of this action that Google aren't quite as unreasonable as Oracle? Is that the standard we hold "don't be evil" to? The legal tool being used is different but it definitely seems anti-competitive.
    - magicalist 14y ago
      It means you aren't beholden at all to Google to be an "Android compatible" device, you just need to pass the freely available compatibility test. Ask the Apache Harmony guys if that's only slightly less unreasonable than Sun/Oracle.
- felipeko 14y ago
  Google is using Java language and its API, not JVM or its libs. Google never called Android a Java compatible or Java. Google has written all of its libs and the Dalvik VM. Now look at this story, it's a company claiming to be Android compatible and using Android runtimes. All they did was a fork and customization of Android. Not there's anything wrong with that, but if you are a member of OHA you agree not to do it. So there you go: Google never agreed to anything, Acer did. Google wrote code and used non-copyrightable part of Java, Alibaba did not (but they still didn't do anything wrong). Google got sued, Acer/Alibaba did not.

andrewcooke 14y ago

in case anyone else is confused, the issue seems to be this: * there is a group called the open handset alliance (OHA), formed by google and others, that gives certain benefits to hardware makers. to be a member of that group you have to commit to not release incompatible versions of android. * alibaba have created software for a smartphone that acer were going to release, called aliyun. * everyone seems to agree that aliyun is not compatible with android (in the sense required by the OHA agreement). it can, however, run some android applications. * the disagreement is about whether or not aliyum is a "version of android". if it is, then google can kick acer out of the OHA (which acer does not want; hence the phone would be blocked). alibaba is arguing that it is not (in particular, it does not use the dalvik vm), so acer should be free to release the phone and remain in the OHA.

nitrogen 14y ago

The troubling thing I see in all this is that, if Google gets all contract hardware manufacturers to join the OHA, then there will be nobody to manufacturer your Android OSP hardware.

mun2mun 14y ago

Google is threatening Acer to not make phone based on Aliyun OS while Haier Group who is another member of OHA have already shiped an Aliyun OS phone[1]. No question of "fragmentation" were asked back then. Hypocrisy at its best. [1] http://www.generalatlantic.com/en/news/article/1838 http://www.generalatlantic.com/en/news/article/1838 Edit: See http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html for list of OHA members.