Google demands removal of Youtube app!?

Dec 2, 2012
378
0
0
Visit site
Completely invalid comparison. MS isn't asking Google to put anything on WP. MS is not asking Google for a second of their engineering staffs time or any other kind of notable effort, whereas porting Office to another platform represents an enormously expensive undertaking.
You're right, they just flagrantly broke Google's T.O.S. but that's ok right?
This year-long back and forth just seems petty.

I'm not claiming it isn't somewhat petty but the law is clear and MS broke it, end of story. If I'm wrong, then I see no reason why MS would back down and comply with Google's complaint. They have stated they will comply and are awaiting the API's from Google. If Google chooses not to give them, we both know MS is going to be embarrassed in front of the world when Google shuts off youtube access to WP devices and MS are powerless to stop them.

I think MS made a big tactical error in picking a fight they can't win because it's going to be a widely publicized "showdown" and they're going to lose if Google decides to pick up the gauntlet rather than cooperate.
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
You're right, they just flagrantly broke Google's T.O.S. but that's ok right?

Of course not, although how flagrantly that occurred is debatable. I just wanted to point out the flawed analogy.

Fact is none of us really know how this went down. We don't know if MS disregarded existing agreements or if MS was unable to comply with them due to Google not providing the required documentation. Based on the press releases, each of us can choose whatever best fits our world view.

The only thing that is clear, which we also both agree on, is that Google is engaged in some intentional and petty feet dragging.

IMHO Google should just deny MS the rights and be done with it. I wouldn't like it, but it would be a lot more respectable.
 

Aquila

Alienware Rogue
May 14, 2013
122
0
0
Visit site
What would stop Microsoft from making an app that doesn't break the TOS? The API's are publicly available. Expecting Google to waste their resources making the app is silly, especially when everything MS needs to make their own is available; this is evidenced by the fact that MS made their own; they just modified it to heavily violate the TOS. This isn't an either or thing; it's not Google has to make it or you can't have it... MS can make it and comply with the agreement, and then you're good. Is it not also available at YouTube It's funny, that Microsoft wants to use it's own route to make apps and web access via browsers and ignore industry trends, then complain that things made in newer tech do not function 100% correctly when going backwards.

Could Google go out of their way to help Microsoft? Absolutely, and I wish that they would. The more competition there is the better for innovation for all of us; and since Google doesn't make money from selling Android, the more they can get their services on other platforms, the better! But that agreement is a two way street and with neither company willing to budge, it seems like it's going to be a consumer choice: Enjoy Windows phones with very limited access to the web as it advances, or choose another phone and wait for Microsoft to evolve.
 

Reflexx

New member
Dec 30, 2010
4,484
4
0
Visit site
Aren't the API's "available"... but not necessarily REALLY available?

As I understand it, to hook into certain services, companies are supposed to be given permission from Google.

MS requests permission to do this long long ago. Then waited... and waited... and waited.

We were stuck with an app that just went to the Youtube website. And every once in a while, even that would stop working because the website would mysteriously refuse to function unless the user switched to Desktop mode or vice versa.

Eventually I guess MS got tired of waiting for Google to give them permission and just made the app, knowing that it would prompt a response from Google. The lack of ads playing is due to not having permission to use certain APIs.

Basically, MS can't make an app with ads because it wasn't given permission to use the APIs. But if they make an app without ads they violate the TOS for Google.

This was pretty obviously Microsoft's attempt to get Google's attention. To have them either say, "Yes, you can use our APIs." or "No. You can't."

If it's a "yes" answer, then hooray!

If it's a "no" answer, Google might be opening themselves up to an antitrust lawsuit.

Google hoped to avoid that by just ignoring MS's requests. But it will be hard to play ignorant now that they've shown they are paying attention. Instead, ignoring MS now will look like a company with monopoly power in internet video leveraging that power to other areas, like mobile app markets.
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
you said Google should just tell Microsoft yes or no. I got it from your post because you wrote it. Unless you just write stuff without understanding what you are saying.

Yes, MS has the rights to use all YouTube APIs, or no, they do not. I still have no idea why you think that has anything to do with revealing business plans.
 

boxa72

New member
Dec 2, 2012
440
0
0
Visit site
Who gives a flying who's right n who's wrong! At tha end of the day its US (the consumer), on both sides, that lose out because 2 multi-nationals wanna carry on like spoiled children. I only bought an 820 bcoz its a Nokia, as that's tha only OEM whose products interest me. If Microsoft lost Windows Phone tomorrow they'd b fine but Nokia wouldn't!! Wot, if anything has Nokia ever done to Google?? With all tha bull**** between MS n Google, only Nokia gets hurt!
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
What would stop Microsoft from making an app that doesn't break the TOS? The API's are publicly available. Expecting Google to waste their resources making the app is silly, especially when everything MS needs to make their own is available...


Firstly, at this point, absolutely nobody is expecting Google to make a YouTube app for WP. Nobody.

Secondly, your take on the API issue is too one sided. In their press release MS explicitly stated that not everything they needed was available to them. MS can't outright lie in a press release (instant court case), so there is something to that, which you are ignoring entirely.

As always, and as with any press release, they are far to vague to actually clarify anything. However, there most certainly are many many ways in which Google could make it hard or even impossible for MS to comply with their T&C's, both technical and legal.

Based on Google's behavior this last year, it is entirely reasonable to assume that this is just another one of their premeditated delay tactics, but just as with MS, we don't really know.

...this is evidenced by the fact that MS made their own; they just modified it to heavily violate the TOS.


I don't understand that. All MS has (or doesn't have) is access to APIs. APIs can't be modified! Whatever happened, MS didn't modify anything.
 
Last edited:

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
Who gives a flying who's right n who's wrong! At tha end of the day its US (the consumer), on both sides, that lose out because 2 multi-nationals wanna carry on like spoiled children. I only bought an 820 bcoz its a Nokia, as that's tha only OEM whose products interest me. If Microsoft lost Windows Phone tomorrow they'd b fine but Nokia wouldn't!! Wot, if anything has Nokia ever done to Google?? With all tha bull**** between MS n Google, only Nokia gets hurt!

True, but ultimately we live in a competitive world.

Neither Google nor MS are acting like spoiled children. They are both competing for smartphone market share, and it is a fact that for every five WP users there are four fewer Android users. It is Google's job to stomp out WP's growth trend as soon as possible, and that is what they are attempting, without being too obvious about it.

I don't think this is really about right or wrong. At least for me, it is about understanding what each company is trying to achieve and how they go about it. When it comes to smartphones and the web, Google has much more power than MS. Google will bring more power to bare as WP gains market share. That comes accross as bully'ish, but MS would do the same if their roles were reversed.

Nokia chose sides, and this is one of the consequences.
 
Last edited:

freestaterocker

New member
Nov 19, 2011
1,675
0
0
Visit site
You're right, they just flagrantly broke Google's T.O.S. but that's ok right?


I'm not claiming it isn't somewhat petty but the law is clear and MS broke it, end of story. If I'm wrong, then I see no reason why MS would back down and comply with Google's complaint. They have stated they will comply and are awaiting the API's from Google. If Google chooses not to give them, we both know MS is going to be embarrassed in front of the world when Google shuts off youtube access to WP devices and MS are powerless to stop them.

I think MS made a big tactical error in picking a fight they can't win because it's going to be a widely publicized "showdown" and they're going to lose if Google decides to pick up the gauntlet rather than cooperate.

Google is also breaking the law by leveraging a practical monopoly in one market (online video content) to gain an unfair advantage over a competitor in another market. (smartphone platforms) It's exactly what MS was found guilty of in the 90s when they bundled Windows based PCs (practical monopoly) with internet explorer (other market) exclusively as the default browser. 20 years later the only real difference is Google seems to be getting away with it, both in the courts and public perception.
 

freestaterocker

New member
Nov 19, 2011
1,675
0
0
Visit site
That was fast...

Changing the API would break every YT client. More likely they are just checking what app a request comes from and ignoring it if it identifies itself as MS' YouTube client.

It was actually already broken yesterday evening. I had to go to the mobile site to show a friend a video.
 
Sep 25, 2011
710
0
0
Visit site
Google is also breaking the law by leveraging a practical monopoly in one market (online video content) to gain an unfair advantage over a competitor in another market. (smartphone platforms) It's exactly what MS was found guilty of in the 90s when they bundled Windows based PCs (practical monopoly) with internet explorer (other market) exclusively as the default browser. 20 years later the only real difference is Google seems to be getting away with it, both in the courts and public perception.
This would be true if Google gave API access to everyone but deliberately chose to keep it from Microsoft. Right now it's a simple case of 'this is my property and you keep off it'. There's nothing monopolistic here, especially when the mobile version of YouTube is open for access to anyone.
 

return_0

New member
May 14, 2013
8
0
0
Visit site
Google is also breaking the law by leveraging a practical monopoly in one market (online video content) to gain an unfair advantage over a competitor in another market. (smartphone platforms) It's exactly what MS was found guilty of in the 90s when they bundled Windows based PCs (practical monopoly) with internet explorer (other market) exclusively as the default browser. 20 years later the only real difference is Google seems to be getting away with it, both in the courts and public perception.

So are you going to explain how Google is breaking the law or just leave it there? Because I do not in any way see how forcing a company using its service to comply with said service's TOS is illegal. In fact I'd say what MS is doing is closer to breaking the law.
 

freestaterocker

New member
Nov 19, 2011
1,675
0
0
Visit site
So are you going to explain how Google is breaking the law or just leave it there? Because I do not in any way see how forcing a company using its service to comply with said service's TOS is illegal. In fact I'd say what MS is doing is closer to breaking the law.

You wouldn't even be asking me this question if you'd been around here for even a couple of months.
They're engaging in what's referred to as "anti-competitive behavior" which violates most, if not all, of the developed world's existing anti-trust laws. They refuse to make any of their services available to the Windows Phone platform with full features like what is available on IOS, Android and BlackBerry, (YouTube, google maps, dropping exchangesync for Gmail, etc) and they regularly change their APIs in ways that break the functionality of 3rd party apps that attempt to off the full experience to users of the WP platform. A perfect example is Easytube for WP7. At the time this app and others like it were the only way to access high quality and HD YouTube content on a Windows Phone, a limitation not experienced on competing platforms. Google changed the YouTube APIs to break it (and the others) so many times that Easytube's developer got fed up and dropped support for the app. It was subsequently pulled from the marketplace, leaving people who purchased the app, myself included, out the money they paid for it and out a way to enjoy high quality YouTube content on their smartphone.

This ongoing battle is well-documented on this and other tech sites. Just go search theverge.com for articles with both Microsoft and Google in the tags, and begin reading. You'll understand what "don't be evil" really means to Google.
 

ag1986

Banned
Jan 14, 2013
486
0
0
Visit site
Google is also breaking the law by leveraging a practical monopoly in one market (online video content) to gain an unfair advantage over a competitor in another market. (smartphone platforms) It's exactly what MS was found guilty of in the 90s when they bundled Windows based PCs (practical monopoly) with internet explorer (other market) exclusively as the default browser. 20 years later the only real difference is Google seems to be getting away with it, both in the courts and public perception.

wat?

YouTube still works on my dev edition L920, last time I checked. Any court will agree that this being so, WP8 still has a reasonable way to access YT and therefore Google is not guilty of antitrust.

And MS' internal emails and the way Windows was written made it clear that they'd made changes for the specific purpose of breaking Netscape et al.
 
Sep 25, 2011
710
0
0
Visit site
You wouldn't even be asking me this question if you'd been around here for even a couple of months.

They're engaging in what's referred to as "anti-competitive behavior" which violates most, if not all, of the developed world's existing anti-trust laws. They refuse to make any of their services available to the Windows Phone platform with full features like what is available on IOS, Android and BlackBerry, (YouTube, google maps, dropping exchangesync for Gmail, etc) and they regularly change their APIs in ways that break the functionality of 3rd party apps that attempt to off the full experience to users of the WP platform. A perfect example is Easytube for WP7. At the time this app and others like it were the only way to access high quality and HD YouTube content on a Windows Phone, a limitation not experienced on competing platforms. Google changed the YouTube APIs to break it (and the others) so many times that Easytube's developer got fed up and dropped support for the app. It was subsequently pulled from the marketplace, leaving people who purchased the app, myself included, out the money they paid for it and out a way to enjoy high quality YouTube content on their smartphone.

This ongoing battle is well-documented on this and other tech sites. Just go search theverge.com for articles with both Microsoft and Google in the tags, and begin reading. You'll understand what "don't be evil" really means to Google.
none of what you said is 'google breaking the law'. being evil isn't against the law.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,908
Messages
2,242,875
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb