[SporkLover]

Jethro, I am starting to think you are a 15 Y/O. Your language has degraded into something that isn't Intelligible. I can disengage if you think you are going to stay at the juvenile level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source is your definition of Open Source. Android is under an Apache License. That is an open source license. It allows folks to develop things for the software that ARE CLOSE SOURCE. Close Source, meaning you do not have access to the code, and have to abide by the original provider's distribution license / rules. In the case of Cyanogen, Gmail, Market, Google Maps, etc are CLOSE SOURCE.

Cyanogen was violating distribution rules for CLOSE SOURCED software. Not Android.

The remote remove you speak of refers to the Android market and any software peddled through the Android Market. If you don't use the Android Market (which belongs to Google) then you don't have an issue. Those Terms of Service apply to ONLY Android Market. Google owned up to them over a year ago, and if you search for news releases, you will see Google was open and up front, and released their intent a long time ago.

I'll even help you out:

Google may have more need to use a kill switch than Apple. That's because Apple vets applications before putting them into its Apps Store. Anything goes in Google's Android Market, opening the chances of malicious or otherwise unwanted applications appearing in the market.

Their intent was to keep Android Market safe. If there is a malicious app released, Google wanted a way to remove it from the market and affected phones.

http://tinyurl.com/y99uydy

Back to Cyanogen (because Android being open source is not really a discussion.... you can find the code easily).....

The Crux of the issue here is the Google Apps that in Google's eyes, were distributed via an Unlicensed means. If you digg deeper.... Cyanogen was distributing Close Sourced Software versions that weren't even released yet. That is more than likely why Cyanogen was singled out.