5 ms·

I feel if an app changes ownership, all users should automatically be notified by the app store.

by kramerger 3y ago

wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
I mean this is not just app related, companies can sell applications with it's user data regardless of the app store.
aitchnyu 3y ago
Browser extensions too.
CodesInChaos 3y ago
> an app changes ownership Unfortunately defining what that means becomes rather tricky once you consider that the company owning the app can change ownership. That ownership can be shared and go through arbitrarily many indirections, and if it's a publicly traded company, some of its shares change ownership all the time.
- bmitc 3y ago
  It's not tricky. Someone owns it.
  - jclardy 3y ago
    Okay, lets take a simple example. Indie app A, owned by a developer, Joe. Company B buys A outright, including employing Joe. They keep the brand around for name recognition. How does the app store know this? None of this has to be public info if A & B aren't public. The company registration hasn't changed. At best, maybe the bank account number changed.
  - TuringNYC 3y ago
    Here is an example of the complexity. I just purchased a single share of Google. Your Google Maps application has thus changed ownership. Boom, I just sold that single share, now the ownership changed again. I realize this sounds tongue in cheek but a PE firm trying to get around ownership disclosure requirements can do something just as easily, both with public and private companies.
    - bmitc 3y ago
      I guess part of my point is that that is Apple's problem and not the consumers'.
  - Yujf 3y ago
    It is tricky, as was explained in the comment you replied to. Maybe you could explain how it is not tricky instead of just making random statements without contributing anything
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
  For public companies, it is extremely easy. Just start off with a warning every time certain filing (Section 13) is made. You could conceivably do this automated. For private, large companies, its a simply attestation. You could open source monitoring for changes - if the company makes an PR announcement of any kind , or if a member of the public reports submits proof of change of control exercise in their contract, ask the company to update their attestation and compare. They don't provide it ? They get a nice little red banner alerting users of shadiness going on.
- jeff_tyrrill 3y ago
  I think the legal concept of "beneficial ownership" is the intent here: We want to know the ultimate (natural) person(s) who control the app's assets and for whose benefit the app is monetized. There is no simple rule that can be applied at scale. Determining beneficial ownership requires a case-by-case review of not just the chain of legal ownership, but management, contracts, incentives, etc. Any fixed rules can be gamed. For example, a company could license out its name as a "franchise" who is legally independent but whose franchise contract has so many arms of control that they de facto function as a single company. Another example is that a majority donor of a nonprofit controls the nonprofit even if they have no board seats or de jure power to appoint or fire board members.
prox 3y ago
This should be a law really. Any subscribers to any service should promptly be notified about the change in parent company and clear language changes (like ads and new permissions etc.)

I feel if an app changes ownership, all users should automatically be notified by the app store.

wouldbecouldbe 3y ago

I mean this is not just app related, companies can sell applications with it's user data regardless of the app store.

aitchnyu 3y ago

Browser extensions too.

CodesInChaos 3y ago

> an app changes ownership Unfortunately defining what that means becomes rather tricky once you consider that the company owning the app can change ownership. That ownership can be shared and go through arbitrarily many indirections, and if it's a publicly traded company, some of its shares change ownership all the time.

bmitc 3y ago
It's not tricky. Someone owns it.
- jclardy 3y ago
  Okay, lets take a simple example. Indie app A, owned by a developer, Joe. Company B buys A outright, including employing Joe. They keep the brand around for name recognition. How does the app store know this? None of this has to be public info if A & B aren't public. The company registration hasn't changed. At best, maybe the bank account number changed.
- TuringNYC 3y ago
  Here is an example of the complexity. I just purchased a single share of Google. Your Google Maps application has thus changed ownership. Boom, I just sold that single share, now the ownership changed again. I realize this sounds tongue in cheek but a PE firm trying to get around ownership disclosure requirements can do something just as easily, both with public and private companies.
  - bmitc 3y ago
    I guess part of my point is that that is Apple's problem and not the consumers'.
- Yujf 3y ago
  It is tricky, as was explained in the comment you replied to. Maybe you could explain how it is not tricky instead of just making random statements without contributing anything
IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
For public companies, it is extremely easy. Just start off with a warning every time certain filing (Section 13) is made. You could conceivably do this automated. For private, large companies, its a simply attestation. You could open source monitoring for changes - if the company makes an PR announcement of any kind , or if a member of the public reports submits proof of change of control exercise in their contract, ask the company to update their attestation and compare. They don't provide it ? They get a nice little red banner alerting users of shadiness going on.
jeff_tyrrill 3y ago
I think the legal concept of "beneficial ownership" is the intent here: We want to know the ultimate (natural) person(s) who control the app's assets and for whose benefit the app is monetized. There is no simple rule that can be applied at scale. Determining beneficial ownership requires a case-by-case review of not just the chain of legal ownership, but management, contracts, incentives, etc. Any fixed rules can be gamed. For example, a company could license out its name as a "franchise" who is legally independent but whose franchise contract has so many arms of control that they de facto function as a single company. Another example is that a majority donor of a nonprofit controls the nonprofit even if they have no board seats or de jure power to appoint or fire board members.

prox 3y ago

This should be a law really. Any subscribers to any service should promptly be notified about the change in parent company and clear language changes (like ads and new permissions etc.)