4 ms·

Can you please elaborate why you would think this is a mistake and Google should side step the app store rules applied to all businesses? This income is clearly

by itake 5y ago

Can you please elaborate why you would think this is a mistake and Google should side step the app store rules applied to all businesses? This income is clearly taxable. The play store offers a 50% discount for small apps. Is it because the payment is optional (and doesn't unlock new features) that make you think this should be except from Google's rules (and potentially taxes?)?

josephcsible 5y ago
> Can you please elaborate why you would think this is a mistake and Google should side step the app store rules applied to all businesses? I don't think anyone is arguing for this app in particular to get an exception from the rules. People are arguing that this rule is ridiculous and that nobody should have to follow it as it's currently written.
miloignis 5y ago
Apparently this isn't how Google sees it, but I'd say yes, giving people a way to donate on your website where your website is linked to from the app under "About" or "More Information" is clearly different from offering an app for purchase, or with in-app purchase, on multiple fronts. The first is that it's a donation, not a purchase, and changes nothing about the app. The second is that there's no mention of donation anywhere in the app, and the website/about/more info link does go to a website with more info. If you instead, like Google, decide that this still counts, you end up the in the (in my opinion, clearly wrong) situation where Google either controls what you put on your independent website, or Google disallows you from linking to your website/portfolio in the app you made. That sounds quite draconian to me. I wonder if adding an in-app purchase that says "donate w/cut to Google" would appease them.
- DennisAleynikov 5y ago
  it seems you're spiritually correct but google is trying to remove the payment loophole that apple enforces as well so I'm curious if we can pressure them both to allow donation links even if normal payment options are banned...
rkagerer 5y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong. From the screenshot[1] it looks like the donation is made through Paypal, not Google's merchant services. My understanding is the app just links to a website. If there's any tax evasion going on it has nothing to do with Google. [1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1474671/129396236-489e6336-e6ac-4a64-85c1-bbb85d48350d.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1474671/129396236-...
zozbot234 5y ago
Taxes are entirely beside the issue - that's between the original developer and the IRS. The Play Store policy has always been about in-app purchases, and few people would describe a donation as "purchasing" anything.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  I agree with you on the taxes issue (and can’t imagine how the opposing argument would go). I disagree with you on the funding the app developer angle. If you seek funding in a way supported, even indirectly, by the app’s availability in the Play Store, Google wants its cut. If you don’t want that support, you’re free to go it alone without the store.
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  As mentioned in TFA, Google does not allow non-taxable donations through Play, and requires that you use a 3rd-party processor for those.
qwertox 5y ago
What does Google have to do with taxes related to Patreon? This clearly isn't Ubisoft.
jfrunyon 5y ago
"Purchases that require Google Play's billing system: Digital items, Subscription services, App functionality or content, Cloud software and services" https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/10281818?hl=en https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... "Developers charging for apps and downloads from Google Play must use Google Play's billing system as the method of payment. Play-distributed apps must use Google Play's billing system as the method of payment if they require or accept payment for access to features or services, including any app functionality, digital content or goods." https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9858738?visit_id=637644790590181537-88997355&rd=1 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... Can you explain which of those categories this payment ("The app doesn't provide any special features to people who donate; it's just a way to help support the project.") falls under?
- RHSeeger 5y ago
  While I understand what you're saying here, I would guess that it's seen as bypassing the intent of the rules, if not their specific wording. If I put an app up on the app store for free, then link to my site and ask for donations, I am effectively using the app store for free. The app in question is effectively setup to say "you don't need to pay for this app, but we would really like you too"... and then the payment is handled outside the play store. Arguing over whether it should be called payment or a donation doesn't really change the fact that is it the user giving money to the developer because of the app; the app they got on the play store. That's the behavior that the rule in intended to avoid.
  - jfrunyon 5y ago
    If Google's intent is to ban donations to an app creator, then why does it explicitly say "if they require or accept payment for access to features or services, including any app functionality, digital content or goods"? Frankly it seems to me that the intent of the rules is to specifically allow asking for payment/"donation" outside of Play so long as nothing in your app is affected by it.
    - 5y ago
danShumway 5y ago
I don't think anyone is saying this has anything to do with the payment being optional or the app being Open Source. Google's interpretation of its rules (assuming that this isn't just a mistake) is that an app can't link in-app to any source or page if there's a way to get from that page to a payment processor. Imagine if you went into Walmart, bought an Android phone, and then when you turned the phone on Google wasn't allowed to show you any links in the Android OS to their support pages because technically you can navigate from the support pages to the online Google store and then buy another phone from them directly without giving Walmart a cut. I don't think Google would call that a reasonable restriction, I think Google would call that anticompetitive.
- izacus 5y ago
  > Imagine if you went into Walmart, bought an Android phone, and then when you turned the phone on Google wasn't allowed to show you any links in the Android OS to their support pages because technically you can navigate from the support pages to the online Google store and then buy another phone from them directly without giving Walmart a cut. No, imagine if you went into Walmart, picked up an item for free and then used PayPal to sidestep Walmarts margin. And then threw a giant fuss because Walmart stopped stocking that free item.
  - danShumway 5y ago
    That would be a problem if that was what was happening here. But it's not what's happening here, so it's not a problem :) Google is listing the app as free. Separately, on a website via a page that is not linked from the main app in any location, you can donate to the developer. The developer is not linking to or steering the user towards that donation page in the app or in the app description, they're just linking to their code repository, which is clearly important for an Open Source app to do. If Walmart gave me a product for free, and separately I donated some money to the person who originally made that product, Walmart wouldn't really have much justification to complain. The analogy you're proposing doesn't really make sense to me. Are you arguing that any method of donating to the developer at all outside of the Play Store is intrinsically stealing from Google? Are you arguing that the developer is stealing from Google by not hiding their donation pages on other platforms that exist outside of the app?

by itake 5y ago

josephcsible 5y ago

> Can you please elaborate why you would think this is a mistake and Google should side step the app store rules applied to all businesses? I don't think anyone is arguing for this app in particular to get an exception from the rules. People are arguing that this rule is ridiculous and that nobody should have to follow it as it's currently written.

miloignis 5y ago

Apparently this isn't how Google sees it, but I'd say yes, giving people a way to donate on your website where your website is linked to from the app under "About" or "More Information" is clearly different from offering an app for purchase, or with in-app purchase, on multiple fronts. The first is that it's a donation, not a purchase, and changes nothing about the app. The second is that there's no mention of donation anywhere in the app, and the website/about/more info link does go to a website with more info. If you instead, like Google, decide that this still counts, you end up the in the (in my opinion, clearly wrong) situation where Google either controls what you put on your independent website, or Google disallows you from linking to your website/portfolio in the app you made. That sounds quite draconian to me. I wonder if adding an in-app purchase that says "donate w/cut to Google" would appease them.

DennisAleynikov 5y ago
it seems you're spiritually correct but google is trying to remove the payment loophole that apple enforces as well so I'm curious if we can pressure them both to allow donation links even if normal payment options are banned...

rkagerer 5y ago

Correct me if I'm wrong. From the screenshot[1] it looks like the donation is made through Paypal, not Google's merchant services. My understanding is the app just links to a website. If there's any tax evasion going on it has nothing to do with Google. [1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1474671/129396236-489e6336-e6ac-4a64-85c1-bbb85d48350d.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1474671/129396236-...

zozbot234 5y ago

Taxes are entirely beside the issue - that's between the original developer and the IRS. The Play Store policy has always been about in-app purchases, and few people would describe a donation as "purchasing" anything.

sokoloff 5y ago
I agree with you on the taxes issue (and can’t imagine how the opposing argument would go). I disagree with you on the funding the app developer angle. If you seek funding in a way supported, even indirectly, by the app’s availability in the Play Store, Google wants its cut. If you don’t want that support, you’re free to go it alone without the store.
jfrunyon 5y ago
As mentioned in TFA, Google does not allow non-taxable donations through Play, and requires that you use a 3rd-party processor for those.

qwertox 5y ago

What does Google have to do with taxes related to Patreon? This clearly isn't Ubisoft.

jfrunyon 5y ago

"Purchases that require Google Play's billing system: Digital items, Subscription services, App functionality or content, Cloud software and services" https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/10281818?hl=en https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... "Developers charging for apps and downloads from Google Play must use Google Play's billing system as the method of payment. Play-distributed apps must use Google Play's billing system as the method of payment if they require or accept payment for access to features or services, including any app functionality, digital content or goods." https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9858738?visit_id=637644790590181537-88997355&rd=1 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... Can you explain which of those categories this payment ("The app doesn't provide any special features to people who donate; it's just a way to help support the project.") falls under?

RHSeeger 5y ago
While I understand what you're saying here, I would guess that it's seen as bypassing the intent of the rules, if not their specific wording. If I put an app up on the app store for free, then link to my site and ask for donations, I am effectively using the app store for free. The app in question is effectively setup to say "you don't need to pay for this app, but we would really like you too"... and then the payment is handled outside the play store. Arguing over whether it should be called payment or a donation doesn't really change the fact that is it the user giving money to the developer because of the app; the app they got on the play store. That's the behavior that the rule in intended to avoid.
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  If Google's intent is to ban donations to an app creator, then why does it explicitly say "if they require or accept payment for access to features or services, including any app functionality, digital content or goods"? Frankly it seems to me that the intent of the rules is to specifically allow asking for payment/"donation" outside of Play so long as nothing in your app is affected by it.
  - 5y ago

danShumway 5y ago

I don't think anyone is saying this has anything to do with the payment being optional or the app being Open Source. Google's interpretation of its rules (assuming that this isn't just a mistake) is that an app can't link in-app to any source or page if there's a way to get from that page to a payment processor. Imagine if you went into Walmart, bought an Android phone, and then when you turned the phone on Google wasn't allowed to show you any links in the Android OS to their support pages because technically you can navigate from the support pages to the online Google store and then buy another phone from them directly without giving Walmart a cut. I don't think Google would call that a reasonable restriction, I think Google would call that anticompetitive.

izacus 5y ago
> Imagine if you went into Walmart, bought an Android phone, and then when you turned the phone on Google wasn't allowed to show you any links in the Android OS to their support pages because technically you can navigate from the support pages to the online Google store and then buy another phone from them directly without giving Walmart a cut. No, imagine if you went into Walmart, picked up an item for free and then used PayPal to sidestep Walmarts margin. And then threw a giant fuss because Walmart stopped stocking that free item.
- danShumway 5y ago
  That would be a problem if that was what was happening here. But it's not what's happening here, so it's not a problem :) Google is listing the app as free. Separately, on a website via a page that is not linked from the main app in any location, you can donate to the developer. The developer is not linking to or steering the user towards that donation page in the app or in the app description, they're just linking to their code repository, which is clearly important for an Open Source app to do. If Walmart gave me a product for free, and separately I donated some money to the person who originally made that product, Walmart wouldn't really have much justification to complain. The analogy you're proposing doesn't really make sense to me. Are you arguing that any method of donating to the developer at all outside of the Play Store is intrinsically stealing from Google? Are you arguing that the developer is stealing from Google by not hiding their donation pages on other platforms that exist outside of the app?