Google Play banned my highly rated app with no real justification(medium.com)
medium.com
Google Play banned my highly rated app with no real justification
https://medium.com/@jimmyff/google-play-banned-my-highly-rated-app-with-no-real-justification-827e734df748
28 comments
This is the principle reason we need decentralized versions of apps like YouTube as you cannot safely build companies or big projects on top of them as your entire organization's existence can be turned off arbitrarily through no fault of your own. Businesses are hard enough to run at the best of times without the threat of your foundation shifting under you.
> This is the principle reason we need decentralized versions of apps like YouTube
Not apps but services. See https://joinpeertube.org.
Not apps but services. See https://joinpeertube.org.
> It was insane how involved they were.
and yet, not insane enough to have a contract signed with them to allow the use of the api?
and yet, not insane enough to have a contract signed with them to allow the use of the api?
I had agreed to terms of service and was a paying Google Cloud customer. The API itself was free to use if they granted you quota.
Maybe if I was a larger corporate customer, I would have had enough spend to have a sales rep and the ability to contact humans and get a more official contract, but that wasn't available to me as a small business.
Maybe if I was a larger corporate customer, I would have had enough spend to have a sales rep and the ability to contact humans and get a more official contract, but that wasn't available to me as a small business.
You put up an app that used the Eurovision name in the same (or a very similar) font, using their logo and are surprised that Google doesn't want to expend any effort in figuring out how legitimate your app is?
Hi, yeah I assumed it was okay because so many other apps and websites use the word Eurovision too -I realise now that this was a big mistake. For context: earlier this year I implemented a scorecard feature (allowing users to score all historic shows and the live shows), the biggest app with this functionality is called "Eurovision 12 points", I'm surprised my app got suspended yet other apps haven't.
The font is a community font and my icon is my interpretation of the Eurovision heart. I wrongly assumed all these changes would have been fine. On the app store listings and in the app itself I make it really clear that it was an unofficial fan made app.
It would have been kind of Google if they had given me the chance to rectify the issue which I would have done without question.
Also the fact their feedback was so minimal and cryptic, if it were a trademark issue why wouldn't they just say that?
The font is a community font and my icon is my interpretation of the Eurovision heart. I wrongly assumed all these changes would have been fine. On the app store listings and in the app itself I make it really clear that it was an unofficial fan made app.
It would have been kind of Google if they had given me the chance to rectify the issue which I would have done without question.
Also the fact their feedback was so minimal and cryptic, if it were a trademark issue why wouldn't they just say that?
Did you actually read the entire article or just skim?
From the HN comment guidelines:
"Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
This is especially true here because I did read the article and have no idea why you think this comment somehow reflects the person didn't fully read the article.
"Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
This is especially true here because I did read the article and have no idea why you think this comment somehow reflects the person didn't fully read the article.
I think you've misinterpreted the guidelines on my comment.
Mine was not "Did you even read the article?". It was "Did you read it whole or skim it?"
The reason I asked what I did - the very thing the original commenter had a problem with was thoroughly addressed in that article.
If you have no idea why I think the person did not fully read the article, I'm sorry but I have to ask you if you too have read the article in full or just skimmed it?
This is just bizarre that I see two instances of, what I assume, are reading comprehension difficulties about the exact same thing.
Mine was not "Did you even read the article?". It was "Did you read it whole or skim it?"
The reason I asked what I did - the very thing the original commenter had a problem with was thoroughly addressed in that article.
If you have no idea why I think the person did not fully read the article, I'm sorry but I have to ask you if you too have read the article in full or just skimmed it?
This is just bizarre that I see two instances of, what I assume, are reading comprehension difficulties about the exact same thing.
I guess I've got to ask, did you read my comment or skim it?
Because the point of it is why are you surprised that Google doesn't want to spend time on resolving and reinstating his account, not the trademark issues which were only restating for context.
Because the point of it is why are you surprised that Google doesn't want to spend time on resolving and reinstating his account, not the trademark issues which were only restating for context.
Your original comment was why google would expend time/resources in verifying if his app is "legit" when he is using the Eurovision name and logo.
The point of it is not what you think it is, it is what your comment actually says.
Let's go full cirlce on this. Did you, the original commenter, read your own comment after you wrote it?
The point of it is not what you think it is, it is what your comment actually says.
Let's go full cirlce on this. Did you, the original commenter, read your own comment after you wrote it?
I've written the article with the hope that it will get someone's attention at Google and they can improve the systems and policies over there, or at very least start providing developers with actual reasons for banning their app so they can learn from their mistakes.
So please give the article a clap and help it reach the suits at Google!
So please give the article a clap and help it reach the suits at Google!
> See popular apps: Amazon, Bumble etc …nobody's on device app title reflects the apps functionality, they just use their brand name)
Whether or not it is correct/ethical but do not compare your app to Amazon. They are different, big, <add much more>.
My only guess is some one made a clone of your app; and is perhaps 'reporting' your app. And Google's AI is responding to you. (And if you are regular hn user... you know the results, sadly).
Whether or not it is correct/ethical but do not compare your app to Amazon. They are different, big, <add much more>.
My only guess is some one made a clone of your app; and is perhaps 'reporting' your app. And Google's AI is responding to you. (And if you are regular hn user... you know the results, sadly).
Apologies; I didn't mean to compare my app with those giants, I was just trying to demonstrate that on device titles tend not to reflect app functionality.
> with the hope that ... they can improve the systems and policies over there
This is not going to happen. There's been a dozen of such posts on HN in the recent time. Google doesn't care.
This is not going to happen. There's been a dozen of such posts on HN in the recent time. Google doesn't care.
I blogged about it when I launched it and that post received comments and applause from senior Google engineers and the official Firebase Twitter account even tweeted about it
I'm always sceptical when there are no links or evidence backing up these kinds of claims. I can not see any writings in Medium by this account about a launch of this application, which makes me even more sceptical.
Not saying the author is fabricating this whole thing, but there is literally no proof of this ever having happened either.
/edit: Was able to find that blog post finally, so I was wrong.
I'm always sceptical when there are no links or evidence backing up these kinds of claims. I can not see any writings in Medium by this account about a launch of this application, which makes me even more sceptical.
Not saying the author is fabricating this whole thing, but there is literally no proof of this ever having happened either.
/edit: Was able to find that blog post finally, so I was wrong.
Hey, I probably should have linked the original article, I didn't as it was a PWA back then (rather than native app) and it had a different name- two factors I thought could be confusing. Glad you found it anyway, if anyone's interested this is the article I was referring too:
https://medium.com/@jimmyff/building-a-web-app-the-progressi...
Frustratingly I didn't screen grab the Firebase tweet and there history doesn't go that far back anymore. I got the mention after posting the article to the Firebase slack channel and one of the team took notice and sent me a PM. (I'm sure the conversation about it will still be in my slack history).
I'm happy to share all correspondence to and from Google if there is an appetite for it. I posted the original messages to reddit 6 months back asking for advice: https://www.reddit.com/r/androiddev/comments/o6xghx/google_p...
Frustratingly I didn't screen grab the Firebase tweet and there history doesn't go that far back anymore. I got the mention after posting the article to the Firebase slack channel and one of the team took notice and sent me a PM. (I'm sure the conversation about it will still be in my slack history).
I'm happy to share all correspondence to and from Google if there is an appetite for it. I posted the original messages to reddit 6 months back asking for advice: https://www.reddit.com/r/androiddev/comments/o6xghx/google_p...
Consider publishing it in F-Droid.
I think google has proven they aren’t trustworthy at all
Obvious trademark infringement.
That isnt what they removed it for
the stated reason was: > your on-device title does not reflect your app’s functionality.
There are several other apps with Eurovision in the name. If the infringement were the reason they are selective with enforcement.
the stated reason was: > your on-device title does not reflect your app’s functionality.
There are several other apps with Eurovision in the name. If the infringement were the reason they are selective with enforcement.
An average user would download "Eurovision GP" expecting the voting functionality everyone and their dog knows is a major part of the experience and instead they get a gallery app.
OP's highly rated app was more than likely listed higher than the official app rated 2.8 stars hence user reports and its subsequent removal.
Trademark infringement is never a good idea, those other apps could get pulled for the same reason at any time.
OP's highly rated app was more than likely listed higher than the official app rated 2.8 stars hence user reports and its subsequent removal.
Trademark infringement is never a good idea, those other apps could get pulled for the same reason at any time.
Yep, I reached the same conclusion as you (albeit more slowly). I wrongly assumed it was okay because so many other apps and websites do the same. Last year I implemented a scorecard feature (allowing users to score all historic shows and the live shows), the biggest app with this functionality is called 'Eurovision 12 points', I'm surprised my app got suspended yet other apps haven't.
It would have been kind & reasonable if Google had given me an opportunity to rectify the issue by re-branding which I would have done in a heartbeat.
Also, I don't understand why their feedback is so cryptic, if it's was a trademark issue why didn't they just say that.
It would have been kind & reasonable if Google had given me an opportunity to rectify the issue by re-branding which I would have done in a heartbeat.
Also, I don't understand why their feedback is so cryptic, if it's was a trademark issue why didn't they just say that.
Well, it's not really a Grand Prix app or General Practitioner app. The app name "Eurovision GP" is confusing
What is a "on-device title"?
It's the name that appears on your phone/device if you have the app installed. This can differ from the app store title which is often more verbose.
> your on-device title does not reflect your app’s functionality.
So you cannot just give it any name, it has to reflect the app's functionality? That is weird. I have a project that is named X, but from that alone you cannot tell what it does exactly. It is impossible to give it a name that would do that.
So you cannot just give it any name, it has to reflect the app's functionality? That is weird. I have a project that is named X, but from that alone you cannot tell what it does exactly. It is impossible to give it a name that would do that.
I no longer use Google Cloud or anything managed by Google. Having a faceless company be able to take down your business and not even talk to you about it is too much of a risk for me.