13 ms·

Google to Microsoft: Remove your YouTube App from the Windows Phone Store

470 points by Avalaxy 13y ago

kailuowang 13y ago
I wonder how this app got approval from Microsoft's own legal department.
- Avalaxy 13y ago
  I think the wishes of the legal department are of less importance than the overall need for good apps on the Windows Phone platform. Google didn't have the time/resources to build a Windows Phone app, so Microsoft did. And they did it well. But now that the app is in the Store, Google wants it removed. That's not a matter of 'no time/resources', that's just a matter of bullying. They've been boycotting the Windows Phone and Windows 8 platforms ever since the launch... Quite typical actually. Google is the only tech giant with a slogan like "don't be evil", yet they are the only evil tech giant at the moment (Microsoft has gotten a lot better the last few years imho).
  - necubi 13y ago
    If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation of the YouTube terms of service. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS.
    - Avalaxy 13y ago
      I read the article, I am the one who posted it. Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. The fact that Google gives the violation of their agreement as the reason doesn't mean it IS the real reason behind it. There are many other youtube apps (like MetroTube) that do the same thing, but they don't get removed. It's a fact that Google has been boycotting Microsoft for years. They blocked GMail syncing for Windows Phone devices, they disabled Google Maps for WP (it worked before, but then they just blocked all WP devices), and now they do it again.
      - jbp 13y ago
        Doesn't Microsoft do samething to Goolge though?
        rlu 13y ago
        iirc, microsoft has onenote, skydrive, skype and outlook.com apps for android. Sure, you can argue that "well Android has majority market share so it's in microsoft's advantage to have apps in that platform!" - and you would be correct. However, that doesn't excuse having the web views for Windows Phone on gmail and maps (and maybe youtube?) be significantly worse than those for iOS/Android. Like, the work has already been done - Google just does not redirect WP users to the "pretty" sites. If you manually enter in the iOS/Android URL on WP, it works fine. It's just not defaulted. And that's lame.
      - makomk 13y ago
        So what you're saying is that there's another app - MetroTube - that also allows users to view YouTube videos on Windows 8 and Windows Phone that hasn't been removed. Congratulations on disproving your own argument that this is an attack on Windows Phone!
      - fpgeek 13y ago
        ToS violations may not be "the" reason, but it is enough of a reason to force Google's hand, whether or not they have other reasons. Exactly how long do you think, say, Viacom woulds tolerate a high-profile, name-brand YouTube app that blocked ads and supported video downloads? And what do you think Viacom would do to Google if Google's response to that app was turning a blind eye?
    - recoiledsnake 13y ago
      >If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation the YouTube ToS. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS. Crossposting my own comment from another thread. So, for years, Google's stated reason for lack of a Youtube client was that Windows Phone didn't have enough marketshare, and now suddenly it has so many users that it loses so many ad impressions because Microsoft's Youtube that the content creators are suffering because all the millions of freeloaders using Windows Phone? i.e It doesn't care enough for the ad impressions on Windows Phone to itself make an app , but when MS does, the loss of the same revenue is the reason for sending the lawyers in and pulling the app?
      - ok_craig 13y ago
        YouTube users make a living off the ads. It is just as much about their rights. Google is the only one who can defend this on their behalf, and they should, down to the platforms with only 1 user.
      - pyre 13y ago
        So, when Microsoft's IP is infringed (patents, etc), it's a tragedy. When Google's (or its partner's) IP is infringed it's something sinister. Gotcha.
        mortehu 13y ago
        Are you suggesting that software patents are as worthwhile as videos and music?
      - aeturnum 13y ago
        One decision about TOS enforcement affects their ability to attack other TOS violations. If you don't enforce your TOS consistently, you open yourself to exactly the sort of anti-competitive charges MS users are leveling against Google.
      - invisible 13y ago
        Any amount of loss due to not following the Terms of Service is grounds for terminating usage. Those same users that are not watching the ad could instead be watching the ad on the web and making them ad revenue. Your logic is so flawed.
  - blippe 13y ago
    Er. You know others have succeeded in creating youtube apps for their platform without breaking the API. Microsoft is just rattling its crib.
  - bhups 13y ago
    Wait, that's not how app development works. Writing a well made app does not somehow allow one to circumvent ToS, which Microsoft very clearly violated. I'm sure if Microsoft merely removed the ability to download videos and restored ads, Google would not have any problems with it. The fact that MetroTube is so successful disproves the conspiracy theory that Google is trying to prevent Windows Phone users from being able to use YouTube. This isn't a "We don't like WP" issue, this is a "your app blatantly violates our ToS and we're not okay with that" issue.
  - beagle3 13y ago
    > Microsoft has gotten a lot better the last few years imho You are entitled to your opinion, but I must say that quite a few people around here, me as an example, do not share it. We still remember the ISO Office XML shenanigans, the vague Linux patent threats, the still ongoing Android patent extortion, the UEFI requirement - that's on par with Microsoft's old evil, imho.
- zmmmmm 13y ago
  That's the most interesting thing here. Microsoft clearly knew this would be unacceptable, and obviously would have known Google would have to tell them to remove the app. So it's clear that the whole thing is an exercise from Microsoft, I suspect, to paint more of the "evil Google" picture that they are working assiduously to establish. Now they can point to Google and say "look, everyone, Google is taking away your toys, they must be evil!". The problem they may have is that this is pretty transparently unacceptable on their part, and even worse, it doesn't jive at all with their general stance on intellectual property (Android infringing on their patents, etc.) where they paint themselves as the good guy who always licenses IP and expects others to do the same.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - CloudNine 13y ago
    >Now they can point to Google and say "look, everyone, Google is taking away your toys, they must be evil!". And they would be right. It's not mutually exclusive that Microsoft is doing this evilly on purpose, and that Google is evilly holding back Youtube from Windows Phone on purpose.
    - myko 13y ago
      No, as stated multiple times within this thread if Microsoft would stop violating the Terms of Service Google would allow them to create a YouTube app.
    - makomk 13y ago
      Microsoft's decision to include a video download button in their app had to be an intentional attempt to force Google's hand - it was obviously specifically added, and it's no secret that Google's been threatening to sue people who do that.
      - n09n 13y ago
        Why does it have to be that? The plethora of browser extensions that implement this feature prove it's something users want. Why imagine a nefarious reason for developers to add a feature to their app that users want?
cooldeal 13y ago
Edit: [[[ This story is getting heavily flagged as well. http://i.imgur.com/LiUSpCy.png http://i.imgur.com/LiUSpCy.png Looks like the Google fans, employees and shareholders on HN with good karma can't let this story break on the day of Google I/O? And people accuse Microsoft of astroturfing! What is this then? If PG does not want to stop this blatant and continuous moderator abuse, he might as well declare HN a Google and Linux fiefdom so that the rest of us using other platforms and who can think for ourselves and are not Microsoft haters can stay away. ]]] Posted this story earlier and it got flagged off the front page. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714520 Reposting my comment here: This is the latest in a long saga. From a post from Microsoft in 2011: First, in 2006 Google acquired YouTube—and since then it has put in place a growing number of technical measures to restrict competing search engines from properly accessing it for their search results. Without proper access to YouTube, Bing and other search engines cannot stand with Google on an equal footing in returning search results with links to YouTube videos and that, of course, drives more users away from competitors and to Google. Second, in 2010 and again more recently, Google blocked Microsoft’s new Windows Phones from operating properly with YouTube. Google has enabled its own Android phones to access YouTube so that users can search for video categories, find favorites, see ratings, and so forth in the rich user interfaces offered by those phones. It’s done the same thing for the iPhones offered by Apple, which doesn’t offer a competing search service. Unfortunately, Google has refused to allow Microsoft’s new Windows Phones to access this YouTube metadata in the same way that Android phones and iPhones do. As a result, Microsoft’s YouTube “app” on Windows Phones is basically just a browser displaying YouTube’s mobile Web site, without the rich functionality offered on competing phones. Microsoft is ready to release a high quality YouTube app for Windows Phone. We just need permission to access YouTube in the way that other phones already do, permission Google has refused to provide. http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2011/03/30/adding-our-voice-to-concerns-about-search-in-europe.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2...
- ok_craig 13y ago
  The issue is that the app is not displaying ads, which is against the TOS.
recoiledsnake 13y ago
There's an ongoing discussion in this thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714639 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714639
cypher543 13y ago
The comments on that article are atrocious. It's like one big fanboy rage orgy. I like Microsoft and all, but Google seems to have a legitimate claim here. All Microsoft needs to do is update the app to comply with the YouTube TOS, which doesn't seem like that big of a deal.
- cooldeal 13y ago
  How do they update the app if Google doesn't give them access to the API? They need to kill it and millions of Windows Phone users will be left with no legal YouTube app. Also, if you're referring to the comments on WPCentral, of course, it's "Windows Phone Central" where obviously fans and users of Windows Phone who got frustrated for years with the lack of a quality YouTube app on their phone hang out.
  - cpncrunch 13y ago
    That's not Google's problem. What law says that Google needs to provide an API? This is just embarrassing for Microsoft. Basically google doesn't think it's worth spending the time developing an app for Windows Phone, and Microsoft then tries to hack it together by themselves, illegally. I haven't ported any of my own apps to Win Phone either - what's the point when nobody is using it? Out of 60,000 visits to our site over a given period, 4000 are iOS, 2000 Android, 50 blackberry and 20 Windows Phone. We haven't bothered with blackberry either (apart from providing an html5 version). Face it Microsoft: Windows Phone is a dismal failure.
    - recoiledsnake 13y ago
      >I haven't ported any of my own apps to Win Phone either - what's the point when nobody is using it? So Google's complaint is that "nobody" is using the Windows Phone Youtube app and that this is hurting Youtube because "nobody" is watching so many ad-less videos on Youtube that it's robbing Youtube and content creators of all the "no money" gotten from no ad views in the app which used by nobody? Oh, and did I mention nobody can use the Windows Phone Youtube app because nobody is using Windows Phone?!
jbigelow76 13y ago
When I saw the original app announcement (also on wpcentral) I quickly downloaded even though I already purchased metrotube, which is a perfectly good YouTube app for Windows Phone. I knew it wouldn't end well with the download of video and ad removal features. Now I play the waiting game to see if Microsoft nukes the app remotely after they are eventually forced to acquiesce :)
bryanjclark 13y ago
"This isn’t the first time Windows Phone users have been shafted by the Mountain View company not willing to develop for the platform." Bullshit - this isn't Google screwing over Microsoft, it's Microsoft being idiots. If MSFT built a YouTube app that didn't blatantly violate Google's policies, I don't think it'd be a problem. YouTube wants viewers, regardless of which platform they're coming from.
- CloudNine 13y ago
  >YouTube wants viewers, regardless of which platform they're coming from. Then why don't they make an Windows Phone YouTube app and show ads on it? Hell, show double the ads just to annoy WP users. Or are they afraid that it will hurt Android?
  - bishnu 13y ago
    My guess is, [expected revenue per user] * [expected number of Windows Mobile users] - [cost to build a decent YouTube app] is a negative number.
    - nivla 13y ago
      Yet they have an official chrome browser app for Windows 8.
      - josh2600 13y ago
        Youtube is considered core mobile functionality, like a browser, but Youtube is a fiefdom in which Google does not have to compete (unlike the ultra-competitive landscape of the Browser wars). While Google has nothing to lose and everything to gain from restricting access to YouTube, the same cannot be said about the Browser, thus they compete. It's simple economics; don't waste money helping people dethrone your monopoly (I AM NOT ADVOCATING THIS POSITION, SIMPLY STATING MY PERCEPTION).
      - eddieroger 13y ago
        Yeah, it shares a codebase with the Windows 7 version if it's different at all. The number of Windows 7 + Windows 8 installs is far greater than Windows Phone users.
sbuk 13y ago
Simple solution; screew Google and offer Vimeo instead. In my opinion, the quality in both sense is better there...
- ben0x539 13y ago
  Vimeo doesn't want a lot of kinds of videos though: http://vimeo.com/help/guidelines http://vimeo.com/help/guidelines For a lot of people, it's not an option.
sbuk 13y ago
Simple solution; screw Google and offer Vimeo instead. In my opinion, the quality in both sense is better there...
duncan_bayne 13y ago
FTA: "Not just remove the app, but also disable existing downloads of the app. Aka, the “kill switch”, which (as far as we can remember) has only been used once before." And this is why app stores - as implemented by Google, Microsoft and Apple - are evil. 'Bought' an app? Think again.
- itafroma 13y ago
  > And this is why app stores - as implemented by Google, Microsoft and Apple - are evil. Evil involves intent, not capability. For example, a car can hurt or even kill someone, but it's not evil. Someone who intentionally and willfully runs down pedestrians with a car would, however, definitely qualify. Here's how the three companies have used their kill switch: - Microsoft has used their kill switch once to disable a pirated app - As far as I'm aware, Apple has never used their kill switch, even for pirated apps or apps that were pulled for various reasons (scams, tethering apps, etc.) - Google routinely uses its kill switch to remove malware and "practically useless"[1] apps So the the real questions are: is using the kill switch to combat piracy evil? What about malware? "Useless" apps? What about not using the kill switch at all for any reason? [1]: http://readwrite.com/2010/06/25/google_activates_android_kill_switch_zaps_useless_apps http://readwrite.com/2010/06/25/google_activates_android_kil...
skc 13y ago
So I'm curious about something. 1. Do ad blockers remove ads from YouTube? 2. Do the people in support of Google's stance use ad blockers?
- CloudNine 13y ago
  Would be interesting to see people's reactions if Google sent a takedown notice to addons.mozilla.org for AdBlock because it's hurting video creators and web sites.
  - makomk 13y ago
    So far they don't seem to have even taken down YouTube ad blockers from their own Chrome store, unlike video downloaders that support YouTube.
1010011010 13y ago
Microsoft is a bad actor. No sympathy for them at all
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
shadowmint 13y ago
The Microsoft PR machine in full motion again I see. 1) Build app that clearly violates spirit and word of TOS, steals content, blocks ads. 2) Complain and act surprised like Google is being a bad guy when told to take it down. 3) ??? 4) Profit! Now they just need to some how spin in some automatic #droidfail hash tags to all the videos they show in the app and it'll be perfect! Idiots. (No, not the developers. I feel an immense sympathy for the people who had to work on this; their managers are the ones who are idiots)
- cooldeal 13y ago
  You're right, Microsoft PR sucks. Google PR on the other hand, is extremely good, they have lots of people believing they're all about "do no evil" and "open" while laughing all the way to the bank.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    > laughing all the way to the bank. I agree, how dare they make money.
- magicalist 13y ago
  best confirmation of this, that no one seems to have commented on, is that the cease and desist letter was immediately leaked by anonymous sources. I understand the desire for a youtube app by WP8 owners, but Microsoft very clearly wanted this back in the news cycle.
- will_brown 13y ago
  I think we can all take a moderate position and say MS has no right to break Google's Terms of Service. In fact unless I am mistaken under CFAA breaking Terms of Service could be a felony. Besides MS has much greater recourse than violating the Terms of Service, to the point of circumventing YouTube's ad revenue. If you take MS at their word, it appears they believe Google is engaging in anti-competitive practices, and if they truly believed that then their remedy is in Court not by unilaterally developing a YouTube App in bad-faith. Notwithstanding G+, it is sometimes over looked that Google already had one of the most successful social networks in YouTube. Separately, it is often over looked that MS also has one of the most successful social networks in Xbox Live.
rbanffy 13y ago
Does anyone seriously believe violating the YT TOS in the app was an honest mistake? This is ridiculous. Why would anyone expect a special TOS just for Microsoft?
bcgur 13y ago
Microsoft to Google: "lol go fuck yourselves". There's no reason whatsoever Microsoft should comply to those ridiculous demands. And it's awesome that Microsoft removed those YouTube antifeatures for users, they for once deserve to be thanked for the good they are doing. Google is looking more and more like the evil one (although far less evil than Apple or Oracle).
krubu 13y ago
Microsoft to Google: "lol go fuck yourselves". There's no reason whatsoever Microsoft should comply to those ridiculous demands. And it's awesome that Microsoft removed those YouTube antifeatures for users, they for once deserve to be thanked for the good they are doing. Google is looking more and more like the evil one (although far less evil than Apple or Oracle).
- fpgeek 13y ago
  There are lots of reasons for Microsoft to comply with these demands. At least one reason for each major media company Microsoft currently partners with (or wants to in the future)... They, after all, are the ones most invested in these particular YouTube anti-features. And should Microsoft stymie Google, I'd predict that they won't remain on the sidelines.
kumarm 13y ago
Microsoft's single agenda these days to derail Google is hurting Microsoft and is only benefiting Google. 50% of top windows8 (RT) paid apps are in Gross violation of Copyright/Trademarks (Mind you including microsoft's own Copyright/Trademarks). Instead of cleaning up that mess and providing proper opportunities for legitimate developers, why is microsoft encouraging doing something by violating TOS of another major company?
tagabek 13y ago
As mentioned above by shadowmint, it seems that Microsoft is looking for some attention, and they have already succeeded. Well done. But what are the long-term effects on the growth of what Microsoft really needs (a thriving third-party mobile development community)? I could be biased because of Google I/O's hype effect, but things like this only make me lean towards Android as my next platform to develop for (coming from iOS). I agree with the definitional meaning of Microsoft's retaliation - large companies should work together to create amazing content (ie. cross-platform Youtube app) for their mutual users. As always, it's a shame to see immature rivalries come between progress.
rlpb 13y ago
Microsoft's statement: "We'd be more than happy to include advertising but need Google to provide us access to the necessary APIs." What's interesting is what they don't say. They don't say that Google have refused to provide them this, or even that they asked Google for this. Assuming that Google's complaint of "Prevents the display of advertisements in YouTube video playbacks" is a TOS violation, it looks to me that Microsoft violated their TOS first, and are only now trying to imply that Google are the bad guys.
Ecio78 13y ago
Interesting compared to how Samsung dealt with this "problem" for a third-party app that they've just awarded of best app award: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chefuturo.it%2F2012%2F11%2Fla-app-made-in-sicily-piu-scaricata-del-mondo-non-ce-piu%2F http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&...
jonas_maj 13y ago
I think Vimeo deserves more love. It allows you to download videos too which is very handy. Windows Phone and Windows 8 users will be better off in the long run using Vimeo. I think Google has made it pretty clear by now that Windows users are not welcome in their ecosystem.
belorn 13y ago
Why are the article calling it the official YouTube app? It seems a strange use of the word official, as normally that would imply a Youtube (or google) made application. Is the word native the common term here?
lucb1e 13y ago
Oh, the first paragraph explains why Youtube's official app sucks so much (no offline caching etc.). Piracy and piracy prevention ruins it all (even when it are laughable prevention methods).
wglb 13y ago
Consider the idea that an article might get flagged due to the level of flame war generated by a particular topic, and you don't need a conspiracy theory to explain its downdraft.
ankitml 13y ago
They dont publicize "Dont be evil" much these day. True. They shouldnt even.
locofacetwice 13y ago
Google is the new MS. They dictate too many things including how web developers should develop their websites.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
joeblau 13y ago
I have a Windows Phone so I just tested some of these objections out. > Allows users to download videos from YouTube That was pretty cool, but I honestly don't need that. I can already download any video from anywhere online using Google Chrome and the curl trick. > Prevents the display of advertisements in YouTube video playbacks I never saw ads on the mobile web version of YouTube, but this could be a problem when Google wants to insert them. > Plays videos that our partners have restricted from playback on certain platforms (e.g., mobile devices with limited feature sets) This was great! I actually remember trying to play a video that worked on my laptop and failed on my phone. I just went back to that same video and it worked. The overall mobile web experience of YouTube is terrible on my Windows phone (and on my iPhone). Since most of you guys are probably iPhone users here is an analogy. It's like trying to switch from a native iOS maps (Apple or Google made) client, to Googles web version of maps. Yeah it works and does everything, but the performance is crap compared to the native mobile application.
GhotiFish 13y ago
Lots of hate on Microsoft "It's a secret ploy to deceive innocent hackers into thinking Google is anti user. HISSSSSSSS" The fact is, Microsoft built a user-centric application, focusing on all the things a user might want to do. An application that treated youtube's servers exactly for what they were, servers, servers serving content. No different than browsers that have ad blocking extensions, or extensions to download videos, or whatever else a computer might want to do with data (did you know a smartphone is computer? Cool huh? ). Microsoft made an application that put the user first. Finally. Even if this is just a PR stunt, even if they have the worst intentions, they did the right thing. If Google wants to contend this they can go suck on my freedom. The proper response to this was: "Wow Microsoft, great app!" It doesn't MATTER what Microsoft's intentions were.

470 points by Avalaxy 13y ago

kailuowang 13y ago

I wonder how this app got approval from Microsoft's own legal department.

Avalaxy 13y ago
I think the wishes of the legal department are of less importance than the overall need for good apps on the Windows Phone platform. Google didn't have the time/resources to build a Windows Phone app, so Microsoft did. And they did it well. But now that the app is in the Store, Google wants it removed. That's not a matter of 'no time/resources', that's just a matter of bullying. They've been boycotting the Windows Phone and Windows 8 platforms ever since the launch... Quite typical actually. Google is the only tech giant with a slogan like "don't be evil", yet they are the only evil tech giant at the moment (Microsoft has gotten a lot better the last few years imho).
- necubi 13y ago
  If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation of the YouTube terms of service. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS.
  - Avalaxy 13y ago
    I read the article, I am the one who posted it. Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. The fact that Google gives the violation of their agreement as the reason doesn't mean it IS the real reason behind it. There are many other youtube apps (like MetroTube) that do the same thing, but they don't get removed. It's a fact that Google has been boycotting Microsoft for years. They blocked GMail syncing for Windows Phone devices, they disabled Google Maps for WP (it worked before, but then they just blocked all WP devices), and now they do it again.
    - jbp 13y ago
      Doesn't Microsoft do samething to Goolge though?
      - rlu 13y ago
        iirc, microsoft has onenote, skydrive, skype and outlook.com apps for android. Sure, you can argue that "well Android has majority market share so it's in microsoft's advantage to have apps in that platform!" - and you would be correct. However, that doesn't excuse having the web views for Windows Phone on gmail and maps (and maybe youtube?) be significantly worse than those for iOS/Android. Like, the work has already been done - Google just does not redirect WP users to the "pretty" sites. If you manually enter in the iOS/Android URL on WP, it works fine. It's just not defaulted. And that's lame.
    - makomk 13y ago
      So what you're saying is that there's another app - MetroTube - that also allows users to view YouTube videos on Windows 8 and Windows Phone that hasn't been removed. Congratulations on disproving your own argument that this is an attack on Windows Phone!
    - fpgeek 13y ago
      ToS violations may not be "the" reason, but it is enough of a reason to force Google's hand, whether or not they have other reasons. Exactly how long do you think, say, Viacom woulds tolerate a high-profile, name-brand YouTube app that blocked ads and supported video downloads? And what do you think Viacom would do to Google if Google's response to that app was turning a blind eye?
  - recoiledsnake 13y ago
    >If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation the YouTube ToS. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS. Crossposting my own comment from another thread. So, for years, Google's stated reason for lack of a Youtube client was that Windows Phone didn't have enough marketshare, and now suddenly it has so many users that it loses so many ad impressions because Microsoft's Youtube that the content creators are suffering because all the millions of freeloaders using Windows Phone? i.e It doesn't care enough for the ad impressions on Windows Phone to itself make an app , but when MS does, the loss of the same revenue is the reason for sending the lawyers in and pulling the app?
    - ok_craig 13y ago
      YouTube users make a living off the ads. It is just as much about their rights. Google is the only one who can defend this on their behalf, and they should, down to the platforms with only 1 user.
    - pyre 13y ago
      So, when Microsoft's IP is infringed (patents, etc), it's a tragedy. When Google's (or its partner's) IP is infringed it's something sinister. Gotcha.
      - mortehu 13y ago
        Are you suggesting that software patents are as worthwhile as videos and music?
    - aeturnum 13y ago
      One decision about TOS enforcement affects their ability to attack other TOS violations. If you don't enforce your TOS consistently, you open yourself to exactly the sort of anti-competitive charges MS users are leveling against Google.
    - invisible 13y ago
      Any amount of loss due to not following the Terms of Service is grounds for terminating usage. Those same users that are not watching the ad could instead be watching the ad on the web and making them ad revenue. Your logic is so flawed.
- blippe 13y ago
  Er. You know others have succeeded in creating youtube apps for their platform without breaking the API. Microsoft is just rattling its crib.
- bhups 13y ago
  Wait, that's not how app development works. Writing a well made app does not somehow allow one to circumvent ToS, which Microsoft very clearly violated. I'm sure if Microsoft merely removed the ability to download videos and restored ads, Google would not have any problems with it. The fact that MetroTube is so successful disproves the conspiracy theory that Google is trying to prevent Windows Phone users from being able to use YouTube. This isn't a "We don't like WP" issue, this is a "your app blatantly violates our ToS and we're not okay with that" issue.
- beagle3 13y ago
  > Microsoft has gotten a lot better the last few years imho You are entitled to your opinion, but I must say that quite a few people around here, me as an example, do not share it. We still remember the ISO Office XML shenanigans, the vague Linux patent threats, the still ongoing Android patent extortion, the UEFI requirement - that's on par with Microsoft's old evil, imho.
zmmmmm 13y ago
That's the most interesting thing here. Microsoft clearly knew this would be unacceptable, and obviously would have known Google would have to tell them to remove the app. So it's clear that the whole thing is an exercise from Microsoft, I suspect, to paint more of the "evil Google" picture that they are working assiduously to establish. Now they can point to Google and say "look, everyone, Google is taking away your toys, they must be evil!". The problem they may have is that this is pretty transparently unacceptable on their part, and even worse, it doesn't jive at all with their general stance on intellectual property (Android infringing on their patents, etc.) where they paint themselves as the good guy who always licenses IP and expects others to do the same.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- CloudNine 13y ago
  >Now they can point to Google and say "look, everyone, Google is taking away your toys, they must be evil!". And they would be right. It's not mutually exclusive that Microsoft is doing this evilly on purpose, and that Google is evilly holding back Youtube from Windows Phone on purpose.
  - myko 13y ago
    No, as stated multiple times within this thread if Microsoft would stop violating the Terms of Service Google would allow them to create a YouTube app.
  - makomk 13y ago
    Microsoft's decision to include a video download button in their app had to be an intentional attempt to force Google's hand - it was obviously specifically added, and it's no secret that Google's been threatening to sue people who do that.
    - n09n 13y ago
      Why does it have to be that? The plethora of browser extensions that implement this feature prove it's something users want. Why imagine a nefarious reason for developers to add a feature to their app that users want?

cooldeal 13y ago

Edit: [[[ This story is getting heavily flagged as well. http://i.imgur.com/LiUSpCy.png http://i.imgur.com/LiUSpCy.png Looks like the Google fans, employees and shareholders on HN with good karma can't let this story break on the day of Google I/O? And people accuse Microsoft of astroturfing! What is this then? If PG does not want to stop this blatant and continuous moderator abuse, he might as well declare HN a Google and Linux fiefdom so that the rest of us using other platforms and who can think for ourselves and are not Microsoft haters can stay away. ]]] Posted this story earlier and it got flagged off the front page. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714520 Reposting my comment here: This is the latest in a long saga. From a post from Microsoft in 2011: First, in 2006 Google acquired YouTube—and since then it has put in place a growing number of technical measures to restrict competing search engines from properly accessing it for their search results. Without proper access to YouTube, Bing and other search engines cannot stand with Google on an equal footing in returning search results with links to YouTube videos and that, of course, drives more users away from competitors and to Google. Second, in 2010 and again more recently, Google blocked Microsoft’s new Windows Phones from operating properly with YouTube. Google has enabled its own Android phones to access YouTube so that users can search for video categories, find favorites, see ratings, and so forth in the rich user interfaces offered by those phones. It’s done the same thing for the iPhones offered by Apple, which doesn’t offer a competing search service. Unfortunately, Google has refused to allow Microsoft’s new Windows Phones to access this YouTube metadata in the same way that Android phones and iPhones do. As a result, Microsoft’s YouTube “app” on Windows Phones is basically just a browser displaying YouTube’s mobile Web site, without the rich functionality offered on competing phones. Microsoft is ready to release a high quality YouTube app for Windows Phone. We just need permission to access YouTube in the way that other phones already do, permission Google has refused to provide. http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2011/03/30/adding-our-voice-to-concerns-about-search-in-europe.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2...

ok_craig 13y ago
The issue is that the app is not displaying ads, which is against the TOS.

recoiledsnake 13y ago

There's an ongoing discussion in this thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714639 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714639

cypher543 13y ago

The comments on that article are atrocious. It's like one big fanboy rage orgy. I like Microsoft and all, but Google seems to have a legitimate claim here. All Microsoft needs to do is update the app to comply with the YouTube TOS, which doesn't seem like that big of a deal.

cooldeal 13y ago
How do they update the app if Google doesn't give them access to the API? They need to kill it and millions of Windows Phone users will be left with no legal YouTube app. Also, if you're referring to the comments on WPCentral, of course, it's "Windows Phone Central" where obviously fans and users of Windows Phone who got frustrated for years with the lack of a quality YouTube app on their phone hang out.
- cpncrunch 13y ago
  That's not Google's problem. What law says that Google needs to provide an API? This is just embarrassing for Microsoft. Basically google doesn't think it's worth spending the time developing an app for Windows Phone, and Microsoft then tries to hack it together by themselves, illegally. I haven't ported any of my own apps to Win Phone either - what's the point when nobody is using it? Out of 60,000 visits to our site over a given period, 4000 are iOS, 2000 Android, 50 blackberry and 20 Windows Phone. We haven't bothered with blackberry either (apart from providing an html5 version). Face it Microsoft: Windows Phone is a dismal failure.
  - recoiledsnake 13y ago
    >I haven't ported any of my own apps to Win Phone either - what's the point when nobody is using it? So Google's complaint is that "nobody" is using the Windows Phone Youtube app and that this is hurting Youtube because "nobody" is watching so many ad-less videos on Youtube that it's robbing Youtube and content creators of all the "no money" gotten from no ad views in the app which used by nobody? Oh, and did I mention nobody can use the Windows Phone Youtube app because nobody is using Windows Phone?!

jbigelow76 13y ago

When I saw the original app announcement (also on wpcentral) I quickly downloaded even though I already purchased metrotube, which is a perfectly good YouTube app for Windows Phone. I knew it wouldn't end well with the download of video and ad removal features. Now I play the waiting game to see if Microsoft nukes the app remotely after they are eventually forced to acquiesce :)

bryanjclark 13y ago

"This isn’t the first time Windows Phone users have been shafted by the Mountain View company not willing to develop for the platform." Bullshit - this isn't Google screwing over Microsoft, it's Microsoft being idiots. If MSFT built a YouTube app that didn't blatantly violate Google's policies, I don't think it'd be a problem. YouTube wants viewers, regardless of which platform they're coming from.

CloudNine 13y ago
>YouTube wants viewers, regardless of which platform they're coming from. Then why don't they make an Windows Phone YouTube app and show ads on it? Hell, show double the ads just to annoy WP users. Or are they afraid that it will hurt Android?
- bishnu 13y ago
  My guess is, [expected revenue per user] * [expected number of Windows Mobile users] - [cost to build a decent YouTube app] is a negative number.
  - nivla 13y ago
    Yet they have an official chrome browser app for Windows 8.
    - josh2600 13y ago
      Youtube is considered core mobile functionality, like a browser, but Youtube is a fiefdom in which Google does not have to compete (unlike the ultra-competitive landscape of the Browser wars). While Google has nothing to lose and everything to gain from restricting access to YouTube, the same cannot be said about the Browser, thus they compete. It's simple economics; don't waste money helping people dethrone your monopoly (I AM NOT ADVOCATING THIS POSITION, SIMPLY STATING MY PERCEPTION).
    - eddieroger 13y ago
      Yeah, it shares a codebase with the Windows 7 version if it's different at all. The number of Windows 7 + Windows 8 installs is far greater than Windows Phone users.

sbuk 13y ago

Simple solution; screew Google and offer Vimeo instead. In my opinion, the quality in both sense is better there...

ben0x539 13y ago
Vimeo doesn't want a lot of kinds of videos though: http://vimeo.com/help/guidelines http://vimeo.com/help/guidelines For a lot of people, it's not an option.

sbuk 13y ago

Simple solution; screw Google and offer Vimeo instead. In my opinion, the quality in both sense is better there...

duncan_bayne 13y ago

FTA: "Not just remove the app, but also disable existing downloads of the app. Aka, the “kill switch”, which (as far as we can remember) has only been used once before." And this is why app stores - as implemented by Google, Microsoft and Apple - are evil. 'Bought' an app? Think again.

itafroma 13y ago
> And this is why app stores - as implemented by Google, Microsoft and Apple - are evil. Evil involves intent, not capability. For example, a car can hurt or even kill someone, but it's not evil. Someone who intentionally and willfully runs down pedestrians with a car would, however, definitely qualify. Here's how the three companies have used their kill switch: - Microsoft has used their kill switch once to disable a pirated app - As far as I'm aware, Apple has never used their kill switch, even for pirated apps or apps that were pulled for various reasons (scams, tethering apps, etc.) - Google routinely uses its kill switch to remove malware and "practically useless"[1] apps So the the real questions are: is using the kill switch to combat piracy evil? What about malware? "Useless" apps? What about not using the kill switch at all for any reason? [1]: http://readwrite.com/2010/06/25/google_activates_android_kill_switch_zaps_useless_apps http://readwrite.com/2010/06/25/google_activates_android_kil...

skc 13y ago

So I'm curious about something. 1. Do ad blockers remove ads from YouTube? 2. Do the people in support of Google's stance use ad blockers?

CloudNine 13y ago
Would be interesting to see people's reactions if Google sent a takedown notice to addons.mozilla.org for AdBlock because it's hurting video creators and web sites.
- makomk 13y ago
  So far they don't seem to have even taken down YouTube ad blockers from their own Chrome store, unlike video downloaders that support YouTube.

1010011010 13y ago

Microsoft is a bad actor. No sympathy for them at all

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

shadowmint 13y ago

The Microsoft PR machine in full motion again I see. 1) Build app that clearly violates spirit and word of TOS, steals content, blocks ads. 2) Complain and act surprised like Google is being a bad guy when told to take it down. 3) ??? 4) Profit! Now they just need to some how spin in some automatic #droidfail hash tags to all the videos they show in the app and it'll be perfect! Idiots. (No, not the developers. I feel an immense sympathy for the people who had to work on this; their managers are the ones who are idiots)

cooldeal 13y ago
You're right, Microsoft PR sucks. Google PR on the other hand, is extremely good, they have lots of people believing they're all about "do no evil" and "open" while laughing all the way to the bank.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  > laughing all the way to the bank. I agree, how dare they make money.
magicalist 13y ago
best confirmation of this, that no one seems to have commented on, is that the cease and desist letter was immediately leaked by anonymous sources. I understand the desire for a youtube app by WP8 owners, but Microsoft very clearly wanted this back in the news cycle.
will_brown 13y ago
I think we can all take a moderate position and say MS has no right to break Google's Terms of Service. In fact unless I am mistaken under CFAA breaking Terms of Service could be a felony. Besides MS has much greater recourse than violating the Terms of Service, to the point of circumventing YouTube's ad revenue. If you take MS at their word, it appears they believe Google is engaging in anti-competitive practices, and if they truly believed that then their remedy is in Court not by unilaterally developing a YouTube App in bad-faith. Notwithstanding G+, it is sometimes over looked that Google already had one of the most successful social networks in YouTube. Separately, it is often over looked that MS also has one of the most successful social networks in Xbox Live.

rbanffy 13y ago

Does anyone seriously believe violating the YT TOS in the app was an honest mistake? This is ridiculous. Why would anyone expect a special TOS just for Microsoft?

bcgur 13y ago

Microsoft to Google: "lol go fuck yourselves". There's no reason whatsoever Microsoft should comply to those ridiculous demands. And it's awesome that Microsoft removed those YouTube antifeatures for users, they for once deserve to be thanked for the good they are doing. Google is looking more and more like the evil one (although far less evil than Apple or Oracle).

krubu 13y ago

fpgeek 13y ago
There are lots of reasons for Microsoft to comply with these demands. At least one reason for each major media company Microsoft currently partners with (or wants to in the future)... They, after all, are the ones most invested in these particular YouTube anti-features. And should Microsoft stymie Google, I'd predict that they won't remain on the sidelines.

kumarm 13y ago

Microsoft's single agenda these days to derail Google is hurting Microsoft and is only benefiting Google. 50% of top windows8 (RT) paid apps are in Gross violation of Copyright/Trademarks (Mind you including microsoft's own Copyright/Trademarks). Instead of cleaning up that mess and providing proper opportunities for legitimate developers, why is microsoft encouraging doing something by violating TOS of another major company?

tagabek 13y ago

As mentioned above by shadowmint, it seems that Microsoft is looking for some attention, and they have already succeeded. Well done. But what are the long-term effects on the growth of what Microsoft really needs (a thriving third-party mobile development community)? I could be biased because of Google I/O's hype effect, but things like this only make me lean towards Android as my next platform to develop for (coming from iOS). I agree with the definitional meaning of Microsoft's retaliation - large companies should work together to create amazing content (ie. cross-platform Youtube app) for their mutual users. As always, it's a shame to see immature rivalries come between progress.

rlpb 13y ago

Microsoft's statement: "We'd be more than happy to include advertising but need Google to provide us access to the necessary APIs." What's interesting is what they don't say. They don't say that Google have refused to provide them this, or even that they asked Google for this. Assuming that Google's complaint of "Prevents the display of advertisements in YouTube video playbacks" is a TOS violation, it looks to me that Microsoft violated their TOS first, and are only now trying to imply that Google are the bad guys.

Ecio78 13y ago

Interesting compared to how Samsung dealt with this "problem" for a third-party app that they've just awarded of best app award: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chefuturo.it%2F2012%2F11%2Fla-app-made-in-sicily-piu-scaricata-del-mondo-non-ce-piu%2F http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&...

jonas_maj 13y ago

I think Vimeo deserves more love. It allows you to download videos too which is very handy. Windows Phone and Windows 8 users will be better off in the long run using Vimeo. I think Google has made it pretty clear by now that Windows users are not welcome in their ecosystem.

belorn 13y ago

Why are the article calling it the official YouTube app? It seems a strange use of the word official, as normally that would imply a Youtube (or google) made application. Is the word native the common term here?

lucb1e 13y ago

Oh, the first paragraph explains why Youtube's official app sucks so much (no offline caching etc.). Piracy and piracy prevention ruins it all (even when it are laughable prevention methods).

wglb 13y ago

Consider the idea that an article might get flagged due to the level of flame war generated by a particular topic, and you don't need a conspiracy theory to explain its downdraft.

ankitml 13y ago

They dont publicize "Dont be evil" much these day. True. They shouldnt even.

locofacetwice 13y ago

Google is the new MS. They dictate too many things including how web developers should develop their websites.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

joeblau 13y ago

I have a Windows Phone so I just tested some of these objections out. > Allows users to download videos from YouTube That was pretty cool, but I honestly don't need that. I can already download any video from anywhere online using Google Chrome and the curl trick. > Prevents the display of advertisements in YouTube video playbacks I never saw ads on the mobile web version of YouTube, but this could be a problem when Google wants to insert them. > Plays videos that our partners have restricted from playback on certain platforms (e.g., mobile devices with limited feature sets) This was great! I actually remember trying to play a video that worked on my laptop and failed on my phone. I just went back to that same video and it worked. The overall mobile web experience of YouTube is terrible on my Windows phone (and on my iPhone). Since most of you guys are probably iPhone users here is an analogy. It's like trying to switch from a native iOS maps (Apple or Google made) client, to Googles web version of maps. Yeah it works and does everything, but the performance is crap compared to the native mobile application.

GhotiFish 13y ago

Lots of hate on Microsoft "It's a secret ploy to deceive innocent hackers into thinking Google is anti user. HISSSSSSSS" The fact is, Microsoft built a user-centric application, focusing on all the things a user might want to do. An application that treated youtube's servers exactly for what they were, servers, servers serving content. No different than browsers that have ad blocking extensions, or extensions to download videos, or whatever else a computer might want to do with data (did you know a smartphone is computer? Cool huh? ). Microsoft made an application that put the user first. Finally. Even if this is just a PR stunt, even if they have the worst intentions, they did the right thing. If Google wants to contend this they can go suck on my freedom. The proper response to this was: "Wow Microsoft, great app!" It doesn't MATTER what Microsoft's intentions were.