Re: [Jack-Devel] [andraudio] Google I/O: High performance audio talk

PrevNext  Index
DateSat, 25 May 2013 18:33:29 +1000
From Patrick Shirkey <[hidden] at boosthardware dot com>
To[hidden] at lists dot jackaudio dot org
In-Reply-ToJohn Emmas Re: [Jack-Devel] [andraudio] Google I/O: High performance audio talk
Follow-UpJohn Emmas Re: [Jack-Devel] [andraudio] Google I/O: High performance audio talk
On Sat, May 25, 2013 6:14 pm, John Emmas wrote:
> On 24/05/2013 10:39, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>>
>> The market is consistently growing but [Google]
>> have excluded professional audio manufacturers and developers from
>> the market. As they have a near monopoly on the global market they are
>> verging on anti competitive behaviour.
>>
>
> On 25/05/2013 07:43, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>>
>> I would like to know what some of the official
>> organisations have to say about it. I wonder if for example the French
>> Government would be interested in it as part of their cultural
>> protection
>> program against the barrage of Foreign (ie US) influence. We know they
>> just love to take Google to court.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> We have already patiently waited for more than 4 years for them to get
>> their s**t together while they have excluded LAD and professional audio
>> from the Android platform the whole time resulting in the loss of
>> potential income for a large number of companies during that time
>> period.
>
> What on earth are you talking about Patrick??  Google's only crime in
> all this is to piss you off (and maybe a bunch of other LADs too - but
> either way, that's NOT illegal).  If Google had done something to
> prevent Apple from implementing pro-audio features, THAT would be
> anti-competitive behaviour.  But if Google makes decisions which
> ultimately harm its own products, that's not anti-competitive, it's just
> dumb.  If people could be convicted for making stupid decisions we'd all
> have been banged up in jail at some point in our lives!!
>
> You may find it unpalatable but the recipient of open source software is
> pretty much free to use it in any way they like.  As long as they abide
> by the terms of the license they absolutely DON'T have to develop it to
> suit anybody else's agenda.  If you believe they've breached the terms
> of their license, please explain how.
>

You are missing the point. It's not about licensing.

It's about Google purposefully excluding professional audio developers and
companies from the Android platform.

That is not about Google loosing money. It is about them stopping us from
making money off the Android platform.

As a rough estimate we can say they have denied the professional Audio and
Linux Audio Development community the potential of earning > $50milion
over the past 4 years.

Who knows what the actual sum might have been. In that case it is anti
competitive behaviour and those kinds of numbers tend to get the attention
of the Anti Trust Lawyers.



--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
PrevNext  Index

1369470818.32497_0.ltw:2,a <49832.188.26.171.156.1369470809.squirrel at boosthardware dot com>