[whocares2345]

Is there any particular reason the author paying rent via donations is different from any of us paying rent from our work? You decided to use Googles distribution platform and infrastructure while not sharing the revenue - fully knowing it is illegal in the Play Store to accept payments outside of the platform. Basically you attempted to steal the efforts Google invested in creating and promoting Android, it’s development tools and infrastructure - and they banned you for it.

[0x426577617265]

These aren't payments. The user isn't purchasing anything.

[EvanDotPro]

Only one of these two statements is true.

[jfrunyon]

"Developers charging for apps and downloads from Google Play must use Google Play's billing system as the method of payment. Play-distributed apps must use Google Play's billing system as the method of payment if they require or accept payment for access to features or services, including any app functionality, digital content or goods."

You're right, GP should have been more explicit: these aren't payments subject to Google Play's "us-only" policy.

[mdp2021]

> Is there any particular reason the author paying rent via donations is different from any of us paying rent from our work

Patently, yes:

-- "donation" means one can get the product independently of any money transfer;

-- «paying from work», «charging for apps», «require or accept payment for access to features or services», means that getting the product is conditional to money transfer.

"Donation" is not "payment".

In fact, I do not quite understand on which contractual reason the ban happened.

[aboringusername]

Sorry but this is why we need regulation and fast. We need by default other app stores on all operating systems (similar to search engines Google were forced to advertise)

Google should have to compete on merit and if somebody doesn't want to give Google/Apple a cut, too bad.

These platforms should probably not be placed under the control of such large entities, Android/iOS should be split into their own organisation .

Google/Apple can then pick their OS or appstore, not both.

[foota]

To play devil's advocate, competing app stores could just be a race to the bottom.

[danuker]

Excellent. The price for distributing software should be very small. My Linux distro gives me free gigabytes of updates every month.

[jlokier]

I don't think they mean a race to the bottom _price_ as the problem.

More like race to the bottom quality, security, spyware, malware, shitty ripoff of other people's work promoted over the original, fake bank apps, fake WhatsApp when you wanted the real one, etc.

Your Linux distro is not in a race to the bottom on any of these things. It works in a completely different way from an app marketplace on a money-handling device. And you know you are running Linux, you know what you're getting.

We should have multiple app stores. But don't be under any illusion that it can only turn out like Linux distros. I would expect some terrible "stores" just like there are some really dodgy apps, some of them installed on users' devices without their knowledge.

[izacus]

There's absolutely nothing stopping the author from distributing his app in following ways:

- on F-Droid, an app store dedicated for OSS software

- on Samsung Store, an app store preinstalled on most Android phones sold in US and other western world

- on Amazon store

- on Huawei app store

- on their own webpage as a downloadable APK

But what they really want is to use Googles distribution system while not paying the margin.

[Siira]

Donations are voluntary, in-app purchases unlock features (traditionally).

Besides, Google has to maintain the App Store to keep their OS afloat.