Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Root bar? | 523 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

And we have a winner

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 21 2013 @ 08:21 PM EDT

Clear indication that the vendor and/or service provider can quite easily lock down the phone even though Google provides a more open platform.

The point being: so far, the only real issues that can be pointed to are not issues created by Google.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Root bar?

Authored by: PJ on Monday, July 22 2013 @ 05:10 AM EDT

If someone could prove that, that the vendor is
allowed to do what he wishes in the terms of
agreement, as opposed to Google telling them
what to do, that would be of interest.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

no, you didn't

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 22 2013 @ 09:27 AM EDT

(after all didn't we install NetBSD on a 286 back then?)

No, you did not install NetBSD "on a 286", then or now.

Maybe you confused NetBSD with ELKS , a.k.a. Linux 8086.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

mea culpa - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 22 2013 @ 04:04 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )