4 ms·

> and it must give rival third-party app stores access to the full catalog of Google Play apps That one feels a step too far to me. It seems like it should be

> and it must give rival third-party app stores access to the full catalog of Google Play apps That one feels a step too far to me. It seems like it should be the developer's job to share their app with third party stores, not Google's.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
georgeecollins 2y ago
Google is the developer.
- clhodapp 2y ago
  Oh! Is this only Google's own apps? I read it as requiring Google to offer some kind of API to allow any app that any developer lists on the Play Store to be sucked into a third-party store. What would "unless developers opt out individually" mean then?
- dialup_sounds 2y ago
  This applies to every app in the Play Store, not just Google's apps.
wccrawford 2y ago
That isn't "all apps on Google Play". It's "all apps developed by Google that integrate with the Google Play system."
- flutas 2y ago
  Nah, it's absolutely all apps on google play. > For a period of three years, Google will permit third-party Android app stores to access the Google Play Store's catalog of apps so that they may offer the Play Store apps to users. For apps available only in the Google Play Store (i.e., that are not independently available through the third-party Android app store), Google will permit users to complete the download of the app through the Google Play Store on the same terms as any other download that is made directly through the Google Play Store. Google may keep all revenues associated with such downloads. Google will provide developers with a mechanism for opting out of inclusion in catalog access for any particular third-party Android app store. Google will have up to eight months from the date of this order to implement the technology necessary to comply with this provision, and the three-year time period will start once the technology is fully functional. I think it's a tough call though. I get it, the court ruled Google had a monopoly, and this is supposed to prop up 3P app stores temporary until they can get footing. The fact it's opt out is... good? I mean at least there's an option. But it also feels they are also forcing devs hands by making it opt out.
  - clhodapp 2y ago
    Yeah, it just feels like it's opting developers into a business relationship with third party app stores that they may not want, by virtue of their business relationship with Google. Look at it a different way: if Google themselves did this as opt out, developers would be screaming bloody murder about how this wasn't the terms of service they agreed to.
  - notatoad 2y ago
    thanks for posting the actual wording here, that makes things a lot more clear and a lot less ominous than my first interpretation.
  - AceFromOttawa 2y ago
    If there 100's of alternate app stores, all with different revenue sharing agreements, payment processing systems, etc etc etc how are developers going to manage it all? Does a developer need to share their billing info with 100's of app stores? Seperatly agree to each stores terms of service? Seems like it will get awfully complicated awfully quick.
    - maxwell 2y ago
      Sounds like a healthy competitive marketplace!
      - clhodapp 2y ago
        Until Samsung and/or your carrier start locking you into their own app stores, now that it's become practical to do that
TrianguloY 2y ago
Perhaps, but that will mean that you will be able to download the official apks from other places, which is what aurora store does but without having to use a google account (probably, but not sure about that). Not sure how that will work for paid apps, but for free apps...maybe it's good? I have mixed opinions here though (as a user and as a developer)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
TheAdamist 2y ago
Sounds like an easy mass copyright infringement case to me against any third party store distributing your app without consent.
- 3np 2y ago
  I haven't verified but I'd be very surprised if this isn't preemtively covered already when an uploader agrees to Play Store terms. I don't believe Google gives any guarantees that apps will be exclusively only accessible via the Play Store app frontend and never redistributed via other channels.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

georgeecollins 2y ago

Google is the developer.

clhodapp 2y ago
Oh! Is this only Google's own apps? I read it as requiring Google to offer some kind of API to allow any app that any developer lists on the Play Store to be sucked into a third-party store. What would "unless developers opt out individually" mean then?
dialup_sounds 2y ago
This applies to every app in the Play Store, not just Google's apps.

wccrawford 2y ago

That isn't "all apps on Google Play". It's "all apps developed by Google that integrate with the Google Play system."

flutas 2y ago
Nah, it's absolutely all apps on google play. > For a period of three years, Google will permit third-party Android app stores to access the Google Play Store's catalog of apps so that they may offer the Play Store apps to users. For apps available only in the Google Play Store (i.e., that are not independently available through the third-party Android app store), Google will permit users to complete the download of the app through the Google Play Store on the same terms as any other download that is made directly through the Google Play Store. Google may keep all revenues associated with such downloads. Google will provide developers with a mechanism for opting out of inclusion in catalog access for any particular third-party Android app store. Google will have up to eight months from the date of this order to implement the technology necessary to comply with this provision, and the three-year time period will start once the technology is fully functional. I think it's a tough call though. I get it, the court ruled Google had a monopoly, and this is supposed to prop up 3P app stores temporary until they can get footing. The fact it's opt out is... good? I mean at least there's an option. But it also feels they are also forcing devs hands by making it opt out.
- clhodapp 2y ago
  Yeah, it just feels like it's opting developers into a business relationship with third party app stores that they may not want, by virtue of their business relationship with Google. Look at it a different way: if Google themselves did this as opt out, developers would be screaming bloody murder about how this wasn't the terms of service they agreed to.
- notatoad 2y ago
  thanks for posting the actual wording here, that makes things a lot more clear and a lot less ominous than my first interpretation.
- AceFromOttawa 2y ago
  If there 100's of alternate app stores, all with different revenue sharing agreements, payment processing systems, etc etc etc how are developers going to manage it all? Does a developer need to share their billing info with 100's of app stores? Seperatly agree to each stores terms of service? Seems like it will get awfully complicated awfully quick.
  - maxwell 2y ago
    Sounds like a healthy competitive marketplace!
    - clhodapp 2y ago
      Until Samsung and/or your carrier start locking you into their own app stores, now that it's become practical to do that

TrianguloY 2y ago

Perhaps, but that will mean that you will be able to download the official apks from other places, which is what aurora store does but without having to use a google account (probably, but not sure about that). Not sure how that will work for paid apps, but for free apps...maybe it's good? I have mixed opinions here though (as a user and as a developer)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

TheAdamist 2y ago

Sounds like an easy mass copyright infringement case to me against any third party store distributing your app without consent.

3np 2y ago
I haven't verified but I'd be very surprised if this isn't preemtively covered already when an uploader agrees to Play Store terms. I don't believe Google gives any guarantees that apps will be exclusively only accessible via the Play Store app frontend and never redistributed via other channels.