backtop


Print 48 comment(s) - last by Azethoth.. on May 13 at 1:04 AM

Emails reveal manager admitting that his firm uses Android compatibility "as a club" against competitors

Google Inc.'s (GOOG) day in court with Skyhook, Inc. took a decidedly ugly turn this week when the court published internal emails from Google's ranks.

In one juicy snippet Android Open-Source & Compatibility Program Manager Dan Morrill writes, "[W]e are using compatibility as a club to make them [Android hardware partners] do things we want."

I.  Google -- Not So Open

If several angry small service providers are to believed, Android is as closed as the legendary Apple, Inc. (AAPLiOS closed garden or worse.  The disgruntled firms claim that Google wields compatibility as a sword to crush rivals while maintaining a public image that it's "open".

In Skyhook's case the company signed a deal in April with Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (005930) and Motorola Mobility Solutions, Inc. (MMI) to put its location-aware services on their devices.  The company made a unique product that offered advanced location tracking employing a mix of GPS, cell towers, and Wi-Fi signals to pinpoint a user's exact location.  The deal would have been a blockbuster opportunity for the small, enterprising company.

That's when Google stepped in.

Recalls CEO Ted Morgan, "After we announced our deal with Motorola, Google went crazy."

Google, upset about the threat to its own service, reportedly threatened its hardware partners by opening investigations into their compatibility compliance, which could lead to them being unable to make and sell new or existing Android handsets.  Both companies meekly bowed to Google's threats, severing their contracts with Skyhook in July.

II. Smacked With a Lawsuit

Outraged, Skyhook filed suit in Massachusetts Superior Court.

But there's more to the story.  The emails reveal that much like Apple, Google's fundamental argument for disallowing third party competitors was that they would offer inferior or confusing alternatives to customers.

Steve Lee, an Android product manager, ordered tests conducted which showed Google's own free service worked better than Skyhook's in the San Francisco Bay Area.  Mr. Lee wrote an email to fellow managers warning that letting Skyhook continue to operate endangered Google's own operations.

He said that even though he believed evidence showed Google's own service to be superior, that the Motorola and Samsung contracts might convince other phone makers otherwise.  They might ditch Google's free service for Skyhook.  He writes, "That would be awful for Google because it will cut off our ability to continue collecting data to maintain and improve our location database."

III. Mountain View Giant Covers Its Tracks Carefully

Clearly Google's management grew concerned that their email conversations might get pulled into court as their efforts to kill Skyhook stepped up.  Patrick Brady, a partner manager at Google, replied to a colleague offering to send him some details on Skyhook, stating, "PLEASE DO NOT! Thread-kill and talk to me off-line with any questions."

Due to Google's apparent efforts to cover its tracks -- a lesson perhaps learned by the Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) blockbuster federal court case of a decade prior -- there's less concrete proof that Google employees were willfully abusing their dominant position.

But in crushing Skyhook, this appears to be exactly what happened -- regardless of their intentions.

Perhaps the greatest irony in the case is that Apple, often demonized as a closed, totalitarian device maker, actually treated Skyhook with greater respect.  While Apple reportedly was not fond of Skyhook's technology popping up on its devices in first party form, it appreciated the potential of the technology and licensed in for use in the iPhone and iPad.  Apple appears to be Skyhook's primary source of revenue, after Google crushed the pending Android deals. 

If Skyhook's sob story is to be believed, one has to wonder how much farther from reality Google's public image of openness could be.  The company is accused of abusing its dominant position to crush small foes and maintain a closed garden.  And that's not to mention the fact that the latest build of its "open source" operating system is closed source.  What is happening to Google?



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

We have all been here before
By Tony Swash on 5/9/2011 5:29:22 PM , Rating: 1
RE: We have all been here before
By Pirks on 5/9/2011 6:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
Who is this Kontra guy? Does he have a real name? Who he works for and what business is he in? The blog is interesting but zero info about the author. Maybe it's an Apple marketing outlet disguised as a blog or something... I'd be careful when going there. Suspicious and fishy. 'Cause he's hiding who he is.


RE: We have all been here before
By Tony Swash on 5/9/11, Rating: -1
RE: We have all been here before
By theapparition on 5/9/2011 8:25:02 PM , Rating: 2
Forgot to include Apple cutting the legal legs from anyone who dared make hardware that was OSx compatible.

This is business, it goes back far, far earlier than Rockefeller. But by cutting two snippets from MS and Googgle to advance your own agenda is.....well you being you.


RE: We have all been here before
By Samus on 5/9/2011 9:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
This has all happened before, and it will happen again, and again, and again, and again, and again....


By snakeInTheGrass on 5/9/2011 11:16:28 PM , Rating: 2
Apple makes all the rules on its platform, deciding what is allowable in its (Steve's?) eyes. Google does that too, but also collects and uses as much of your personal information for non-stop advertising while allowing crapware installs on Android devices, because Android users are 'the product', as consumers are generally called in the advertising industry.

I personally know which walled garden I prefer - the one that isn't full of crap. For Google execs like Gundotra to sit there spewing about the evil of Apple (1984!) is just rich. Yeah, somehow Google is an improvement. Lol.

That's not to say Apple doesn't strongarm and do whatever it wants, it's just that the inevitable side effect of the competing business model of a licensed OS across multiple hardware vendors always seems to involve those manufacturers trying to make up their thin margins by selling 'space' in their installs for crap. And of course since Google isn't charging for the OS, they need to make it up with more ads, which guarantees their #1 priority is lots of adware / data mining of the users as well.


RE: We have all been here before
By Tony Swash on 5/10/2011 12:29:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Forgot to include Apple cutting the legal legs from anyone who dared make hardware that was OSx compatible.

This is business, it goes back far, far earlier than Rockefeller. But by cutting two snippets from MS and Googgle to advance your own agenda is.....well you being you.


Yeah - so Sony should allow PS3 clones, Microsoft should allow Xbox clones, BMW should allow BMW clones cars. Don't be a dope. Apple make combined hardware/software devices. Apple doesn't stop people networking to help each other hack MacOSX to run on non-Mac hardware (I have done that and it was easy to find the info and support software to let me do it - Apple does nothing to stop this). What Apple stops is people ripping off their business model to make money - and why not? Raising red herrings about Apple won't stop people seeing what Google is doing and how much it reflects their claim to be 'open' and 'doing no evil'.


RE: We have all been here before
By sprockkets on 5/10/2011 7:16:24 PM , Rating: 3
Can I sideload on Android? Yes, unless you bought a crappy Att phone.

Can I sideload on iOS? Not without jailbreaking.

When this changes, Google will be evil. Until then, STFU.


RE: We have all been here before
By nafhan on 5/10/2011 9:55:02 AM , Rating: 2
It seems like Tony spends a lot of time searching for little known blogs that support his point of view - either that or he just writes the stuff himself. Linking to random wordpress blogs that no ones ever heard of certainly isn't authoritative or even really helpful.


RE: We have all been here before
By Tony Swash on 5/10/2011 11:46:01 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
It seems like Tony spends a lot of time searching for little known blogs that support his point of view - either that or he just writes the stuff himself. Linking to random wordpress blogs that no ones ever heard of certainly isn't authoritative or even really helpful.


I notice you don't actually attempt to refute any of the points made in the reasonably cogent article I linked to. The article makes a clear argument based on Google's actions and business model for a certain sort of analysis of Google, one considerably less gullible and starry eyed than many around here, and you haven't actually responded to any of them. Why?

What about Google using compatibility as 'a club' to make OEMs do what they want. Is that not being evil?

Come Google fans - tell me why this is OK?


RE: We have all been here before
By nafhan on 5/10/2011 12:42:11 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, what I was trying to say is: make your point in your post here (you know, that's what forums are for), or if you can't manage that, at least link to articles from reputable sources. I'm not going to waste my time reading a random multi-page article of dubious credibility.
quote:
What about Google using compatibility as 'a club' to make OEMs do what they want. Is that not being evil?
To start with, I always felt like "do no evil" was a ridiculous corporate motto/slogan. Is using "compatibility as a club" good for the Android ecosystem? Probably (at least some of the time). Is it bad for some OEM's? Yes, but again, only some of the time. Is it "evil"? I'd say it's a business decision - not killing babies or something. So, no it's certainly not "evil" as far as I understand the term.


RE: We have all been here before
By Tony Swash on 5/10/2011 2:07:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Actually, what I was trying to say is: make your point in your post here (you know, that's what forums are for), or if you can't manage that, at least link to articles from reputable sources. I'm not going to waste my time reading a random multi-page article of dubious credibility.


You can't be bothered to read a short few hundred words article on topic but you do have time to tell us you are not going to read it.

Covering your eyes does not make the bogey man go away:)


RE: We have all been here before
By nafhan on 5/10/2011 3:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
Yep.


"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki