
How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users - andygambles
https://by.graffino.com/how-google-obliterated-my-24k-users-chrome-extension-eeb14c040a39#.13m3awp18
======
nmstoker
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...](https://productforums.google.com/forum/m/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/play/86WVa8b_3i4/9kDu_0CaAwAJ)
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.

Clearly their model needs to rely on limited user support and that's okay,
provided there's a good service with _some_ human presence. But it's getting
to be a problem...

~~~
adzicg
anecdotally, you can get good support if you're a customer, but there's a big
difference between a customer and a user. I've heard (not confirmed
personally, just overheard at conferences), that if you spend enough on
adwords to register on their radar as a customer, things are easy to get
sorted even if they're nowhere adwords related.

the big difference is that for the most part, google users/developers/... are
not really customers.

~~~
davidgerard
I can reassure you, as a Google Apps for Business customer, that they treat
their paying customers with every bit the same contempt as they treat their
free end users.

~~~
jeffmould
I have had to call a couple times on different email related issues with
Google Apps and have to say my experience has been nothing less than
impressed. They were responsive, extremely helpful, and continued to follow-up
to make sure the issue was resolved and we were not experiencing any more
problems.

I've also had issues with Adsense and have access to their support, and have
had the same experience there. Helpful, responsive, and followed up long after
the problem was resolved to make sure we didn't have any more problems.

Overall, I went in thinking their support would suck and ended up impressed.

~~~
davidgerard
When was that? If they've improved I would be _delighted_.

~~~
jeffmould
Two within the last 12 months and a couple last year. I just had an Adsense
issue last month that was fixed same day. For apps, I had to merge multiple
business accounts several months ago and they assisted us with the entire
process.

------
edent
Not providing any meaningful support _is_ Google's business model - you can
see them talk about it at
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU0Z_HAzO3I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU0Z_HAzO3I)

> Google estimates that they would need to hire over 20,000 customer service
> people to deal with 1 query every three years from each customer. So it has
> decided - as far as possible - to employ zero people and rely on algorithms.

[https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2013/02/googles-customer-
contempt-c...](https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2013/02/googles-customer-contempt-
conundrum/)

~~~
adamc
Which is a really good argument for never developing for the Google eco-
system. Because you can't afford to invest in a platform where if something
goes wrong you're just f*cked.

~~~
malka
Agreed. At least on other corporate eco systems (Microsoft, Oracle, etc.), if
you are a paying customer, you have great support.

~~~
colemannerd
Absolutely! You only have to use 10 year old technology for that support.

~~~
throwanem
Great! It's had time for a lot of the bugs to get knocked out, and most of the
rest to be well enough known for fixes to be pretty solidly understood.

------
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...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
US/firefox/addon/yahoomailhideadpanel/)

~~~
tobltobs
I guess it is not using "Facebook" or in your case "Yahoo" in your extension
name, but changing the content for a user of a Facebook or Yahoo page is what
is triggering the remove of the extension. If it is against the TOS (or
Platform Policy) I don't see how else they are supposed to react if the get a
complain.

~~~
barkbro
I don't see how an add-on posted on the Chrome store is subject to Facebook's
ToS. It might be aiding people in breaking the ToS, but is there really a law
against that?

~~~
aminorex
Google makes the laws now. Governments are mostly irrelevant.

~~~
SZJX
Well you've been quite extreme in this thread. I get your concerns, but I'd
say that day is still very much far away. Libertarian lunatics like Peter
Thiel certainly dream of it, but I really doubt it will become the reality, at
least not over the whole world if indeed so in the already very corporate
America.

Anyways, if the vision aspired by Thiel happens, those "libertarian"
capitalists will be killed by revolts/uprisings in an instant. A world without
tax nor regulation nor basic support for social equality never works. Just as
explained in Capitalism in the 21st Century, if inequality is not addressed,
there will be revolts and chaos. Extreme injustice can't dominate forever.

------
chiefalchemist
What's that? Google? Poor support? Poor service? Say it isn't so.

To be clear, #Sarcasm :)

Google's genius, isn't so much what they do. It's also that they've lowered
the bar when it comes to expectations. They understand that designing and
building products is relatively easy. The unknowns are in time knowable.

On the other hand , reality-based humans drive Google crazy. They are,
evidently, to be avoided at all costs.

In that context, it's "interesting" how it's working out for Google+, eh.
Surprised?

~~~
wernercd
In some aspects, maybe... in other aspects, they've raised the bar to heights
that others can't/won't reach.

In a company that has hundreds of products, is that really so hard to believe?
Mega successes... mega failures. Still massively successful?

Look at Apple. They were at the top with the iPod. Then the iPhone. Then the
iPad. Massively successful. Yet they still release turd products like one
button mouse, Apple TV and the G4 Cube.

Or Microsoft with their massively successful products and massively
unsuccessful turds.

It's not like other companies don't have horrible customer support... Nope...
just Google. /rolls eyes

~~~
protomyth
> one button mouse

Although I have some serious issues with Apple (e.g. iPhone 6 plus), Apple
hasn't released a one button mouse in a long time. They all have two buttons,
just check the preferences.

Frankly, Apple TV is actually a pretty good product since my technophobe Mom
can use it for its intended purpose. I still don't like the whole remote
policy, but that's a developer thing and frankly Apple really isn't the most
friendly company to developers either.

~~~
thetinguy
Don't argue. This poster is of the mind that his opinion is the only right
one.

~~~
wernercd
What makes you think that? From five short paragraphs, I'm an immovable
mountain - unable to change my opinion because I'm right?

Didn't realize that text carried that much weight...

Didn't realize that a comment about a Google Extension was so earth shattering
that it's not worth arguing over...

I'd hate to see you in a conversation about anything of real substance.

------
Jerry2
> _My requests got closed with a “Thanks for your feedback.” canned response._

This is a prime example of why I don't use my Gmail anymore and why I pay for
email. I've read plenty of horror stories of how people lost their Gmail
accounts for all kinds of reasons. Most of the losses were completely
unrelated to Gmail but related to perceived 'abuse' of Google's other services
like Youtube (if your YT account gets shut down for 'copyright abuse', your
Gmail will be gone as well). Some people lost Gmail accounts over Google Play
store apps they submitted. Basically, if they close your account, your Gmail
is linked to it and it's gone too. That scared the heck out of me because I
had my whole life in there.

And there's just no way to contact Google's support... unless you know someone
at Google.

Author should feel lucky they didn't close his account over this.

~~~
Betabot101
I've recently started to move a lot of the services I use away from Google
provided services. Who'd you go with instead of Gmail for email?

~~~
KiwiCoder
Not OP, but I moved all of my email from free Gmail to paid Fastmail about 2
years ago, and I've not had a moment of regret.

I send quite a lot of email for work and other things and I have what I think
is a higher-than-average number of email addresses to manage.

One adjustment I made - I now archive older emails to avoid extra storage
costs, which in turn means that searching for older emails is slightly more
hassle.

Fastmail's web interface and mobile app are not quite as slick (as gmail) but
this isn't a big deal for me personally.

~~~
Sylos
Can't you just use another e-mail app, like for example K-9 Mail, with it?

~~~
KiwiCoder
I used K-9 for many months and it was just OK. The FastMail app was not a huge
improvement (over K-9) but it was still an improvement, at least in my
experience. From memory K-9 didn't handle multiple "send-from" accounts as
competently as the FastMail app, and there were other quirks that became more
irritating over time.

------
petercooper
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 ;-)

~~~
majewsky
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 collect any data about me without my
explicit consent.

~~~
red_admiral
My guess here is that the subset of users who would be willing to pay a
monthly subscription is strongly correlated with the subset that advertisers
are interested in targeting most. If a site got say 10% of users to pay a
subscription, their value to advertisers - and hence their advertising revenue
- might drop a lot more than 10%, leaving them with a net loss.

~~~
GrinningFool
It seems to me the opposite. If someone cares enough to pay for the content
directly ,I suspect that person is the one who will be going out of the way to
avoid ads and tracking in the first place.

~~~
fdgdasfadsf
The trouble is that at this stage hoovering up customer data is in Google's
DNA. As far as my perceptions go all a paid option means is that now they
attach my credit card details to their data on me.

------
hota_mazi
> 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.

~~~
dordoka
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 from the blog post. Therefore, author's conclusion about developing for
that platform seens right.

~~~
blihp
The problem is that the author used the wrong example to make that point. This
issue was entirely on the developer and at this point in the web/mobile/app
game I have to believe he really didn't want to understand what the issue was
and was just trying to get some attention with that post.

Let's pretend Google actually had great developer support (remember: we're
pretending here) which was staffed to whatever degree it 'should' be. He still
would have likely gotten nothing but automated/canned replies because this
particular 'issue' has been brought up time and time again by inexperienced
and/or bozo developers (i.e. 'whhaaa... you mean I can't make a living off of
someone else's brand?'. No company is going to spend much/any time fielding
these types of support requests, even if it's paid support) It would have been
a stronger argument if he had an issue that a real person on the other end
would have been able to help him with.

~~~
ar0
Your point would be valid if the author hadn't pointed out that the same issue
was resolved properly by Apple within three days (by renaming to "Cleaner -
for Facebook"). My understanding is that Apple is bound by the same laws as
Google when it comes to trademarks and IP.

So you do not have to pretend here: If Google had developer support that would
be as good as Apple's (which I believe is a very low bar considering all the
anger Apple is getting about how they treat developers), the extension would
still be in the Chrome App Store and doing just fine.

------
chinhodado
These stories are too common. Google is mortified of trademark/IP violation,
so if you made the mistake of naming your thing wrong and got reported, good
luck getting help with it. On the Android app store it's even worse, once
taken down if you want to submit the app again under a different name you have
to make a new app package, which means forfeiting all the existing users,
reviews, ratings, etc.

------
deanclatworthy
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 to end well for you.

~~~
zenopopovici
They told me I was infringing 4 years later... when there are numerous apps in
the store doing the same. It's also a cleaner that works only of Facebook.
Google reviewed it and approved it 4 years ago. The extension is free. There
is no advertising. I don't make any profit.

I was never told what to do or how to change it so that my users would still
recognize it. Also changing its name in "Cleaner - For Facebook" was suggested
(and accepted) for the Safari extension by the Safari Gallery Team.

If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it. This is not about TM
infringement, but the total lack of communication by Google.

Thing is that they basically told me I can't do anything if the original
complainant gives his go-ahead ... after 3 months of canned responses.

(I'm the author of the post).

~~~
DannyBee
"They told me I was infringing 4 years later... "

Laches is only a defense if facebook knows and it took 4 years. Even then,
caselaw suggests 4 years is the minimum you'd ever get to complain about.

"Google reviewed it and approved it 4 years ago."

Not sure of the relevance to the first sentence. It's not the same folks.

"I was never told what to do or how to change it so that my users would still
recognize it. Also changing its name in "Cleaner - For Facebook" was suggested
(and accepted) for the Safari extension by the Safari Gallery Team. If I don't
know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it. "

I'm honestly not sure what you expect here. Google doesn't know what's going
to make the other guy stop complaining, and if the other guys complains, they
have liability.

I expect this is why they directed you to contact the complainant. Google
really can't say or do anything here without risking legal liability, unless
the other guy basically says "yeah, we don't care anymore". So they aren't.
You can't expect Google to offer you legal advice on how to fix this, that's
just silly.

Note that contrary to whatever you think - you have recourse here, even if
facebook ignores you (i assume you called the complaining place on the phone
instead of just emailing folks)

You could go get a declaratory judgement that your app is not trademark
infringing. If you did this, and google ignored _that_ , i think you'd have a
reasonable argument here.

~~~
zenopopovici
I have a reasonable argument, but you're not listening. So I'm just going to
stop writing.

If you're a developer there needs to be an explanation and a mediation if a
conflict occurs. This is how business is handled everywhere. I am a developer
that helps promote their business.

There is no where to call no where to write and to get a human on the other
side. There is no appeal.

------
jondubois
Silicon Valley companies are an oligopoly - They behave more like
collaborators than competitors. This type of behaviour just confirms it.

Why does Google care if someone wrote software to block Facebook ads? Maybe
they have a secret deal with Facebook to help cleanse the world from ad
blockers?

Obviously Apple has no skin in the game (they don't rely on ad money) - Maybe
that's why they allowed the ad blocker to remain on their store.

This is a case of competing companies collaborating with each other at the
expense of the consumer because the outcome is mutually-beneficial for the
companies. This is anti-capitalist behaviour.

If Facebook has a problem with ad blockers, they should take it up with the
government instead of collaborating with competitors.

That brings back memories of the Google/Apple employee anti-poaching agreement
[http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-others-settle-anti-
poa...](http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-others-settle-anti-poaching-
lawsuit-for-415-million/)

~~~
VikingCoder
They should take it up with the government - rather than having terms of
service which allow them to remove content they deem inappropriate? How
exactly would going to the government make things better for anyone?

~~~
jondubois
I don't see how 'Cleaner Facebook' is a brand infringement. Anybody who
downloads this app would surely know that the app is not made by Facebook (it
doesn't attempt to mislead users into thinking that).

There is a clear distinction between claiming that something is made 'For
Facebook' vs 'By Facebook".

------
Buetol
That's what you get when you centralize things.

A better thing could be a community-owned store for the chrome extensions (and
a community-owner browser). Something like the Mozilla Add-ons site but for
Chromium-only extensions.

Or being able to add you own stores in Chromium, would be even nice for
companies who want to distribute private extensions.

~~~
eveningcoffee
The problem is actually that Chrome is a thing at all. Even greater problem is
a lot of developers, who should know better, recommending it en masse to
laypersons.

------
zenopopovici
I'm really surprised this got so much traction..., I didn't submit this to HN.
Baffled that so many users went trough roughly the same experience.

(I'm the original author)

~~~
chris_wot
Great project - is this in a repo we can fork?

~~~
zenopopovici
It's not opensource. I would have to rewrite it to open source it. And write
some docs. I don't know if I have the time for it.

I can't release it in the form it is now. I'm really ashamed of the code I
wrote a few years back :).

~~~
jessaustin
Don't worry about it! The code probably isn't nearly as bad as you think, and
anyway it can be improved through PRs... Did you consider open-sourcing it
from the beginning? If so, why did you decide not to do that?

------
nkozyra
> After 3 months of trying everything I could think of, I give up.

Frankly, it would have taken just one thing - remove references to Facebook. I
know that's basically amounting to doing some linguistic gymnastics in order
to express what your extension does, but you _did_ in fact use a trademark
without their consent, and ostensibly in a way that reduces their revenue
stream. This really isn't a Graffino v Google issue.

Expecting "due process" is also an unrealistic complaint in this scenario.

> I just want you to think twice before creating a revenue stream based on the
> Chrome Web Store.

Forget the Chrome Web Store. Think twice before creating a revenue stream
based on _any_ service that can pull out the rug at any moment. If you don't
control your own destiny things like this can and will happen.

~~~
PeterisP
You don't need consent for _nominal_ uses of a trademark. If I say that my
service does X for Facebook, then I'm allowed to say that even if Facebook
objects.

I may need to explicitly prevent the impression that my service is Facebook or
part of it, and add a footnote about who is the owner of the Facebook
trademark, but saying that an extension is "a cleaner for Facebook™" is
explicitly allowed under trademark laws. Even without consent from Facebook,
and even if Facebook explicitly forbids it.

~~~
nkozyra
I'm not saying the complaint was legally valid, obviously Google can't return
the necessary due diligence on every DMCA takedown request. But the reasoning
was explicitly stated in that request.

------
exelius
The "why" is quite simple: Google is an ad company, and the entire reason they
developed Chrome was to ensure they had control over the plugin ecosystem to
ensure Google-provided ads could never be blocked. But ad blockers are
becoming an existential threat to online advertising in general, so Google is
likely trying to prevent them from existing.

It's a terrible idea because advertisers don't give a fuck about performance.
I've ditched Chrome because it's just too slow with all the ads -- at least
with Safari and Firefox I can run an ad blocker to cut down on _some_ of the
mountains of JavaScript trackers, overlays and animated banner ads that make
the browser so effing slow. I know I'm not the only one in this boat.

~~~
newscracker
It's not true that you cannot run an adblocker on Chrome. You can easily
install uBlock Origin, uBlock, Adblock Plus, etc., from the extension store.
You can also run EFF's Privacy Badger extension to block trackers as an
additional measure.

~~~
exelius
It's more that if these extensions ever became a real threat to Google, they
could easily block them since they control the extension store. That tends to
keep them in line over the long run.

------
savrajsingh
Google suspended adwords for my shareware software site and removed it from
the index because I didn't post a EULA. I posted it, but now they're claiming
I need 'more original content' \-- the whole site is original. Not sure how or
why innocent developers are being caught up in the dragnet obviously intended
for spammers / scammers, but it seems those folks continue to operate freely
while the innocent are being locked down.

------
uptown
"I got quite a few offers to sell it, so others could push advertising trough
it."

Makes you wonder how many of my installed extensions have changed owners
during my use.

------
thr0waway1239
Email the Bing team and ask them to feature a "Unresolved Google Complaint of
the Day" with a timer ticking to show how long the problem has been left
unresolved with a link to your blog post - on the Bing home page. That might
get you somewhere :-)

------
ejcx
I ran in to the exact same problem.

I had a chrome extension with >15k users. One day I got an email saying I
violated the facebook trademark (my extension blocked the read receipts in
facebook messenger and had 'facebook' in the title).

I reached out to google and they said reach out to the person who filed the
complaint (which was not facebook, it was some agency they pay). I reached out
to them, called their phone number, sent them emails, and they were
unreachable. I emailed google to say they are unreachable and they won't
respond.

It is kind of annoying...

------
baldfat
If you write a extension to remove ads from FaceBook and your user base has
grown from 4,000 to 24,000 users and it just got taken down I feel your lucky.
I am not saying it is good, bad or indifferent but someone is going to notice
you and make some noise when you remove ads from FaceBook and you have
FaceBook in your name.

The communication side fo things is clearly bad on Google's side. Similar to
the YouTube demonetized videos fiasco. Google needs more PR and Communication
people.

------
nabla9
The economic model for writing apps for closed distribution platforms, or
-stores is kind of serfdom without manorial courts. You sign of your rights
for being heard or listened. You are in the mercy of the platform owner.

From the point of platform owner this kind of indifference and arbitrariness
is justified with low cost and it's not going to go away. They only need to
keep the frequency of occurrences within acceptable limits.

------
gizmodo59
Google is highly unreliable for developers. The number of products that are
discontinued are staggering. Not trying to be pessimistic but unfortunately
many feels like that.

------
kelvin0
Google went from 'do no evil' to 'do no support'. It feels like talking to a
refrigerator when you desperately need support for a service you are paying
for. Been there, done that I will never rely on google for anything remotely
useful again (apart from www searches).

------
VOYD
A great example of the charade of open source. Sorry you spent so much time on
something that seems like it might have been useful, only to run into the
black hole of corporate/legal red tape that kills good products. "Do no evil"?
"Define do".

------
diego_moita
Isn't this a very old story, repeated a thousand times before? How many people
made excellent programs for Windows only to see Microsoft stealing or
destroying it by changing APIs or exploring undocumented features of Windows?
Ask Borland, Computer Associates, Lotus, PKWare and so many others.

How many times has Apple already done the same, both on the Mac and iPhone?

And before them both there was IBM.

When you develop for controlled platforms and walled gardens you're not
creating a business for the long run. What you're doing is free market
research for the owners of the garden.

Yes, there are exceptions (Intuit, Adobe, Autodesk). But they're exceptions,
not the rule.

------
al_chemist
My app "LoL Helper" was also copyright infringing League of Legends. Not sure
if I can laugh out loud anymore.

------
tdash
Slightly off topic. But here's another story of how unresponsive software
giants are and how how helpless the users are in most cases
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://the-
ken.com/the-unbelievable-story-of-a-facebook-impostor/&num=1&strip=1&vwsrc=0)

------
intralizee
I've had good support with real Google support "people" when using Google's
Cloud Service. It may just be that the extension falls under the category of
ad blocking and they choose to ignore for beneficial reasons over actually
replying. It would be curious to see the same thing happening towards a
popular extension that doesn't deal with ads.

------
andreapaiola
Over 1 month and counting to update a Google Web Font (Mada)

[https://github.com/khaledhosny/mada/issues/11#issuecomment-2...](https://github.com/khaledhosny/mada/issues/11#issuecomment-244472491)

~~~
pavlov
Sorry to say, but don't get your hopes up... It seems like Google doesn't care
about ever updating the fonts they distribute.

The author of Crimson Text, a very popular free web font, complains about it
on his Github readme [1]:

"While you are looking at the new, improved version, Google Fonts continues to
offer the clumsy-looking original and has not heeded the repeated pleas for an
upgrade."

[1] [https://github.com/skosch/Crimson](https://github.com/skosch/Crimson)

~~~
andreapaiola
Well... I've downloaded a newer version and now it's local... actually I have
no hopes and don't care anymore... ;)

------
ptero
I am not surprised that Google took this down when reported for copyright/IP
violation (whether true or made up) and that emails from a relatively small
project are only getting canned responses (I wish it were different, but
realistically Google is not going to change). I think the only way to change
this is to get advocacy online to get noticed. And as someone else said, if
you build plugins for a company-managed software, you are at their mercy WRT
to disabling it at any time (the same is true for a community-based software
as well, but the process is usually transparent and more aligned with users
and developers needs -- no blanket "because copyright" rejections).

------
stesch
And there is my co-worker … constantly on the phone with Google.

He is selling ads. And he gets lots of support.

------
kowdermeister
This story has some parody feeling to it :)

Just to recap:

1) Receives a take down notice for trademark violation

2) Changes name from "Cleaner Facebook" TO "Cleaner — for Facebook" :)

3) Gets surprised as taken down again

Let me suggest a few names _without_ Facebook in the title:

\- Social facelift

\- Clean UI

\- Fresh look for social media

~~~
zenopopovici
You got it wrong. I was never told what to do or how to change it so that my
users would still recognize it. Also changing its name in this way was
suggested (and accepted) for the Safari extension by the Safari Gallery Team.

If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it. This is not about TM
infringement, but the total lack of communication by Google.

~~~
kowdermeister
> If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it

Most of programming btw is like that. Google throw an exception with a better
error than "undefined is not an object". Maybe it's easy for me from the
outside to pinpoint the problem, but it's usually about reading between the
lines.

Their support is indeed poor, but you are not entitled anything and probably
the lesson here is not to build anything serious on 3rd party platforms where
you are unsure about licensing, legal questions. I've been burned once by
SoundCloud legal team for using their public API.

~~~
zenopopovici
I'm not entitled for support when I'm developing for their platform ... and
I'm supposed to be a sightseer 4 years in the future.. I'm gonna stop right
there...

------
Mahn
> I just want you to think twice before creating a revenue stream based on the
> Chrome Web Store.

This is probably not a good idea in general today anyway, with Google phasing
it out for Windows/Linux/macOS.

~~~
dgacmu
Chrome Apps are being phased out for Win/Lin/Mac, but I don't think there's a
change to extensions or the store itself?

------
SZJX
Sure the point of this article is about customer support offered by Google.
I'd say for their core products such as AdWords, Google are treating their
customers with care. It's just that they simply don't give a shit to the
majority of their other products. Why would they anyways? They're an ad
company, earn their profits through ads almost exclusively, and really just as
the founders said themselves, the other projects are much experimental in
nature after all. That's just the reality in a business sense.

------
brisraj
Google listened to somebody's complaint and then decided to take down this
extension. When they have somebody or some mechanism to listen to such
complaints, why they don't have anybody to listen to this developer.

~~~
Sylos
I'm not sure that they do actually have _someone_ handling trademark
complaints. At least on YouTube, they handle copyright claims by simply taking
the video down as soon as a copyright claim comes in and then you can try to
appeal afterwards as a YouTuber.

But even if they do have a person handling incoming trademark complaints, that
doesn't mean that they have someone handling appeals. They can face legal
damages, if they don't handle trademark complaints. They can't face legal
damages, if they pull through on one too many trademark complaint.

------
alimbada
This is the first I've heard of this extension. I'd be interested in
sideloading it using Chrome's Developer mode if the developer made it
available for download separate of the Chrome Web Store.

------
dvh
I think the only problem was calling it "Cleaner Facebook", he should have
called it "Cleaner Social Media" and he would have no issues.

------
sickbeard
You could have saved yourself some trouble and did the right thing.

Changing it from "Cleaner Facebook" to "Cleaner - For Facebook" won't solve
any copyright claims against it. I suspect it's mostly the "facebook" part.

~~~
zenopopovici
Why won't it solve any copyright claims against it? It did in the Safari
Extensions Gallery ... It's quite easy to make required changes when the rules
are clear and communication exists.

------
ythl
Before I even read the article I knew the extension was an ad-blocker.

All these people make ad-destroying apps and extensions and then act
flabbergasted when big companies relying on ad-revenue don't like that and
file complaints to get them taken down.

~~~
zenopopovici
But it's not why it was taken down ... :)

~~~
ythl
Try an experiment, then. Create a new account and submit the extension under a
new name unrelated to facebook. Grow your userbase to a size significant
enough that FB notices.

I am betting that FB will get it taken down again. Trademark Infringement was
just the scapegoat for your original extension. The real reason it was taken
down was because it was harming FB's business model for a growing portion of
its userbase.

------
revelation
You use "Facebook" in the name of your extension to lure users into installing
it. Google tells you you can't use the trademark. You again use the trademark.
Google gives up on your spammy ways.

They seem to have done everything right here.

~~~
njloof
Register it as "for FB" \-- users will know what it stands for.

~~~
nkozyra
If you read the original email, the complaint also lists "FB."

------
chris_wot
Meh, this will be he death of Google. Check out their "Collaborative Inbox".
It's a disaster and totally unusable. I work for a company that tried to use
it, but the feedback was so bad despite management buy-in it is totally
unused, and will never be used by any user.

