My guess - as a former google employee he may have knowledge of the inner workings of the company and can upload/create the app in such ways that he can maximize pre take down times.
> Googlers and Xooglers receive no special treatment. No current Googler would risk getting fired to help a Xoogler. No conspiracy theory required.
Unless the person knows he is a future Xooglers. Come on, corruption is everywhere and employees do bad things all the time. The employee(s) may be paid for doing that.
> SongFlip has been banned from Google Play several times in the past for Intellectual Property infringement. After his developer account is banned, the developer keeps on creating new developer accounts to reupload this app. Below is a list of past package names this app has been uploaded under, which have since been banned:
com.seven.songflip
com.fungames.songflip
com.unicornlabs.firetunes
So really Google isn't allowing it, this person just keeps on signing up.
Does Google not have an app approval process when a developer wants to submit an app to the store? Surely the resubmission of a banned app would be detected at that step?
Android dev here: There is virtually no submission review. As long as the bundle ID is correct I could upload pretty much whatever I wanted, the only things they check for are matching bundle ID's, correct version numbers, basically anything that could damage the Play store in some technical fashion. Everything else is up for the users to report, which is why the Play store is FLUSH with garbage apps.
Windows Phone doesn't seem a ton better, the only ones that have any handle on crapware are Apple, and even then it isn't as good as it used to be.
It's a control / scale issue. Apple clamps harder on apps that infringe on its rules (it appears they have humans in the loop doing some active checking, if "My app got banned for ridiculous reasons" stories that hit HN periodically are to be believed). But Apple's developer base is so much larger that the amount of work needed to control against crap is proportionately higher.
It's true that there is crapware in the iOS app store, but this app would face at least some pain there. Since there's app review, you couldn't have the app taken down then just upload it again without waiting through the long process of app review.
I have both. I'm not saying it's the Eden of apps (Like I said, especially recently the App Review seems very lax) but the ratio of crap to useful apps is much better in the App Store in my experience.
There is surely a way to determine if one app is substantially similar to a previously banned app, eg. by fuzzy comparing the binary, or running it and comparing screenshots.
What if an app provides negative value? Right now every successful app has a few dozen knockoffs that are deliberately confusingly similar, and functionally identical or inferior; it makes discovery considerably more difficult, especially if you're looking for something that isn't a hit or a ripoff of a hit.
I'm pretty sure nobody is advocating for warez or exact copy apps, but you need to be careful drawing that line.
Just because to you it's "just another bejeweled clone" doesn't make it so. A layperson would probably think that HN is "just another reddit", and that's not any more valid.
Luckily (or unluckily depending on which side you are on) we already have laws that define this for us. Trademark, copyright, and patents. For better or for worse, that's legally what we have to work with.
Not bad, as such. I'm all for someone writing an app that adds value/entertainment and makes them some money. But at the same time.. how many do we really need?
Or suing developers who intentionally violate the ToS in a repeated manner like this. Make it financially far more costly to screw Google and the users over than it is currently profitable.
It sounds like the people being screwed are SoundCloud and possibly some of the musicians who use it, not Google or the millions of users downloading the app. So if someone should sue, it should probably be them.
Probably none but what banks share your address with whoever asks? You can open a new checking account with your bank online and get a new P.O. box and as far as Google is concerned you are a different person/company.
There isn't a way for a normal company to verify the name who registered a bank account. They can verify your claim to have access to it, but not the actual name on the account.
Google could hold the money for X days (30? 60?) and ensure they respond to complaints within that time so if a new app appears and people complain it can be taken down and the money not sent on. That would prevent the ToS breaking developers from profiting.
I find that statement weirdly irreconcilable. Can you really be a naive user and a developer worth his mettle? I get your point, but there is a huge chasm between what users think is good for them and the actual capacity they have to not harm themselves.
I get that you as a "power user" are probably not interested in the restrictions and rules that the Apple ecosystem "imposes", but there is a humongous gap between you who is probably very competent and skilled at protecting yourself from all the numerous and plentiful risks that the Android system exposes you to; and the other end of the spectrum, the 99.99% of users who couldn't protect themselves even if they wanted to and wantonly download and install and follow prompts (if they read them at all) to expose themselves.
I find it rather ironic and rather reckless really from the developer perspective too that you seem to totally eschew all the risk considerations that Apple takes into account, just ignoring the business decisions they make. It is unarguable that the Apple ecosystem is not astronomically more secure and safe and a better user experience than Android for 99.999% of users.
You may be upset that you don't have access to low level device or OS features, but ultimately those are also largely security restrictions and in no way there to annoy you. What you should ask yourself is why the devs like you seem to be wholly unappreciative that Apple doesn't leave massive, humongous, gargantuan security and privacy vulnerabilities just gaping wide open all over their OS and devices. It's rather telling that people with your kind of mentality have no understanding for practical considerations and justifiable limitations and boundaries.
Sure, I'm not a huge fan about all of Apple's decisions, but conversely, your type of mentality is the equivalent of saying that there should be no guards in prisons and bank vaults should be open to the outside 24/7 where everyone can take out money on the honor system.
To address some of your arguments (the others are quite orthogonal to my original point) :-
>I find it rather ironic and rather reckless really from the developer perspective too that you seem to totally eschew all the risk considerations that Apple takes into account, just ignoring the business decisions they make.
I am not advocating for the abandonment of all security in favour of freedom. And I think there a better balance of security, convinience and freedom is possible than that currently provided by Apple. Still there is a certain trade-off involved between freedom and security. We have to compromise on one to gain the other. Given the choice, I would rather sacrifice a bit of security for greater freedom than vice-versa. (which is ultimately why i chose the android ecosystem over Apple's)
>It is unarguable that the Apple ecosystem is not astronomically more secure and safe and a better user experience than Android for 99.999% of users.
I will agree that from a security and privacy perspective iOS is miles ahead of Android. But i can argue that the iOS doesn't provide a better user experience for 99.99% of users. I will give just one example from my country India (there are many more). Here we are undergoing a explosive growth of smartphone usage driven by low-cost android devices. A lot of this growth is driven by poorer users from rural areas. The thing is even if they could afford Apple devices, they would get a sub-par experience to that provided by Android. Why? Because they often lack the necessary literacy, connectivity or bankability needed to utilize the Apple ecosystem (Or even the Play store for that matter). Instead they use apps like Xender and bluetooth to share music, apps, videos, etc. It is an entirely decentralised, p2p, shadow ecosystem operating in parallel to the playstore-ecosystem. Sure, it is rife with piracy (one of the main considerations behind Apple's locked-down model) and is riddled with insecurity. But i would argue that benefits far outweigh the risks. And isn't bringing the benefits of technology to the poor, one of the professed goals of Silicon Valley?
Which brings me back to my original point- Android's lenient security model allows for new and novel uses of technology that wouldn't have otherwise been possible.
Which would you prefer, a locked-down walled-in garden, ensuring you can only run a certain piece of software if company x tells you you can; or a more open marketplace that everyone can take part in, that occasionally has bad apples?
Neither. I prefer a completely open non-marketplace aka PC minus Windows 10. Phones in their current iteration are the death of device freedom. Sure there are work arounds for some things but they're band-aids on bullet wounds.
Only because they don't know what it is, nor largely that it exists, nor what it means for them to not have it.
Most of the big tech companies prey on ignorant users these days in the most insidious and pernicious ways for their profits - to a far greater extent than the seemingly innocent things like making a quick buck because someone doesn't know how to snap in a DIMM.
EDIT: Nor any viable alternative in the same form factor.
The "mysteriously" qualifier seems to be sarcasm by the part of the original submitter on reddit. He seems to be implying that, by being a former Google employee, this person is getting a pass or using inside information to skirt around the system.
Quoting from the post:
> Here is proof SongFlip was released by someone who used to work for Google:
The conclusion of his post seems to be in line with that:
> My question is why is Google allowing SongFlip to break so many rules? Could it be the case that the SongFlip creator, who is a former Google employee, is using contacts within Google to prevent it from being taken down despite so many violations? We can only speculate...
> By mysteriously allowing it to continue breaking rules and violate intellectual property and ignoring all reports against the app, Google has allowed it to quickly become the #16 Overall app in the USA, which means it is making over $30,000 per day in ad revenue and is as popular as Spotify (#14 Overall app).
I think that anyone could probably do the same things that SongFlip is doing. The dev is just slipping through unnoticed because Google isn't particularly vigilant about making sure bans stick because it'd be an annoying overhead and would block some people from getting to upload that might make great apps.
As for the ToS violation clause I think that's there for when they receive complaint from the 3rd party, they don't want to go through every app and figure out all the 3rd party application it's using and how then go to each of those sites and parse their ToS. Does Apple even do that in their review process? That'd be a hell of a lot of work.
"The "mysteriously" qualifier seems to be sarcasm by the part of the original submitter on reddit. He seems to be implying that, by being a former Google employee, this person is getting a pass or using inside information to skirt around the system.
"
Considering Robert was a product marketing manager, and thus, would not have had access to much, it's a pretty silly guess.
But it's clearly not banned quick enough if he can get to #16 and have >1M downloads. I can't believe that happened in a few days. Every reupload would start from 0 users.
Google could still take legal action against them.
Repeatedly signing up for new accounts after being banned is trespassing on private property, and I'm fairly sure Google could sue for TOS violations if they wanted.
Google allows everything by default, and only takes down apps later if they become a problem, whereas Apple reviews everything that is published beforehand.
Well they do have responsibility to police - if app x infringes company y content it is up to y to notify google. Same as with any breaking of guidelines.
As a person that has had dealings with apple submission process and dev accounts - lets agree to disagree. These people wanted credit card information faxed to them.
most likely from a part of his body not suitable to mention here. :) But, if you get kicked out of the play store for breaking the rules, don't you also lose any funds you have earned through google?
I guess he could use mobile ads from a third party that doesn't care about the app changing names.
earlier you wrote "Here I am using images I have a right to use, but they banned me anyway." (Which I thought was informative). You got downvoted, and replied in frustration to yourself writing "Someone can't leave a comment on here without being down-voted by the same asshole every time? Fucking tools." But quickly deleted both comments.
Not before I started writing the response below to it though. I hope you see it!
>Here I am using images I have a right to use, but they banned me anyway.
>>Someone can't leave a comment on here without being down-voted...
Your handle is poopsintub - HN isn't reddit, which is a very good thing. Here in general commentators need to be more substantive and civil in all of their comments. (Which is what makes this place good.)
I would suggest making a more normally-named account (I'm only referring to the name you chose here, not the content of your posts.) By the way I had a glance at your posting history, it's substantial and good. HN has a policy about being civil, so anyone who even glances at your username will see that you are already not being civil, since poopsintub can't be part of civil discourse - a politician can't say those words on TV at all. This is probably what causes you to attract downvotes anytime you don't make a clearly informative post. (I don't think there's anything wrong with any of your posts at all, I looked through two pages, it's 80% very good and a few kneejerk reactions you might want to tone down but I didn't see anything that bad.)
I'm not a moderator here just a commentator like you. If you said something even slightly controversial (you really haven't) you might get so many downvotes that you would be hellbanned, so that nobody sees your posts except you. That really shouldn't happen.
So I would suggest picking a more neutral name and toning down the discourse a little. For example, in writing this comment I went from "make a normal account" to "I would suggest making a normal account", and adding the other information to make it more informative. Hope this helps.
I don't think Google even cares about these things. Its kind of like the usual Google fail of "allowing" spammy link farms to rise in their search results. The problem is algorithmic solutions suck compared to basic human judgement on a lot of things. This happens to be one of those things.
i'm involved in this Android ban game myself, i don't think this guy is pulling connections with old Google colleagues. i noticed myself Google getting a bit slower banning accounts of previous indiscretions. they'll have another wave soon and knock out loads of apps and accounts.
i'm also skeptical that OP in that reddit thread is really a soundcloud musician. more likely he's a jealous Android dev and snitching on his competition!
91 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 161 ms ] threadUnless the person knows he is a future Xooglers. Come on, corruption is everywhere and employees do bad things all the time. The employee(s) may be paid for doing that.
You think out of 60K employees, there's not a one that would take that risk for $15K a day? I don't think you're cynical enough.
> SongFlip has been banned from Google Play several times in the past for Intellectual Property infringement. After his developer account is banned, the developer keeps on creating new developer accounts to reupload this app. Below is a list of past package names this app has been uploaded under, which have since been banned:
com.seven.songflip
com.fungames.songflip
com.unicornlabs.firetunes
So really Google isn't allowing it, this person just keeps on signing up.
Windows Phone doesn't seem a ton better, the only ones that have any handle on crapware are Apple, and even then it isn't as good as it used to be.
Just because to you it's "just another bejeweled clone" doesn't make it so. A layperson would probably think that HN is "just another reddit", and that's not any more valid.
Luckily (or unluckily depending on which side you are on) we already have laws that define this for us. Trademark, copyright, and patents. For better or for worse, that's legally what we have to work with.
However forced ranking, deep linking, and previous ban evasion are all real concerns for Google's reputation as a corporate friendly gatekeeper.
Some people cheat wherever and whenever they can.
My guess is that it would allow an attacker to get account numbers belonging to existing customers??
Hell, who WOULDN'T do that for $30,000 daily ad income.
I get that you as a "power user" are probably not interested in the restrictions and rules that the Apple ecosystem "imposes", but there is a humongous gap between you who is probably very competent and skilled at protecting yourself from all the numerous and plentiful risks that the Android system exposes you to; and the other end of the spectrum, the 99.99% of users who couldn't protect themselves even if they wanted to and wantonly download and install and follow prompts (if they read them at all) to expose themselves.
I find it rather ironic and rather reckless really from the developer perspective too that you seem to totally eschew all the risk considerations that Apple takes into account, just ignoring the business decisions they make. It is unarguable that the Apple ecosystem is not astronomically more secure and safe and a better user experience than Android for 99.999% of users.
You may be upset that you don't have access to low level device or OS features, but ultimately those are also largely security restrictions and in no way there to annoy you. What you should ask yourself is why the devs like you seem to be wholly unappreciative that Apple doesn't leave massive, humongous, gargantuan security and privacy vulnerabilities just gaping wide open all over their OS and devices. It's rather telling that people with your kind of mentality have no understanding for practical considerations and justifiable limitations and boundaries.
Sure, I'm not a huge fan about all of Apple's decisions, but conversely, your type of mentality is the equivalent of saying that there should be no guards in prisons and bank vaults should be open to the outside 24/7 where everyone can take out money on the honor system.
>I find it rather ironic and rather reckless really from the developer perspective too that you seem to totally eschew all the risk considerations that Apple takes into account, just ignoring the business decisions they make.
I am not advocating for the abandonment of all security in favour of freedom. And I think there a better balance of security, convinience and freedom is possible than that currently provided by Apple. Still there is a certain trade-off involved between freedom and security. We have to compromise on one to gain the other. Given the choice, I would rather sacrifice a bit of security for greater freedom than vice-versa. (which is ultimately why i chose the android ecosystem over Apple's)
>It is unarguable that the Apple ecosystem is not astronomically more secure and safe and a better user experience than Android for 99.999% of users.
I will agree that from a security and privacy perspective iOS is miles ahead of Android. But i can argue that the iOS doesn't provide a better user experience for 99.99% of users. I will give just one example from my country India (there are many more). Here we are undergoing a explosive growth of smartphone usage driven by low-cost android devices. A lot of this growth is driven by poorer users from rural areas. The thing is even if they could afford Apple devices, they would get a sub-par experience to that provided by Android. Why? Because they often lack the necessary literacy, connectivity or bankability needed to utilize the Apple ecosystem (Or even the Play store for that matter). Instead they use apps like Xender and bluetooth to share music, apps, videos, etc. It is an entirely decentralised, p2p, shadow ecosystem operating in parallel to the playstore-ecosystem. Sure, it is rife with piracy (one of the main considerations behind Apple's locked-down model) and is riddled with insecurity. But i would argue that benefits far outweigh the risks. And isn't bringing the benefits of technology to the poor, one of the professed goals of Silicon Valley?
Which brings me back to my original point- Android's lenient security model allows for new and novel uses of technology that wouldn't have otherwise been possible.
Which would you prefer, a locked-down walled-in garden, ensuring you can only run a certain piece of software if company x tells you you can; or a more open marketplace that everyone can take part in, that occasionally has bad apples?
Sounds a lot like "device freedom" isn't a feature people actually want.
Most of the big tech companies prey on ignorant users these days in the most insidious and pernicious ways for their profits - to a far greater extent than the seemingly innocent things like making a quick buck because someone doesn't know how to snap in a DIMM.
EDIT: Nor any viable alternative in the same form factor.
Quoting from the post:
> Here is proof SongFlip was released by someone who used to work for Google:
> His Linkedin and Google+ Profiles list prior employment by Google: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robertdo and https://plus.google.com/+RobertDo/about
> He mentions he created SongFlip here: http://www.meetup.com/The-Brooklyn-iPhone-and-iPad-Developer...
> His Twitter shows extensive SongFlip testing: https://twitter.com/robertdo
> His company "Hype Reactor, Inc.": http://www.bizapedia.com/ca/HYPE-REACTOR-INC.html
> The "Hype Reactor, Inc." developer account shows SongFlip was uploaded to it before being removed: https://www.appannie.com/apps/ios/publisher/hype-reactor-inc...
The conclusion of his post seems to be in line with that:
> My question is why is Google allowing SongFlip to break so many rules? Could it be the case that the SongFlip creator, who is a former Google employee, is using contacts within Google to prevent it from being taken down despite so many violations? We can only speculate...
> By mysteriously allowing it to continue breaking rules and violate intellectual property and ignoring all reports against the app, Google has allowed it to quickly become the #16 Overall app in the USA, which means it is making over $30,000 per day in ad revenue and is as popular as Spotify (#14 Overall app).
As for the ToS violation clause I think that's there for when they receive complaint from the 3rd party, they don't want to go through every app and figure out all the 3rd party application it's using and how then go to each of those sites and parse their ToS. Does Apple even do that in their review process? That'd be a hell of a lot of work.
Considering Robert was a product marketing manager, and thus, would not have had access to much, it's a pretty silly guess.
Repeatedly signing up for new accounts after being banned is trespassing on private property, and I'm fairly sure Google could sue for TOS violations if they wanted.
Or is this also a problem that occurs on the Apple store?
Apple is black box which you should pray to not reject it for whatever reason and get incomprehensible rejection message in your mailbox.
Occasionally when a new rule is introduced, there is uncertainty on both sides about how it is to be interpreted leading to stress for developers.
And Apple's rejection messages are far from incomprehensible. They point to what you need to change.
As a person that has had dealings with apple submission process and dev accounts - lets agree to disagree. These people wanted credit card information faxed to them.
1: Google is only banning developer accounts, not the violating developer themselves (policy problem).
2: Google is trying to ban the actual developer, but failing at identity assertion (technical/data problem).
Never heard of this before. So Google (allegedly) have their own 4chan-alike service internally?
http://gizmodo.com/5946769/google-workers-make-internal-meme...
I wonder where he pulled that number from.
I guess he could use mobile ads from a third party that doesn't care about the app changing names.
earlier you wrote "Here I am using images I have a right to use, but they banned me anyway." (Which I thought was informative). You got downvoted, and replied in frustration to yourself writing "Someone can't leave a comment on here without being down-voted by the same asshole every time? Fucking tools." But quickly deleted both comments.
Not before I started writing the response below to it though. I hope you see it!
>Here I am using images I have a right to use, but they banned me anyway.
>>Someone can't leave a comment on here without being down-voted...
Your handle is poopsintub - HN isn't reddit, which is a very good thing. Here in general commentators need to be more substantive and civil in all of their comments. (Which is what makes this place good.)
I would suggest making a more normally-named account (I'm only referring to the name you chose here, not the content of your posts.) By the way I had a glance at your posting history, it's substantial and good. HN has a policy about being civil, so anyone who even glances at your username will see that you are already not being civil, since poopsintub can't be part of civil discourse - a politician can't say those words on TV at all. This is probably what causes you to attract downvotes anytime you don't make a clearly informative post. (I don't think there's anything wrong with any of your posts at all, I looked through two pages, it's 80% very good and a few kneejerk reactions you might want to tone down but I didn't see anything that bad.)
I'm not a moderator here just a commentator like you. If you said something even slightly controversial (you really haven't) you might get so many downvotes that you would be hellbanned, so that nobody sees your posts except you. That really shouldn't happen.
So I would suggest picking a more neutral name and toning down the discourse a little. For example, in writing this comment I went from "make a normal account" to "I would suggest making a normal account", and adding the other information to make it more informative. Hope this helps.
i'm also skeptical that OP in that reddit thread is really a soundcloud musician. more likely he's a jealous Android dev and snitching on his competition!
[0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.hypermedia...