Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

by.graffino.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 252 posts

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#31

Post by mhurron »

spot wrote: post #26
majewsky wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

google does not sell your data. this is such a tired canard.

Selling access to the user that created the data is the same damn thing for the end user. It's just that in the way Google does it, Google gets paid over and over instead of one time selling a static list.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#32

Post by raverbashing »

majewsky wrote: post #13
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thus far, I accomplish that via: Duck, Duck, Go; NoScript; Privacy Badger; and uBlock Origin. Its silly to need to do all that, but it works well for me.

uBlock cannot give me a pristine timeline; Twitter's algorithms still mess with the content ordering. It's not just about ads, it's about how a tool's design is poisoned by the need for maximal ad revenue. As far as DuckDuckGo goes, I would really love to use them regularly. DDG is even the default search engine on my notebook, but I find myself going to Google in the second step about 90% of the time because DDG's r…

> Twitter's algorithms still mess with the content ordering.

Settings -> Account, under "Content" unmark "Show me the best Tweets first"

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#33

Post by ocdtrekkie »

majewsky wrote: post #3
petercooper wrote: post #2

I'm starting to think that if Google had a service where you could pay $10/$20/whatever, and actually get someone reasonably well informed to read what you're saying and direct your issue to the right person, they'd have another significant revenue stream on their hands ;-)

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

The problem is that Google does not want that messaging. If they collected money in exchange for not violating your privacy, they'd be acknowledging that what they do, is actually violating your privacy. At times, Google has even tried to use the rhetoric that providing you more relevant ads is a service to you that improves your experience on the Internet. (LOL)

Basically, the income they'd gain from offering this would pale in comparison of the reputation they'd lose (and following that, users) from admitting what they do is bad for you.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#34

Post by FussyZeus »

dordoka wrote: post #25
hota_mazi wrote: post #17

> I received an email from Google telling me that my extension violated Facebook’s trademark What did you expect? Any service, not just Google, will shut down apps and extensions for similar reasons. This has nothing to do with > I just don’t think it is worth it to put any amount of effort to build something on a platform that turned out to be so unreliable.

I do agree that any service might honor the takedown request for the registered trademark infringement. But what the author refers to is completely another issue: the complete lack of support from Google. The extension author complied with the request. Tried to contact several times an only got canned responses. I guess Google doesn't care much about people that develop for their platform. At least that's what I got…

Additionally, how the hell is this trademark infringement? We've been using the "Software Name for X" formula for decades to refer to programs that operate in conjunction with other systems. In this case this extension only works with Facebook, therefore the Facebook name is more or less required to describe the function of the product with any accuracy. It's not like he's written a third party app for Facebook or we made his own social network called Facebook, he's done nothing to damage the value of the trademark.

I'm generally a pro IP guy but this seems extremely draconian.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#35

Post by piyush_soni »

The exact same thing happened to me. I have a fairly successful Firefox add-on named 'Yahoo Mail Hide Ad Panel'[0], and it is one of the top-rated extensions on Mozilla's Add-on store. When I wrote it for Chrome, they removed it apparently after a complaint from Yahoo. Understandable, but I asked them how are the other extensions containing the same name not removed? No answer. I asked if "Hide Ad Panel for Yahoo Mail" would work, no response. I just gave up and decided not to write that extension for Chrome, just like OP did.

[0] : https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/yahoomailhide...

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#36

Post by eveningcoffee »

majewsky wrote: post #3
petercooper wrote: post #2

I'm starting to think that if Google had a service where you could pay $10/$20/whatever, and actually get someone reasonably well informed to read what you're saying and direct your issue to the right person, they'd have another significant revenue stream on their hands ;-)

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

The problem is that by paying you are also identifying yourself and what user data would be better than clearly identified user data?

Second problem is that there is potentially more money in you than this proposed relatively low amount because you are probably spending a lot more in a month and it is big attraction to become a middleman in every transaction you make.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#37

Post by spot »

mhurron wrote: post #31
spot wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

google does not sell your data. this is such a tired canard.

Selling access to the user that created the data is the same damn thing for the end user. It's just that in the way Google does it, Google gets paid over and over instead of one time selling a static list.

not it isn't. if you sell the data then it goes into 3rd party hands and out of google's control and they can do all kinds of bad things with it.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#38

Post by FussyZeus »

nmstoker wrote: post #15

It seems recently like anything inbound to Google goes into /dev/null! A number of us have been trying to get a response regarding Google Apps accounts with Play Music, and we're paying customers. There's no response to the forum https://productforums.google.com/forum/m/?utm_medium=email&u... nor when I put it on Twitter and when a load of us tried direct feedback via the app, that still hasn't got any response. Clea…

You'd think if they could blow billions of dollars on tons of industries they have no intention of actually entering, they could find a few million somewhere to hire some CSRs. Google's gotten big enough now where they aren't incentivized to give a shit.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#39

Post by piyush_soni »

deanclatworthy wrote: post #23

What you are doing not only violated Facebook's trademark (good luck calling it fair use), but it's also against Facebook's ToS. They have actively gone after extension authors who alter the Facebook experience and even deactivated their accounts. Rightly or wrongly, when you sign up to a service you are bound by the conditions they set out. In this case, making an extension to block advertising is probably not going…

But then, aren't Adblock Plus/uBlock Origin violating the ToS by altering the 'Facebook experience' as well? They're still there on the Web store.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#40

Post by Algent »

deanclatworthy wrote: post #23

What you are doing not only violated Facebook's trademark (good luck calling it fair use), but it's also against Facebook's ToS. They have actively gone after extension authors who alter the Facebook experience and even deactivated their accounts. Rightly or wrongly, when you sign up to a service you are bound by the conditions they set out. In this case, making an extension to block advertising is probably not going…

I can see the obvious trademark issue since he used the facebook name.

But I don't get why you bring up the ToS. Those are irrelevant outside of FB's website. ToS =/= Law.

Post reply on HN