Judge Dismisses Google's Complaint Over Android Code Viewing 87
CWmike writes "A U.S. trade judge has rejected Google's move to block the testimony of a Microsoft expert witness in the dispute with Motorola over patents allegedly used by Android. Last week, Google accused Microsoft of violating a confidentiality agreement struck between Microsoft, Motorola and Google in the ITC case. The judge rejected Google's motion on Monday. 'The ALJ [Administrative Law Judge] finds no basis to discern from Google's statement whether Google made a reasonable, good-faith effort to resolve the matter with Microsoft,' he wrote in his ruling."
No standing? (Score:3, Insightful)
By the way, what is this ultra secret, mega proprietary Android source code anyway? I thought Android was open source. Didn't Andy Rubin define "open" as the ability to download and compile the source?
Re:No standing? (Score:5, Insightful)
>> All the source is open but some is more open than others.
Please go on. Don't be shy. And if you can't provide the evidence, please just shut the fuck up with your Apple whoring.
"Over the past few months, according to several people familiar with the matter, Google has been demanding that Android licensees abide by "non-fragmentation clauses" that give Google the final say on how they can tweak the Android code [businessweek.com]—to make new interfaces and add services—and in some cases whom they can partner with."
Or I could have just said: Honeycomb. "Open" indeed.
BTW, they have pills for Tourette's now.
Re:Suing themselves (Score:4, Insightful)
I thought it was funny that Google and Android are supposed to be so open, yet they were trying to suppress source code they considered "highly proprietary."
Re:No standing? (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you do when Google withholds the source for months like they did with Honeycomb? Add a sleep command in there?