https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2q2kkdedno
Will this be good or bad for GrapheneOS and the openness of Android?
There have been several restrictions recently:
- no more device trees for Pixel phones
- developer target device is not Pixel any more but some virtual machine called Cuttlefish
- AOSP source code developed behind closed doors and then "dumped" at release
- enforcement of Play Integrity for more and more apps
- enforcement of Play Store installations for some apps
- reports that Play Integrity fails if phone is not logged in with Google account
- planned future "sideloading" ban via mandatory Play Protect (unless the developer pays Google and gives them their ID)
I remember that regarding device trees, the GrapheneOS developers interpreted this as being partially triggered by the monopoly lawsuit because they wanted to separate Pixels and Android in case they had to divest Android. So that might be good news.
I think I also read something that in the ruling it said OEMs can't be forced any more to bundle Google Search, Chrome or Gemini if OEMs wants to preload Play Services. I don't think it's particularly relevant to GrapheneOS but might go in a good direction as Google is clearly trying to weaponise Play Services against degoogled Android versions (e.g. apps enforcing Play Integrity checks, Play Protect sideloading block).
On the other hand, the general mood in the FOSS "scene" seems to be that Google got off lightly and they essentially got green light to remain a monopoly with only minor restrictions.
Overall I don't think the ruling has a particular impact on GrapheneOS and AOSP, but I'm interesting in hearing others' thoughts about it.