The kerfuffle painting the Google Wallet app as an innocent victim of Verizon blocking — in violation of an “open” Internet and net neutrality regulations — completely misses the forest for the trees. This conflict revolves around two ongoing industry battles. First, whether or not apps should be vetted for security, privacy, and other legal concerns before public release or crowd-sourced fixed after problems affect everyone. And second whether or not Internet apps should have open access to proprietary devices, hardware, network operating systems and security authorizations.
Google is no victim of “blocking,” Google is negotiating in the press, which is its standard MO.
Google also is no longer the mythical “two guys in a garage,” but it is increasingly the dominant mobile player, commanding 97% share of mobile search, 80% share of U.S search advertising, 53% share of U.S. mobile operating systems, and 44% of global online advertising. In addition, Google brazenly projects Android’s share of all TVs globally will be 50+% in 2012. This is all strong evidence of Google’s self-serving concept of “open Internet” competition, which is that everything owned by everyone else should be free and openly accessible to Google without permission.
Google/Android is the World’s Biggest Pickpocket
Consider the overwhelming evidence from those that deal with Google.
App Developers: Google Android fosters the pocket-picking of app developers’ wallets. The number one Android app developer, Zeptolab, told the FT that the Android platform generates only 5-10% of the revenues that the “smaller” Apple iOS platform generates for app developers. Zeptolab’s Misha Lyalin said: “We are not making much money from Android even though we have been number [one] app for three months… there is a huge gap, really a big one.” The reason is Android enables mass piracy. For example, Android game developer Hexage, points out Android “piracy of his apps is through the roof.” Per Business Insider, Android has enabled pirates to steal Hexage’s games at a rate of: 97% in Asia, 70% in Europe, and 43% in the U.S. A recent Yankee research study into Android app piracy concluded it was a major problem for developers: “Android apps are living in the Wild West without a sherrif… Google can’t afford to simply let pirates kill app developers businesses. They need to foster some law and order…”
Users: Google Android effectively enables users’ “pockets” to be picked as well. For example, Android pilfered users’ privacy without their knowledge as Android secretly tracked users’ location every few seconds, per the Wall Street Journal. Google Android’s lax security has enabled hackers to snatch private records of users’ phone calls, texts, emails and call lists, all without a user’s permission or control, per PC Magazine’s Security Watch and a recent North Carolina State University study. Google Android’s lax approach to notifying people of needed security patches, allows hackers to continue to easily filch users’ privacy per InfoWorld. And concerning Google TV, which runs on a version of Android, Google prevented users from installing security software to protect themselves from harmful content or malware, per PC World.
The most egregious harm to users from Google’s sticky fingers was that Google for several years knowingly criminally endangered users’ health and safety by promoting illegal prescription drug imports according to the DOJ; this criminal behavior resulted in a near record $500m criminal forfeiture penalty against Google in August. And to show that this was not an isolated incident of Google’s disregard for its users’ money and welfare, the Special Inspector General of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) of the Federal Government recently found that Google widely promoted mortgage scams with Google advertising, effectively facilitating the swindling of millions of dollars from unsuspecting U.S. consumers.
Competitors: Concerning Google Wallet specifically, eBay sued Google this year for picking Paypal’s pocket of most of their trade secrets related to mobile payment systems, per Reuters. Concerning the creation of Android software, Oracle sued Google last year for billions of dollars because it “knowingly, directly, and repeatedly infringed Oracle’s Java-related property.” An incriminating email indicates Google’s leadership chose to pick Oracle’s pockets. After Google experimented with Skyhook Wireless’ WiFi location service in order to improve Google and Android’s location engine, Google then allegedly picked Skyhook’s pocket of patented innovations and then reportedly bullied Skyhook’s clients to not use Skyhook, but use Android’s stolen location engine solution. This prompted Skyhook to sue for patent infringement and unfair business practices.
In addition, Yelp told the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee in September of Google’s deceptive and unfair business practice of swiping Yelp’s restaurant reviews and then presenting them as Google’s own on Google Places. Moreover, Viacom sued Google-YouTube for $1b for an “illegal business model” for snatching hundreds of thousands of infringing TV and movies videos. The appeal of this case has the Appeals Court focusing in on Google’s undisputed “willful blindness” to the pilfering of Viacom’s copyrighted content.
Finally in what should be the Guiness World Record for most pockets picked by one company, Google has copied over fifteen million books without the copyright holders permission, prompting the world’s authors and publishers to sue Google for theft, and the DOJ, Register of Copyrights and a Federal Judge to all oppose Google’s proposed book settlement as effectively granting Google a going-forward monopoly to pick authors’ pockets in the future.
In sum, Google Android’s “prime directive” apparently is: “adoption uber alles,” i.e. do whatever it takes to accelerate Android adoption and extend Google’s dominance as deeply as possible into mobile and video. This requires Google to generally interpret an “open Internet” to mean there is no need for Google to ask others for their permission or authorization to access and use their private data or property. If someone expects otherwise, Google will accuse them of not being transparent, trying to block or censor Google, infringe on Google’s freedom of speech, or discriminate against Google.