They can if there is fraud. i.e. If they choose a winner with a different method other than the one specified in the terms of conditions or if they already have the winners before hand. Of course, I don't believe that google would do anything evil, I'm just saying that if there is a contest, and there is fraud, you can sue.
Let me give yuou an example. Google says that they will choose the winners based on four criteria and only on those four criteria. So I spend 1000 hours and code my application to those four criteria. Then after the contest I find out that they chose the winners not based solely on those four criteria but rather on whether my submission came from a team or an individual. I also find out that my application could have won, but because I submitted as a team or a company and because there were already too many companies winning then they decided to give it to an individual. Now, I've just wasted 1000 hours on a competition that did not follow its own terms and conditions when selecting the winner. In fact, I've been misleaded. This my friend, is grounds for a law suit. Google can say that they reserve the right to change the rules or not follow them if they want to, bla,bla,blah, but the fact is that if I can reasonably show that google acted in bad faith then it is likely that a judge may see it my way and award me punitive damages. Once again, I don't believe that google is acting in bad faith nor that they will. I really do believe their do no evil motto. On May 1, 2:52 am, "Muthu Ramadoss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think anyone can sue Google if they fail to win. The judges have the > final say. > > > > > > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Kevin Galligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Oh, I'm with you there. Its not like they're going to say, "Oh, and > > Steve's app is in because, well, we just felt like Steve needed a > > break". However, in a situation where Steve and BigCorp had the same > > idea, it would be interesting to see how things went down. > > > Ehh, you're right. I bet BigCorp would win. BigCorp would sue, > > unless Steve's app was clearly better. Steve probably isn't going to > > sue ;) > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I think the goal of ADC is to showcase amazing apps on the Android > > > > platforms. I would estimate that most of the 50 winners will be > > > > corporate and team entries even though I estimate most of the 1700+ > > > > entries are individual entries. Still, I hope there will be a few > > > > individual entries winners (I am one). > > > > Yes, I think google can get sued if they choose some applications > > > based on whether it is an individual or not. It would constitute fraud > > > on my book since they never made that clear in the terms and > > > conditions. Applications will be chosen based on the four criterias > > > mentioned and that is it. Any of you hoping that google will cut you > > > some slack because you are an individual you are dreaming. > > > > On Apr 30, 8:30 pm, j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I think the goal of ADC is to showcase amazing apps on the Android > > > > platforms. I would estimate that most of the 50 winners will be > > > > corporate and team entries even though I estimate most of the 1700+ > > > > entries are individual entries. Still, I hope there will be a few > > > > individual entries winners (I am one). > > > > > On Apr 30, 4:22 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > The terms rightly shift the burden to contestants of any suits that > > > > > happen because someone somewhere thought something somewhat like > > what > > > > > you thought and captured in code. The contestants have to cover > > this: > > > > > > "patent or other intellectual property right of any person" > > > > > > I don't know what patents exist on handset accelerometer driven > > games, > > > > > but if that is what was submitted, the submitter shoulders the > > legal > > > > > stuff. > > > > > > I don't know what patents exist on GPS location based services/ map > > > > > views, but I bet there are some and the contestant must shoulder > > the > > > > > burden if someone sees the application and thinks it looks like > > > > > theirs. 10 Best was doing something with AT&T a few years ago and > > AT&T > > > > > can be a bit territorial. > > > > > > You get the idea. > > > > > > Our entry is about traffic avoidance. The basic idea harkens back > > to > > > > > Paul Revere's ride where traffic density was relayed by lanterns > > with > > > > > the words "one if by land and two if by sea." And some other 100 > > year > > > > > old ideas. The Android architecture makes some really simple, well > > > > > worn, ideas really powerful. It will coexist with exiting services > > > > > and users will get to shop existing traffic services based on how > > good > > > > > the services work for them. > > > > > > Anyway we kept our application so simple that it is obvious, to > > give > > > > > it the best shot of reaching the market… And we protected our team > > > > > members. > > > > > > I hope this clarifies. > > > > > > On Apr 30, 4:25 pm, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Why? I get corporate law, but what's the concern? > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Ours was a team, but we submitted as a company so that the > > check will > > > > > > > be made out to something that can be limited liability. If > > you read > > > > > > > the terms for phase 2 (maybe stage 2), limited liability is a > > the only > > > > > > > way I could see to responsibly participate. > > > > > > > > On Apr 30, 3:24 pm, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I assumed it was more of a legal deal. Maybe not, though. > > I imagine > > > > > > > > if all the 50 were going to be business apps, they'd > > probably swap out > > > > > > > > a couple of the group and individual ones just to keep the > > masses > > > > > > > > happy. > > > > > > > > > Maybe they would be judged differently, though. I think > > individual or > > > > > > > > team might get a little slack for interface polish and > > documentation. > > > > > > > > I don't think its going to do much for idea assessment, > > though. They > > > > > > > > want awesome apps. Considering that, I bet everybody would > > get about > > > > > > > > the same assessment. > > > > > > > > > Where this might really come into play is the unavoidable > > situation: > > > > > > > > two (or more) of the same submissions. If the ideas are the > > same and > > > > > > > > the quality is comparable, I bet the > > business/team/individual > > > > > > > > designation would come into play. The question is, which > > way would it > > > > > > > > go? Business is most likely to complete the app (maybe). > > Individual > > > > > > > > and team make for better press. Cinderella story sort of > > thing. I'd > > > > > > > > argue this whole thing is as much about the apps as it is > > about the > > > > > > > > press, but I could be wrong ;) > > > > > > > > > Also individual. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 4:01 PM, nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > So they asked us in the submission process whether we > > were an > > > > > > > > > individual, a team, or a business. What impact do you > > think that will > > > > > > > > > have on judging? If any? I can't remember them saying > > in the contest > > > > > > > > > rules that applications would be judged differently based > > on the type > > > > > > > > > of submission, but I can imagine that that information > > would subtly > > > > > > > > > change how someone would look at an application. And in > > a way it > > > > > > > > > would make it more fair given that individuals are going > > to have > > > > > > > > > manpower differences (by definition) compared to teams or > > business. > > > > > > > > > > Full disclosure: I say this as someone who submitted as > > an > > > > > > > > > individual :-) > > > > > > > > > > nick- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > take care, > Muthu Ramadoss. > > http://mobeegal.in > find stuff closer.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Challenge" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
