Don't Be Evil Means Don't Be Evil
linuxjournal.com
linuxjournal.com
This makes no sense to me. If Google told me, "Stop distributing our closed source applications" then I wouldn't care whether I was told by an engineer or a lawyer. And I certainly don't see why using a lawyer to do this would be "one of the worst sins you can commit" in the open source community.
With that being said, this article raises good points about the closed-ness of the Android software dev kits, their use of NDAs, and how their handling of Android development has been less open than Google likes to claim.
If their motto was "Don't be Annoying" I could understand the outrage... and yes, Google probably made a mistake by not calling the guy first.
But it seems like a simple corporate communications mistake... and last I checked mistakes, especially the first time they occur, aren't evil.
An ethics document would obviously be more detailed, but those three simple words allow for a quick initial vetting of a decision.
I think it's less a question of ethics in general, and more a question of not playing by the rules of the community in which they're trying to participate.