Open Source Not Welcome At Palm App Catalog

davidmwilliams writes "It appears Palm is seeking to follow Apple's footsteps in gaining a reputation for inconsistent and spurious rejections and removals of iPhone and iPod Touch applications. In this case, Palm has resisted including a free application because the source code is attainable elsewhere."

Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[eldavojohn]

From the article:

In September Zawinski was called by Joe Hayashi from Palm, formerly Senior Director of Product Management for Yahoo!. Despite the treatment from Palm over this matter Hayashi said "We aren't asking that you remove the binaries or source of your apps from your web site, and we aren't restricting anyone from distributing their source code, open source license or otherwise."

Yet the Palm SDK License [palm.com] (as linked to in the article) states under section 4. Developers' Ownership and Ability to Distribute its Applications:

4.3 Applications Can Only Be Distributed Through the Palm Application Catalog. Developer acknowledges and agrees, that absent a separate written agreement with Palm, Developer may not distribute any Application except as allowed by Palm's formal approved distribution process and channel (the "Application Catalog"). Developer acknowledges and agrees that (a) distribution of Applications will be subject to further terms and conditions, which may include a share of the revenue generated from sale of the Applications to be paid to Palm by Developer, where such terms and conditions shall be presented to Developer upon or before Developer's request for distribution of any Application, (b) because of certain laws, regulations, as well as contractual or other restrictions, Palm may refuse to allow the distribution of certain types of Applications, and (c) distributed Applications may be viewable or inspectable by third parties, and Palm is not obligated to take any steps to obfuscate the code associated with the Applications or take any other steps to prevent third parties from viewing or inspecting Application code.

Now this is assuming Jamie Zawinski used the SDK to produce the Palm Pre programs (I'm not sure what the Pre can run and these programs seem to be merely ports). After searching around for the terms of service for the application store for the Palm Pre, I came up pretty empty handed aside from the Developer SDK License. The fact that it says 'Beta' on the app store may make this forgivable but I'm not seeing a clear distinction on the fine details and legal on what you may or may not do when submitting an application. It appears there may be some internal conflicting views also -- considering what Hayashi said and what Palm did.

Actual blog post

[Anonymous Coward]

jwz: My ongoing Kafka-esque nightmare of dealing with Palm and their App Catalog submission process. [livejournal.com]

Bonus: Ben Galbraith: Thoughts on Palm and Jamie Zawinski [galbraiths.org] (Ben and Dion just moved from Mozilla to Palm).

Open source IS welcome at Palm

[krid]

I've released an open source password management app for webOS (http://www.precentral.net/homebrew-apps/keyring), and a rep from Palm contacted me to offer help in getting my app into the catalog. They have no issues with open source, and no problem with the code being available elsewhere. The problem here is that jwz got his panties in a twist, and he needs to take a few deep breaths.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[Kasracer]

This article is dumb. Palm is working hard on getting everything in line and many policies have evolved. They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.
The App Catalog is still in beta so the latest terms, etc are not there. I don't even know why Slashdot accepted this article as it was already debunked and addressed by Palm.

Re:Ultimately Android

[Zencyde]

Are you not even paying attention to that issue? Google sent the C&D because Cyanogen was distributing applications that are sold with the Google Experience. It's not so much that the users aren't allowed to download it as much as it is the distributor lacks a method for verifying that the users have the appropriate license to acquire such content. In fact, some Google employees are assisting with the project at this point.

Lots of open source apps on there

[darrenkopp]

The twitter app i use (spaz) is open source and it's in the app catalog. and they were able to do it before the SDK was even available to the public. they got permission from palm.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[SmokeSerpent]

This is not the current developer agreement that you have to accept to submit applications. The developer agreement does include a clause allowing open source distribution as long as you do not distribute Palm's IP or charge a fee for that distribution.

Slashdot getting weak

[ConfusedVorlon]

C'mon /.
Not only is this a rehash of an article posted before.
It is pretty clear from that article that Palm is doing nothing remotely deserving this title. /. can and should do better.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[ColdWetDog]

Indeed, and the best way to do this is not to become the control freaks that Apple are.

Maybe yes. Maybe No. [wired.com]

"Tell me, do you know what this is?"

One of the first applications was open source

[Anonymous Coward]

Spaz, a twitter client, was on the pre from the launch, and it has been open source the entire time.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[shutdown -p now]

They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.

In private email, they did. And if you TFA (and the blog post [livejournal.com]), they said that "it's okay" before they released a new version of SDK, the license agreement for which explicitly states that it's not okay (which is the one linked from GP's post). So their position is at best unclear, and at worst - if you consider chronological order - they've rescinded their earlier words.

Re:Ultimately Android

[mafian911]

I dont see why Google would be considered a control freak. Android is probably the most open mobile OS available. That is the premise behind Google's "Open Handset Alliance" after all. Considering the fact that you can put any application you want on the market, without fear of rejection (unless it gets reported, which is mostly a community decision), and the fact that their OS is open source itself, I think they've gotten pretty close to being truly open as it is. I don't blame Google for trying to protect the applications they require a license for. They really have done everything they can to make the platform otherwise open. I agree with Bullfish. I think Android is going to reach critical mass soon. In my opinion, it's the only phone that has a chance to close the gap between the iPhone and every other phone on the market.

Re:Ultimately Android

[Captain Spam]

Considering the fact that you can put any application you want on the market, without fear of rejection...

I hate to be pedantic, but I'm in fact helping your case when I inform you that you don't even need to put it on the Marketplace if you choose; you can just point the browser to an .apk file hosted somewhere and the phone will offer to download and install it without problems (after you confirm you really want to do so).

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[metamatic]

The developer agreement does include a clause allowing open source distribution as long as you do not distribute Palm's IP or charge a fee for that distribution.

So it's still incompatible with the GPL, then.

(GPL allows you to charge a fee, and doesn't allow you to impose additional restrictions on people such as prohibiting them from charging a fee.)

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[MightyMartian]

Moderation shouldn't be based on whether you agree with someone. That's the whole point. If you disagree with someone, then goddamned well enter the thread and debate. But to use mod points (like these idiot mods did) to basically bash down something they don't like but don't have the balls to actually to get into the game about is just plain wrong, and shows what cowardly, worthless, pathetic, meaningless little pieces of snot those mods are.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License

[Anonymous Coward]

I read the article and it seemed to me Palm was working against him, not with him. How is it possible that they were so unprepared for open source? Not allowing other distribution, suggesting a NDA before discussing the distribution restrictions? That is not just "dragging their feet", that's being totally out of touch with the software development world of today.