What bullshit. Does requiring users to agree to GPL or LGPL license make a software non-free?
"You agree that you will not take any actions that may cause or result in the fragmentation of Android, including but not limited to distributing, participating in the creation of, or promoting in any way a software development kit derived from the SDK."
Any action? Promoting? Does this mean that I can't write a blog post about developing for Kindle Fire? Hell, can I even buy a Kindle Fire and not break these terms (or install Cyanogenmod) seeing that it is just "including but not limited to" the SDK itself?
Most people misunderstand the license, being my favourite:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePos...
EDIT: just in case... "You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program.", point 9 of the GPLv3: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
3.4 You agree that you will not take any actions that may cause or result in the fragmentation of Android, including but not limited to distributing, participating in the creation of, or promoting in any way a software development kit derived from the SDK.
You end up making quite broad promises (IMHO) by just clicking through to download the SDK.
If not, then what does this wording even mean in practice?
Is it conceivable that a company could offer source via GPL yet demand a separate license for the right to use it?
>This License explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program.
it also protects your freedom to modify and run modified versions of the software