View Single Post
benny1967's Avatar
Posts: 3,790 | Thanked: 5,718 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ Vienna, Austria
#10
Originally Posted by zerojay View Post
Well, it's pretty much the only way it would have happened at all because there's no way they could have announced "it's GPL" and had even one of those manufacturers interested. Not even a single one. That's just how it works. Most of those companies have never been involved in anything remotely resembling open source development, so they know nothing about how it works. All they know is "we're giving away our secrets". I think what we'll see is that this is Google's way of warming them up to the platform and then later on going full GPL once the platform's gained some foothold in the market. At that point, we'll ultimately see if Android will succeed and actually convince the phone manufacturers (and providers - they see open source as a security risk) to join them and GPL their work.
Thats probably not going to work. Big projects like this dont change their licenses, not if the new one would be less rewarding for the manufacturers than the old one. No. Apache v.2 is here to stay.

I agree: It wouldnt have worked with GPL. Manufacturers wouldnt have swallowed a GPLed framework. So what? There is a GPL-licensed platform. What use is a „commercial-friendly open-source license […] without the requirement to contribute those innovations back to the open-source community“ if what you wanted was contributions to the community? I'm afraid they'll rip of community-developers, happily accepting their code but never sharing further improvements they make themselves. Thats not how it works. I'd rather have no Google-Phone at all than such a semi-open-platform.

Again, all of this is speculation at this point. - Except that lawyers say Apache v2 ist not compatible to GPLv2. So dont try using existing, GPLed code for projects on Android... (except there's a GPLv3 version; GPLv3 and Apache v2 are compatible)