Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links

Post by irjustin » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:02 AM UTC

usr1106 wrote: post #39

irjustin wrote: post #35

I know this will be against deeply against HNews but I'm open to discussion. I don't see anything wrong with this. Charging vs Donations, I don't see what the difference is. It's people paying money for good/services/software. The primary difference is the open ended pricing model. Google, Apple put up networks and there's value in that network. Whether someone chooses to release their app for free or charge money fo…

It is useless to discuss market or even fairness as long Google and Apple are (de-facto) monopolies for the respective phone owner. It's a major failure of governments to allow monopolies.

Post by esotericn » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:04 AM UTC

irjustin wrote: post #60

esotericn wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're stating, essentially, that anyone who wants to publish FOSS software with a donation link should be forced to go through some convoluted procedure and register as a charitable organization. (where? in the US? in their specific region? does it matter? how much time will it take for them to figure out? is this even possible in all regions? does this require ongoing effort e.g. accounting, document submission, ge…

True, I'll agree that going non-profit is a nightmare. But again, what is FOSS with a donation link vs free-to-use software with pay-as-much-as-you-want. One sounds like a non-profit while the other sounds like a for-profit. Perhaps if you can directly show your software is FOSS via licensing etc that there should be a special exemption? Seems like there needs to be a sole-proprietier non-profit... but man that seems…

Post by karambir » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:07 AM UTC

esotericn wrote: post #19

$50 sent, thanks Jason, no thanks Google. A small amount relative to the value that you're giving to the world, but hopefully a few pints won't go amiss. Fuck gatekeepers.

Post by mcherm » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:08 AM UTC

dessant wrote: post #58

bipson wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what you are proposing is to make an ideological fight out of this issue, that is exactly what the author describes as "a huge time-drain that does not make the app better" and exactly the opposite of what he meant with "choose your battles". Let me say that I think you're morally right, but it is probably not a reasonable choice of actions for the author and the users of the app.

There is no need for an ideological fight, because there is no written Google Play policy against donation links in apps. This is most likely a mistake made by the reviewer or an automated system, and I believe they should follow up on it to sort things out.

Post by irjustin » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:14 AM UTC

esotericn wrote: post #63

irjustin wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, I'll agree that going non-profit is a nightmare. But again, what is FOSS with a donation link vs free-to-use software with pay-as-much-as-you-want. One sounds like a non-profit while the other sounds like a for-profit. Perhaps if you can directly show your software is FOSS via licensing etc that there should be a special exemption? Seems like there needs to be a sole-proprietier non-profit... but man that seems…

Sure, there is very little distinction. I'd argue that both are donations. Pay-as-much-as-you-want (if $0 is an allowable price) represents a donation with a slightly different funnel. The for-profit vs non-profit distinction is immaterial to me; the distinction is between actually paying for products (e.g. buying an ingame item or support or a subscription or whatever; some sort of 'contractual' thing), and literall…