Why is Android Studio labelled as proprietary?

Chris Williams · Feb 14, 2024

I found this:

github.com/flathub/com.google.AndroidStudio

License

opened 10:08AM - 11 Apr 19 UTC

closed 07:15AM - 18 Apr 19 UTC

I am not sure if the license tag of 'proprietary' is correct. I assume this r…efers to the license agreement seen when one downloads the prebuilt Android Studio from Googles official websites. However, the download itself contains a license notice marking all the files as licensed under the Apache license? Additionally, the License Agreement from Google specifies that for any code marked with an OSS license, the OSS licence takes precedence over the proprietary License Agreement. So, while I am not a lawyer (though I would like to hear the opinion of one on this), I'd say that the version of Android Studio as distributed on flathub is licensed under Apache? If I am wrong on this I'd like to know, because there are [some people](https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/android-studio/) redistributing Android Studio under the Apache license.

Hubert Figuière · Feb 14, 2024

It’s right there:

github.com

flathub/com.google.AndroidStudio/blob/master/com.google.AndroidStudio.appdata.xml#L5


      
          <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
          <component type="desktop">
          	<id>com.google.AndroidStudio.desktop</id>
          	<metadata_license>CC0-1.0</metadata_license>
          	<project_license>LicenseRef-proprietary</project_license>
          	<name>Android Studio</name>
          	<summary>Integrated development environment for Google's Android platform</summary>
          	<description>
          		<p>
          			Official Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for developing Android
          			applications. The IDE is based on IntelliJ IDEA, and provides additional
          			features on top of its powerful code editor and developer tools designed
          			to enhance the productivity of the Android application developers:
          		</p>
          		<ul>

KarroubaJattimy · Feb 15, 2024

im confused, is the app itself foss but the wrapper is not foss? can this be circumvented?? is this due to google or the unofficial contributor???

Chris Williams · Feb 15, 2024

I think this is sort of (but not exactly) like Chromium vs Google Chrome. Google’s binary release is apparently proprietary even though it’s based on open source code (its permissive license allows that).

BTW, to whoever just edited that Wikipedia article: in the issue I linked, “AUR” presumably means the Arch User Repository, where android-studio is (incorrectly?) labeled as Apache-licensed. Wikipedia edits should be better-sourced than a random comment on github anyway …

KarroubaJattimy · Feb 15, 2024

wait whats a binary release?

KarroubaJattimy · Feb 15, 2024

can you edit the wikipedia page and correct this?