6 ms·

Agreed - the whole thing reads like a giant whine, to me. The author has zero concept of what he's done wrong, which is astounding to me.

by rrrx3 12y ago

TuringTest 12y ago
The question is, was the punishment proportional to the crime? The 'whine' was about being banned for life because of novice mistakes made without bad faith. How is one supposed to learn the ropes? It's like learning to drive in a country where driving schools didn't exist and the full extent of traffic laws applied to you. How possibly could the author learn what he was doing wrong?
- nl 12y ago
  How is one supposed to learn the ropes? Maybe listen to one of the many warnings he was given?
  - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
    Warning, your post is in breech of my policies, the policies of HN, the law local to you or some other policy that applies due to jurisdiction that applies to the server, you, me or HN. Please correct this error immediately or your account will be terminated. /s
- danielweber 12y ago
  The majority of the post was "it's their fault that they didn't stop me!" When his first app was suspended, Google should have given a better response when he asked what he did wrong. But to just continue forward doing the exact same thing he was doing before was asking for trouble. If Google wouldn't give him a clear answer, he should have asked his friends or the community.
  - aceperry 12y ago
    His friends consisted of "99.9% of everyone I know uses iOS", are probably contemptuous of Android. Which seems to be a common attitude amongst the apple fanbois. I don't think his friends could've helped him.
  - TuringTest 12y ago
    According to the timeline, all the applications that got his account suspended were already in place when he got the first notice. So it's not as if he continued doing the same thing - he was sacked by inaction, and the warnings didn't contain sufficient notice that more action (removing the other applications, which hadn't got a warning yet) was required on his part.
- Cthulhu_ 12y ago
  > The question is, was the punishment proportional to the crime? Well yeah, repeated trademark infringement / impersonation; if Google wasn't strict about that kinda thing, the owners of those brands would sue them for millions, just as much as they were with Youtube. They're similarly strict with Youtube videos for that matter.
  - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
    "Khan Academy TV - youtube.com/user/khanacademy" Is that impersonation? Basically his app let you have a "bookmark" that opened a YouTube provided channel. Sure he seems to be naive about the trademark issues (but interestingly never mentions how much money was made, if any) but Google were highly flawed in their customer service/developer relations [as usual]. The trademark issue isn't entirely clear cut (but I wouldn't want to try and defend it in court) as it's descriptive of what it is. There's an exhaustion of rights angle too - like being able to sell Nike shoes and call them Nike shoes as long as they are really from Nike. My point I suppose is it's not entirely without complexity. Google, how hard is it to have a pro forma response that says "You can not use other business names or trademarks, which you don't have a license for, as part of your app name.".
    - GFischer 12y ago
      To continue your analogy, it would be more akin to selling Nike shoes in your store, and calling your store Nike Store Seller, and using Nike's logo prominently in your store. I'm sure Nike wouldn't like that, even if you were actually selling Nike shoes. I agree that Google wasn't exactly communicative (they never are).
      - TuringTest 12y ago
        Wouldn't it more like having a Nike stand in a store called Google's Play App Store, with a small sign noting "this is not an official Nike stand"? (the developers name and notice). I understand that Nike wouldn't want the unauthorized usage, but an app is a product, not a store.
- hxw 12y ago
  I have never submitted anything to Google Play, but there has to be some sort of guidelines for what you can submit and not? Or he could have just searched the web - "(...) searching the web I find dozens of similar stories"
  - tim333 12y ago
    There is a guide and it's pretty clear: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/2986097?hl=en https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... "For example, if your app displays the brand, icon, or title from another app [...] your apps can be suspended and your developer account terminated."
    - agrotera 12y ago
      I was trying to feel some kind of sympathy for the guy and though that maybe the terms and conditions may have been full of jargon and hard for someone without a legal background to understand. That's about as clear as can be.
- claudius 12y ago
  There was no crime (at least no criminal prosecution of one form or another) and no punishment. There was a violation of the contract the OP agreed upon and the other party decided to make use of their right and terminate that contract. That other party has no obligation whatsoever to continue to uphold the contract or not make use of the clause which allows them to exit. The other party is also under no obligation to provide someone some leeway to “learn the ropes”. Lastly, the ropes which the author failed to learn are founded in civil and criminal law, not in the ToS of the other party specifically. Since ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse to violate said law, there is particularly little reason for anyone to give the OP any sort of leeway to learn obeying the law. TL;DR: Don’t trust companies with important stuff if you are not certain to have appropriate forms of recourse if they decide in a way you don’t like. Don’t ignore civil and criminal law because they’re just “rules”. Read the terms of service if you agree to them.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- avz 12y ago
  It's a misrepresentation to cast the account suspension as if it was a punishment for a crime. Google has the right to terminate a business relationship with partners who violate their terms and conditions and ignore their warnings. Developer account with Google is not a birthright. The provision of it is a business relationship conditioned on following certain rules which the author broke multiple times and despite warnings.
- mattstocum 12y ago
  He was warned. Repeatedly. What the hell else did he want? An overt act of divine intervention?
  - wolfgke 12y ago
    What he wanted is stated clearly in the article: "I emailed Google back and asked them to tell me exactly what I need to change to be compliant with the rules. Is it the icon? The name? The disclaimer? What? Google refused to give me any additional information. So, I just left the app in the suspended state and never attempted to update it since I really didn’t know what I needed to change".
    - Eiriksmal 12y ago
      My beef with this article is that he knew something was wrong, hence his questions basically asking, "Which of my many actions violated copyright law?" And tattles on himself when he admits everything about his "app" revolved around unfair use of others' copyrighted material: "I 'borrowed' your icon and your name when I created my 'app.' Is that wrong?"
      - Dylan16807 12y ago
        If you tell me I've done 'something' wrong I can make an enormous series of increasingly-tenuous possible justifications in my mind, but that doesn't mean I have any clue if I've actually done something wrong or if there was a mistake in evaluation somewhere.
        Eiriksmal 12y ago
        "A few weeks went by and I got an email stating one of my apps had been suspended. ... I could understand if an uptight lawyer out there didn’t want my app on the store displaying their videos." "The suspension email stated that I was trying to impersonate another company, and that this was forbidden. I had no intention of impersonating anyone." I would say, in this gentleman's situation, that's pretty specific. Especially since he admits above, below, and all around his Google correspondence that he's got a very good understanding that what he's doing violates either US copyright law or Google's terms of services, regardless of intent. "You, sir, are in violation of copyright law. What? You didn't intend to violate copyright law and have a "disclaimer" in your app? Oh, well in that case..."
- sjs382 12y ago
  >The question is, was the punishment proportional to the crime? Yes. >The 'whine' was about being banned for life because of novice mistakes made without bad faith. How is one supposed to learn the ropes? The novice mistakes were made without bad faith, I agree. This is why his first app was suspended. The reason he was banned however, was continuing to ignore warnings. He has no concept of what he did wrong—he's not someone I would want to do business with, either.
jasonlotito 12y ago
If one person does it, it's a whine. When Airbnb or Uber does it, it's fighting back against the establishment. Not suggesting he was right, but you can't be apart of this community without noticing these things.

Agreed - the whole thing reads like a giant whine, to me. The author has zero concept of what he's done wrong, which is astounding to me.

by rrrx3 12y ago

Agreed - the whole thing reads like a giant whine, to me. The author has zero concept of what he's done wrong, which is astounding to me.

TuringTest 12y ago

The question is, was the punishment proportional to the crime? The 'whine' was about being banned for life because of novice mistakes made without bad faith. How is one supposed to learn the ropes? It's like learning to drive in a country where driving schools didn't exist and the full extent of traffic laws applied to you. How possibly could the author learn what he was doing wrong?

nl 12y ago
How is one supposed to learn the ropes? Maybe listen to one of the many warnings he was given?
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  Warning, your post is in breech of my policies, the policies of HN, the law local to you or some other policy that applies due to jurisdiction that applies to the server, you, me or HN. Please correct this error immediately or your account will be terminated. /s
danielweber 12y ago
The majority of the post was "it's their fault that they didn't stop me!" When his first app was suspended, Google should have given a better response when he asked what he did wrong. But to just continue forward doing the exact same thing he was doing before was asking for trouble. If Google wouldn't give him a clear answer, he should have asked his friends or the community.
- aceperry 12y ago
  His friends consisted of "99.9% of everyone I know uses iOS", are probably contemptuous of Android. Which seems to be a common attitude amongst the apple fanbois. I don't think his friends could've helped him.
- TuringTest 12y ago
  According to the timeline, all the applications that got his account suspended were already in place when he got the first notice. So it's not as if he continued doing the same thing - he was sacked by inaction, and the warnings didn't contain sufficient notice that more action (removing the other applications, which hadn't got a warning yet) was required on his part.
Cthulhu_ 12y ago
> The question is, was the punishment proportional to the crime? Well yeah, repeated trademark infringement / impersonation; if Google wasn't strict about that kinda thing, the owners of those brands would sue them for millions, just as much as they were with Youtube. They're similarly strict with Youtube videos for that matter.
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  "Khan Academy TV - youtube.com/user/khanacademy" Is that impersonation? Basically his app let you have a "bookmark" that opened a YouTube provided channel. Sure he seems to be naive about the trademark issues (but interestingly never mentions how much money was made, if any) but Google were highly flawed in their customer service/developer relations [as usual]. The trademark issue isn't entirely clear cut (but I wouldn't want to try and defend it in court) as it's descriptive of what it is. There's an exhaustion of rights angle too - like being able to sell Nike shoes and call them Nike shoes as long as they are really from Nike. My point I suppose is it's not entirely without complexity. Google, how hard is it to have a pro forma response that says "You can not use other business names or trademarks, which you don't have a license for, as part of your app name.".
  - GFischer 12y ago
    To continue your analogy, it would be more akin to selling Nike shoes in your store, and calling your store Nike Store Seller, and using Nike's logo prominently in your store. I'm sure Nike wouldn't like that, even if you were actually selling Nike shoes. I agree that Google wasn't exactly communicative (they never are).
    - TuringTest 12y ago
      Wouldn't it more like having a Nike stand in a store called Google's Play App Store, with a small sign noting "this is not an official Nike stand"? (the developers name and notice). I understand that Nike wouldn't want the unauthorized usage, but an app is a product, not a store.
hxw 12y ago
I have never submitted anything to Google Play, but there has to be some sort of guidelines for what you can submit and not? Or he could have just searched the web - "(...) searching the web I find dozens of similar stories"
- tim333 12y ago
  There is a guide and it's pretty clear: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/2986097?hl=en https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... "For example, if your app displays the brand, icon, or title from another app [...] your apps can be suspended and your developer account terminated."
  - agrotera 12y ago
    I was trying to feel some kind of sympathy for the guy and though that maybe the terms and conditions may have been full of jargon and hard for someone without a legal background to understand. That's about as clear as can be.
claudius 12y ago
There was no crime (at least no criminal prosecution of one form or another) and no punishment. There was a violation of the contract the OP agreed upon and the other party decided to make use of their right and terminate that contract. That other party has no obligation whatsoever to continue to uphold the contract or not make use of the clause which allows them to exit. The other party is also under no obligation to provide someone some leeway to “learn the ropes”. Lastly, the ropes which the author failed to learn are founded in civil and criminal law, not in the ToS of the other party specifically. Since ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse to violate said law, there is particularly little reason for anyone to give the OP any sort of leeway to learn obeying the law. TL;DR: Don’t trust companies with important stuff if you are not certain to have appropriate forms of recourse if they decide in a way you don’t like. Don’t ignore civil and criminal law because they’re just “rules”. Read the terms of service if you agree to them.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
avz 12y ago
It's a misrepresentation to cast the account suspension as if it was a punishment for a crime. Google has the right to terminate a business relationship with partners who violate their terms and conditions and ignore their warnings. Developer account with Google is not a birthright. The provision of it is a business relationship conditioned on following certain rules which the author broke multiple times and despite warnings.
mattstocum 12y ago
He was warned. Repeatedly. What the hell else did he want? An overt act of divine intervention?
- wolfgke 12y ago
  What he wanted is stated clearly in the article: "I emailed Google back and asked them to tell me exactly what I need to change to be compliant with the rules. Is it the icon? The name? The disclaimer? What? Google refused to give me any additional information. So, I just left the app in the suspended state and never attempted to update it since I really didn’t know what I needed to change".
  - Eiriksmal 12y ago
    My beef with this article is that he knew something was wrong, hence his questions basically asking, "Which of my many actions violated copyright law?" And tattles on himself when he admits everything about his "app" revolved around unfair use of others' copyrighted material: "I 'borrowed' your icon and your name when I created my 'app.' Is that wrong?"
    - Dylan16807 12y ago
      If you tell me I've done 'something' wrong I can make an enormous series of increasingly-tenuous possible justifications in my mind, but that doesn't mean I have any clue if I've actually done something wrong or if there was a mistake in evaluation somewhere.
      - Eiriksmal 12y ago
        "A few weeks went by and I got an email stating one of my apps had been suspended. ... I could understand if an uptight lawyer out there didn’t want my app on the store displaying their videos." "The suspension email stated that I was trying to impersonate another company, and that this was forbidden. I had no intention of impersonating anyone." I would say, in this gentleman's situation, that's pretty specific. Especially since he admits above, below, and all around his Google correspondence that he's got a very good understanding that what he's doing violates either US copyright law or Google's terms of services, regardless of intent. "You, sir, are in violation of copyright law. What? You didn't intend to violate copyright law and have a "disclaimer" in your app? Oh, well in that case..."
sjs382 12y ago
>The question is, was the punishment proportional to the crime? Yes. >The 'whine' was about being banned for life because of novice mistakes made without bad faith. How is one supposed to learn the ropes? The novice mistakes were made without bad faith, I agree. This is why his first app was suspended. The reason he was banned however, was continuing to ignore warnings. He has no concept of what he did wrong—he's not someone I would want to do business with, either.

jasonlotito 12y ago

If one person does it, it's a whine. When Airbnb or Uber does it, it's fighting back against the establishment. Not suggesting he was right, but you can't be apart of this community without noticing these things.