4 ms·

It has already been discussed even in the mainstream news quite some time ago: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-o

It has already been discussed even in the mainstream news quite some time ago: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-... Presumably (judging by comments on Russian websites), Yandex has got an agreement to include (or included) in the report documents that show you have to play by Google's rules and install Google services on every model in every region of the world once you signed the service agreement, or (even better for them) direct prohibition to pre-install Yandex services.

Oletros 12y ago
Yes, I know that has been discussed, but there is no article (and not even in the Ars one) were it is said that an OEM is forbidden to launch a non Google Android device like the op is repeatedly claiming
- ocdtrekkie 12y ago
  Again: See the Acer/Alibaba incident.
- Oletros 12y ago
  Apart that what the OHA forbids are forks that doesn't pass the ACT, Aliyun was not an Android fork Please, stop talking about what you clearly don't know. Still waiting those clauses that you post as facts. Can you link to them or not?
ocdtrekkie 12y ago
The case may actually let us see a new version of the MADA if they can require it be in public court records.