Android Devices Are Hives of License Violations 299
inkscapee writes "Android developers are paying little attention to Free/Open Source software licenses and have a 71% violation rate. Come on folks, FOSS licenses are easy to comply with, certainly easier than proprietary software licenses, and less punitive. But it seems even the tiny hoops that FOSS requires are too much for devs eager to cash in."
What the hell? (Score:5, Informative)
The article doesn't mention Android separately. It has one set of numbers for both Android and iOS. Exact quote:
A new study from open source services vendor OpenLogic reports that 71 percent of Apple iOS and Google Android apps are not in compliance. OpenLogic scanned 635 apps, including both free and paid on the Apple App store and Google Android Marketplace. Of those 635 scanned apps, 52 apps include Apache licensed code while 16 included GPL/LGPL licensed code.
Who the hell wrote that summary?
71 percent? (Score:4, Informative)
How does 52 apps out of 635 add up to 71%??
Re:Do no evil (directly) (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What about iOS? (Score:4, Informative)
It was an iPhone user who wrote the headlines...
27% for Android - 32% for iPhone (Score:5, Informative)
From the press release [marketwire.com] for the study:
OpenLogic found that among the applications that use the Apache or GPL/LGPL licenses, the compliance rate was only 29%. Android compliance was 27% and iPhone/iOS compliance was 32%. Overall compliance of Android applications using the GPL/LGPL was 0%.
Re:Do no evil (directly) (Score:4, Informative)
But I am taking the whole article with some skepticism.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Informative)
Of the 635 apps that they looked at, they confidently identified 68 as having Apache or GPL'd code. Of the 68 apps with open source code 71%, or 48 in absolute terms, were in violation. I admit that it would have been clearer and more interesting to say that 7.6% of the apps they looked at were in violation. If they had a truly random sampling and that number held out, you'd be looking at more than 20,000 apps that are violating the Apache and GPL licenses.
Re:What the hell? (Score:-1, Informative)
Re:"FOSS licenses are easy to comply with, certain (Score:2, Informative)
As a computing professional, I find all of this whining about Free Software license complexity rather embarrassing frankly.
Who's whining? Please, don't be unnecessarily rude.
I understand licenses such as the GPL very well. I'm not whining, and I don't find the license complex in the least. I'm simply pointing out that for commercial software developers, GPL'd code is often not an option.
I also write software for my wife's small business with no plans to distribute, but I avoid GPL code in those projects, too, in case I ever do decide to commercialize what I've created. I don't want to get trapped into too much reliance on something with too high a cost, then be forced to refactor at great expense in terms of time later down the road.
I have no problem with other people using GPL code if they want to.
Electronic Arts and Oracle can manage navigating this "quagmire". Why can't you?
Why the hostile and rude attitude?
One really wonders what an SBA audit of you whiners would turn up.
Wow...fuck you, too.
I don't pirate anything. Anything. Not software. Not music. Not movies. Your thinly veiled accusation that I'm a thief is assholery in the top degree.
Big claims, no proof == slashvertisement (Score:5, Informative)
2. They offer to sell developers scanning software so devs can make sure their apps are in compliance.
3. PROFIT!?!
Color me skeptical.
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Informative)
APL, Section 4.1 ... you must include a copy of the apache license.
Section 4.4 ... if you give attribution to anyone, you must give attribution to the original work you used. I.E. if you credit yourself you have to credit the original authors as well.
Its REALLY easy to comply with, but I've failed to comply in early releases of both open and closed source software myself simply because I forgot to add attribution and the license file. Of course, as soon as I or anyone else noticed, I fixed it as it is an honest mistake but ... its still REALLY easy to violate the license in a clearly defined way.