
Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms - kujaomega
I&#x27;m an independent developer and in this thread I will show you the succession of events that lead to Google ban of my app.<p>In september 2019 I decided to start developing as a fulltime project an Android app about physical events in Spain.<p>At the end of February 2020 I launched the app.<p>March 14 2020 started the confinement in Spain. Weeks later I decided to pivot the app to include online events, movies and tv shows ranking of online streaming platforms.<p>This May 2020, I launched the update and reoriented the app as a Things to do app (Only available in Spain). So I used the following description of the app:<p>Title: &quot;Tintodo - Things to do&quot;<p>Short description: &quot;The best things to do, online events and movies&quot;<p>Full description:<p>&quot;Are you thinking of things to do when bored? Or are you planning what to do tomorrow? With this app you can discover online events and movies from your favourite online platforms.<p>Find out online events in your quarantine like activities, meetups, cooking recipes, business and networking events. You can also filter the types of events and if they are free or paid events.<p>Thanks to this app, you will never be bored tonight. You have a ranking of the best movies in all online movie platforms, which will allow you to enjoy this confinement and is one of the main sources of things to do in your free time.<p>Note: We don’t play movies in this app. This app allows you to browse movies in your favorite platform, some of the movies are free, some not, the owners of those platforms are the ones who own the rights of the movies.&quot;<p>17 May 2020, Google suspended my app for using keywords related to COVID-19.<p>This is my case, but in a near future, how I can advertise my users or future users that my app behaviour is different due to COVID, I have no chance. 8 months developing that lead to a suspension for using covid words, at least, It&#x27;s not 9 years like the Podcast Addict app.
======
mediaman
Slightly different topic, but Google also suspended our company's adwords
account, I believe for using keywords related to COVID-19.

The business is an American manufacturer that added capacity to manufacture
PPE to make up for the lack of Chinese supply. Since we were supplying direct
to the market, the prices of the PPE were in-market from before COVID times,
or cheaper. We weren't out to make a killing, just to fill up some
manufacturing time and help folks out. We had the equipment, the people, the
facility.

However, we didn't have a great way to reach people who needed it - healthcare
was not our normal industry - so we decided to put it up on Adwords.

Within 24 hours, the account was suspended. We appealed it (thinking it must
have been a mistake), and a month later, they told us they reviewed it and
maintained the suspension. We told them we were only promoting PPE to help
people in health care find supply and they didn't care. We've never had
suspension issues before.

The whole experience left a very negative taste for Google. With their extreme
dominance in market share for advertising, they no longer need to cater to
customers' needs. (Maybe they care if you're a multimillion dollar customer,
but certainly not if you're an everyday SME manfuacturer.) And there's not a
lot of alternatives to turn to for that type of advertising. There was no
recourse, no discussion, no reasoning. Just the Google blank wall.

We wound up manufacturing lots of it anyway to hospitals in need, but Google
actively tried to stop distribution of American-made PPE during the pandemic.

~~~
mcv
> _" Google actively tried to stop distribution of American-made PPE during
> the pandemic."_

This sounds like a great headline to shine some light on Google's banning
practices. Some bad PR may help them reconsider their lack of customer
service.

~~~
flingo
Great headline.

Shame there won't be any ads put on that article to pay any of the staff.
Another one of the problems that comes from a near-monopoly.

------
timdorr
One of the most popular podcast apps, Podcast Addict, is dealing with this
right now as well: [https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/05/18/podcast-addict-
pull...](https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/05/18/podcast-addict-pulled-play-
store-allegedly-violating-coronavirus-policy/)

[https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1261651512947691520](https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1261651512947691520)

~~~
Kye
HN discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23219427](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23219427)

~~~
koheripbal
Can someone remind me why there is an "app store" that is run by the phone OS
maker? Aside from the anti-trust/monopoly type issue, should there be a more
market healthy de-coupling between the place I buy my apps and the OS maker?

Monopolies are almost always bad for consumers.

I kind of chuckle when I think about how Microsoft had such a huge battle over
IE being integrated into Windows, and now we sort of accept a situation 100x
worse on our mobile phones without batting an eye.

~~~
elsonrodriguez
The why is that there was a huge solution/market gap.

Finding software for Palm and Windows phones was often a trek through random
forums and websites to download garbage that didn't work.

There needed to be a central registry before smartphones would be adopted by
the average person, and the registry needed some quality assurance so that the
average person would have a good experience.

Tucows wasn't going to cut it, and the only open model that worked at the time
was linux distro package repositories, which would need a dozen features
tacked on before it was usable, and only added packages glacially (that QA
problem again.)

Smartphones wouldn't be a thing without centralized app stores, but I'm also
in favor of allowing users to add third-party app stores, in the belief that
99% of people won't do it, and the 1% would understand the security risks.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> There needed to be a central registry before smartphones would be adopted by
> the average person

This is revisionist. The iPod/iPhone originally didn't even have third party
apps and it caught on anyway. Even now, 90% of the value of a smart phone is
having a web browser in your pocket and most "apps" could have just as easily
been web pages.

I think the only apps on my phone that can actually justify being apps instead
of web pages are Signal (so it can store my conversations on my phone and not
a third party service) and Firefox (because it's a web browser). Meanwhile the
iOS app store won't allow Signal to be my SMS app and requires Firefox to use
Apple's browser engine, so the utility it provides is strictly negative. I
could have been just as happy to get Firefox from firefox.com and Signal from
signal.org.

I still don't understand why Facebook is an app. Facebook is a web page. (I
mean I do understand, it's because the app can hoover up more of your personal
information, but why should _I_ want that?)

~~~
ta17711771
> 90% of the value of a smart phone is having a web browser in your pocket and
> most "apps" could have just as easily been web pages.

They will be very soon. PWA is spreading like wildfire.

Now we just need to teach people to use secure browsers. (Not just ones people
think are private.)

~~~
cutemonster
> PWA is spreading like wildfire.

Do you mean on Android? I've read they're a bit crippled on iOS

~~~
ta17711771
They're a bit crippled on both main platforms, but quite a bit less all the
time. and the more average consumer learns about them, the less the friction
will be of Menu->Add to homescreen (if you missed the prompt/dismissed it
without reading).

------
leppr
I've long wished there was a more encompassing alternative to F-Droid, which
would include the same payment facilities as Google Play (paid app, in-app
payments, subscriptions), allow proprietary apps (but still give FOSS as a
search filter and show it as a prominent feature on the app page), and offer
plenty of user curation features ala Steam and make filters optional (which
would allow communities of independent reviewers to vet apps for child-safety,
not being COVID-related, etc... and users to chose whether to restrict
themselves to that selection or not).

It's quite amazing when you think about it, that two US companies have
absolute power over deciding what 99% of people in the world can do with a
device that many would describe as an extension of themselves.

~~~
nocturnial
Epic games tried to side step google:

> When Fortnite launched on mobile in 2018, Epic Games very notably
> sidestepped the Google Play Store and pushed users to download the title
> directly from their website, an effort made to avoid the substantial revenue
> cuts that Google takes from in-app purchases of Play Store downloads. After
> 18 months of harsh rhetoric regarding platform gatekeeping, Epic Games says
> that Fortnite is now available for download on the Google Play Store, though
> it will still be downloadable from fortnite.com moving forward.

> Google puts software downloadable outside of Google Play at a disadvantage,
> through technical and business measures such as scary, repetitive security
> pop-ups for downloaded and updated software, restrictive manufacturer and
> carrier agreements and dealings, Google public relations characterizing
> third party software sources as malware, and new efforts such as Google Play
> Protect to outright block software obtained outside the Google Play store,:
> an Epic Games spokesperson said in a statement. "Because of this, we've
> launched Fortnite for Android on the Google Play Store."

~~~
scarface74
And Epic conveniently forgot to mention the part about the security warning
being well deserved when it came to Fortnite...

[https://www.cnet.com/news/fortnites-battle-royale-with-
andro...](https://www.cnet.com/news/fortnites-battle-royale-with-android-
security-problems-is-just-getting-started/)

~~~
ppseafield
Hmm... Well deserved, or a poor security choice for Android? The vulnerability
appears to be that any app can overwrite an APK downloaded to external storage
with a FileObserver. How is that not pathologically bad security on Android's
part?

> Any app with the WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE permission can substitute the APK
> immediately after the download is completed and the fingerprint is verified.
> This is easily done using a FileObserver. The Fortnite Installer will
> proceed to install the substituted (fake) APK.

~~~
UncleMeat
Android offers app-local storage that no other app can write to. Epic simply
failed to use it. The alternative would be no shared filesystem at all, but
then people would complain about that as well since things like file browsers
wouldn't function and sharing things like photos between apps becomes tricky.

Notably, all operating systems that allow programs to write to files have this
"pathologically bad security". Download a .exe file on Windows and check its
hash before installing and you have a TOCTOU bug where malware can sub the
file after you've checked the hash.

Another alternative is to not permit any application to be installed unless it
is signed by the OS manufacturer or some other finite trusted list of signers
- but then we are right back at the app store model that pisses people off.

~~~
scarface74
"sharing things like photos between apps becomes tricky."

That's a solved problem. Apps on iOS can request access to the photo library.
Why Apple still doesn't allow write access to the music library is
frustrating.

It would be nice if you had a universal "folder picker" where multiple apps
could be given access to a user created folder on ios, admittedly.

------
mrtksn
Apple rejected my update for having COVID-19 related keywords, I removed the
keywords and submitted again and it was approved pronto. I wasn't trying to
piggyback the pandemic or anything like that, I added the keyword because it's
relevant to my app.

But as I understand it, Apple is not accepting any apps related to COVID-19
that don't come from an authority like a medical institution or a government
body. In the face of the reality that there are many people ready to sell
their mothers to slavery for profit(and even maybe likes or the LULs), I am
O.K. with leaving the pandemic to the monopoly of institutions that can be
held responsible for their actions.

You should try to re-submit your app without referencing to the pandemic in
any way. Do not include any keywords that can get you flagged again. After
all, the pandemic could have never happened. You are not entitled to profit
from it, right?

Your description looks fairly innocent and I see how it is relevant to mention
the quarantine and I wish you luck as your app might actually help people with
it but it's not the end of the world not to use the word.

Unlike you, there are many people looking to rank high in the most popular
keywords simply because these are popular keywords at the moment and it's
likely that Google and Apple don't have a better way to separate bad apples
from the good apples so they go for the crude but safe approach of banning
them.

------
cryptoquick
Google is just such an awful, despicable company, that I've actually moved
everything I can from their platform. It wasn't easy, I'd been a Gmail user
for nearly 15 years. I'd rather pay Microsoft a hundred bucks a year than
support them. That's how much I hate Google.

~~~
webartifex
Agree.

I am using the German email provider mailbox.org They even report how often
the government forces them to release info with a search warrant.

However, I have yet to find an email provider that mimics Gmail's tagging
system (=> you can give n many tags to a single email and that email is only
kept once on the server).

I often think that Google's "Don't do evil" motto is stretched way too often
these days.

~~~
vorpalhex
They removed "Do no evil" from their guidelines.

~~~
mdwrigh2
It's "Don't be evil" and it's still in the code of conduct:

    
    
      And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up!
    

\- [https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-
conduct/](https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/)

~~~
vorpalhex
[^1] is the particular source I had in mind. It seems to no longer be a value
but part of the signoff.

[^1]: [https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-
do...](https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-
from-1826153393)

~~~
Crash0v3rid3
The last sentence in your article:

'The updated version of Google’s code of conduct still retains one reference
to the company’s unofficial motto—the final line of the document is still:
“And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t
right – speak up!”'

So they literally just moved it to the end of the code of conduct and did not
remove it.

------
davidg109
I have a strong love/hate relationship with all this App Store oligopoly. Love
because often they are weeding out apps with security/privacy concerns. On the
flip side, cases like this where you are 600 feet buried in red tape trying to
talk some sense into someone at the company.

You can try to talk to someone at Google, but good luck with that. I think
you’re doing what’s best now. Shine a spotlight so far up Google’s hooter via
publicity about your case that someone higher up catches your attention and
remedies the situation.

~~~
elliekelly
I wonder why Apple can’t treat apps the same way they treat charging cables?
The Apple approved cables are usually a bit more money but I’m willing to pay
a few extra bucks because Apple provides a valuable service to me - I know the
cable is much less likely to fry my device. Likewise I’d be willing to pay an
extra dollar or two for an app that jumped through all of Apple’s hoops.

------
mavsman
My brother made an app to help people remember to wash their hands when they
get home. Simple. Free. No ads. Very minimal. Tracks location locally but
doesn't collect it or make any network calls. Google denied him from
publishing to the app store until he removed all references to Coronavirus or
COVID-19.

I only downloaded it because he's my brother but I now realize how helpful it
is and it's frustrating that potentially helpful apps are getting banned when
they're not even attempting to profit.

------
WrtCdEvrydy
Yeah, google banned mine too ([https://medium.com/@lazherrera/that-one-time-
google-made-it-...](https://medium.com/@lazherrera/that-one-time-google-made-
it-more-difficult-to-communicate-about-covid-19-cf29c3751c69))

~~~
Magnets
>Please remove all metadata and In-app mentions of COVID-19 or its related
keywords such as stay home, social distancing, etc.

that is just crazy

As usual they are just using a hammer to crack a nut.

They can't pull this shit with youtube because creators have a direct line to
draw attention to it. With developers they know it will go largely unreported

------
nocturnial
Could you post your back-and-forth with google support?

In the worst case, I doubt it will resolve anything but it could give other
developers an idea on how or how not to communicate with google. In the best
case, you might restore your app on google and have a template for other
developers on how to deal with this issue.

If you have send a request but didn't get a reply, please post those as well.

~~~
jestinjoy1
They banned my app which gives COVID-19 related information in Sign Language.
No reply on my appeal yet.

~~~
nocturnial
You need to give me more than this. Like: I filed a complaint at date X, time
Y, and wrote <this>. Today is date X1 and I haven't received a reply.

It might not matter for your case, but the next time I'm in a meeting I can
use this to say "Hey, maybe it's not smart to go with those services from
company Z"

~~~
cwhiz
I doubt this will be of much use to you but here are the emails I received
from Google.

I appealed to Google on March 27th at 9:18AM. Received a response on March 30
at 5:31 AM telling me they received my appeal. Google denied my appeal on
March 30 at 8:43 PM with no more information than the original. I responded to
Google within minutes on March 30 at 9PM. I received an email back from Google
on April 1 at 1:10 AM with a final "fuck you."

Here is the last email from Google:

\----------------

Thanks again for contacting the Google Play team.

As much as I'd like to help, I’m not able to provide any more information or a
better answer to your question. In our previous email, I made sure to include
all the information available to me.

As stated in our previous email, we have confirmed your violation, we will not
be able to reinstate your app if you don't provide proof that the app is from,
commissioned OR supported/acknowledged by a government entity or public health
institutions like WHO.

\--------------------------

And the original rejection from Google:

\-------------

During review, we found that your app violates the Sensitive Events policy.
Specifically, we don't allow apps that lack reasonable sensitivity towards or
capitalize on a natural disaster, atrocity, conflict, death, or other tragic
event.

You can read through the Sensitive Events page for more details.

For example, your app currently contains content towards a specific sensitive
event, such as Coronavirus, without legitimate source of information.

If you are one of the following, please provide verifiable documentation for
our review.

A government body/healthcare organization who developed this app. A developer
commissioned to build this app by a government or an official health
organization entity (examples include WHO, Red Cross, Hospital, etc). An app
supported/acknowledged by a government or official health entity for use.
Alternatively, please be advised that we will not be able to reinstate your
application without the above documentation.

You may also want to read through the Protecting People From Misinformation
paragraph in article Coronavirus: How we're helping on Google's blog.

If your developer credentials are still in good standing with Google Play and
if your app allows for it, you can publish a new compliant version of the app
by following these steps:

Make the necessary changes to your app to address the issue described above,
if possible. Double check that your app complies with all other policies
listed in the Developer Policy Center as additional enforcement could occur if
there are further policy violations. Sign in to your Play Console and upload a
new app using a new package name and a new app name. Thank you for your
understanding. Please let me know if you have any other questions on Google
Play policy.

\--------------------------

Your app can't even mention the words Covid or they'll suspend the app and
ding your account. Absolutely preposterous.

------
wodenokoto
That is rough. I had to read your text several times to find anything related
to COVID, but I guess it is the "which will allow you to enjoy this
confinement" part.

I'm no expert, but I guess you need to try and phrase it like it just the
thing you need when you are home, and let the users figure out why they are
home.

~~~
trca
Could also be mentioning of "quarantine" directly. Might make sense to make
your app description more generic to just being home, so that it will still be
applicable after the COVID-19 pandemic has come to a conclusion.

~~~
RonanTheGrey
Yeah, makes me wonder if apps for "stay at home" parents are getting hit too,
despite the fact that the expression is decades old.

------
Causality1
They're doing the same on YouTube. Just mentioning covid will get a video
demonetized regardless of content. It's as if Google's position is that we
have to deny anything is out of the ordinary, like it isn't touching the lives
of every person in the world.

------
nobita
My app was suspended back in March just before Google updated their policy
regarding to COVID. And my app was just being submitted for (my own) internal
testing, didn't even made public.

One would've thought the change in policy back then was to allow Google to
offer more clarity and fairness.

Seems things are going the other way.

Hacker News Discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22462315](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22462315)

Updated Link to Blog Post:
[https://flyingnobita.com/mobile/flutter/2020/03/02/coronavir...](https://flyingnobita.com/mobile/flutter/2020/03/02/coronavirus_suspended_my_first_google_play_app.html)

~~~
floatingatoll
Note that, unlike OP's events app, your app was specifically about
Covid/Coronavirus and serves no other purpose but to deliver Covid/Coronavirus
information. I expect their judgement call is more plausible in your case than
in OP's.

~~~
nobita
Agree that it's a different case than OP's.

Though I'm still puzzled at how Google allows so many YT feeds showing live
COVID stats.

------
tzs
> This is my case, but in a near future, how I can advertise my users or
> future users that my app behaviour is different due to COVID, I have no
> chance

Why do you want to advertise that to your future users?

From your description, your app appears to be an event finder that started out
for only physical events, and you later expanded that to include online
events.

The app itself does not appear to have anything to do with COVID. COVID was
simply what personally motivated you to add online events, and so it's not
clear to me that including COVID related words in the description will
actually help anyone find or understand your app on the store.

------
cwhiz
With this policy Google should ban Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Vimeo, every
news app, Reddit, etc, etc, etc.

Of course, they won't, because this policy is absurd and enforced unevenly.

------
Uhrheber
Artificial intelligence?

More like dumber than the dumbest human.

~~~
coffeefirst
Yes. Going after the crop of fraudsters and SEO scammers trying to cash in on
the crisis is a fine idea. But between this and Podcast Addict, it's pretty
clear they're just indiscriminately deleting everything or trusting and
algorithm to make hard calls.

The odds are good they ban Red Cross or a reputable news organization.

~~~
ravenstine
Whoa, they took away Podcast Addict? I've used PA for nearly a decade and
can't see how they could credibly ban it from their store. Either this is a
result of their advanced "AI" making an oopsie or they're using the current
situation as an excuse to axe their competition, and I'm more likely to
believe the latter. Google always acts with a degree of plausible deniability.

------
lytefm
I've had a similar experience about two months ago. Our app is a simple health
and fitness tracker. When corona broke out, we made some adjustments so that
people could track their symptoms and export them as Excel file in order to
share it with their physician or health authorities. We also adjusted our
description accordingly and got banned immediately. We appealed to the ban,
removed everything related to corona from the description (I guess the word
„quarantine” is the offending word in your case) and got reinstated after a
few days. Nowadays it's used by thousands of people participating in a
COVID-19 longitudonal study and we haven't had any problems again. Takeaway:
Unless you're the WHO, don't mention anything related to COVID-19 in your
description. Ask your Chinese friends how to deal with censorship, in Finland
they simply make „Kotona” („at home”) instead of „Corona” Videos on YouTube.
[https://www.millionfriends.de/coronatracker-
suspended/](https://www.millionfriends.de/coronatracker-suspended/)

------
yadco
Maybe a solution for this sort of thing might be progrsive web apps. You won't
be subject to the risk of an app store knocking you off.

------
stx
Youtube also removed several videos from a youtube channel MedCram.com. Its a
channel run by a medical doctor who discusses updates from medical journals in
technical detail.

The following videos have been removed from youtube.

\- Coronavirus Epidemic Update 10: New Studies, Transmission, Spread from
Wuhan, Prevention (2019-nCoV)

\- Coronavirus Pandemic Update 43: Shortages, Immunity, & Can a TB Vaccine
(BCG) Help Prevent COVID-19

\- Coronavirus Pandemic Update 57: Remdesivir Treatment Update and Can Far-UVC
Disinfect Public Spaces

\- Coronavirus Pandemic Update 60: Hydroxychloroquine Update; NYC Data; How
Widespread is COVID-19

\- Coronavirus Pandemic Update 71: New Data on Adding Zinc to
Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin

Watch their latest video to see that they try to stick to the facts and avoid
politics:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UANgon3Umns](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UANgon3Umns)

------
Pmop
I follow some Brazilian YouTubers who are referring to the covid-19 as
"Voldemort".

------
hota_mazi
I believe Google made it clear they will only allow a very small subset of
apps related to COVID-19 so they can make sure that

\- The information on their app store regarding the virus is 100% medically
and scientifically accurate.

\- Nobody takes advantage of the pandemics to profit.

------
floatingatoll
"circumstances beyond our control"

"global circumstances"

"event restrictions"

------
a3n
Google pays people hundreds of thousands $ per year so that it _acts like_ a
faceless government bureaucracy staffed by lazy drones.

------
mkhpalm
Simple solution is to just stop writing apps for Google's platform. There are
other avenues that aren't dependent on the corp whims of entities you can't
really talk to.

~~~
Sargos
Not really. The only other option is to limit your service to only desktop
PCs/websites which is not super helpful to normal people that just use their
phones for everything.

Google has a monopoly on phone apps. If they don't like your app then you
pretty much don't exist. You don't have many options.

~~~
rsj_hn
"Normal people" do not just use their phones for everything. Normal people use
their phones for getting around and they stare at the screen when they are
bored, for example waiting for a bus or waiting in line.

When they want to do real work or real play they don't do it on their phone,
they need a larger form factor with more power, a bigger screen, and better
input technology, whether that is a laptop/desktop or game console.

This idea that if something isn't available on your phone, then it's not
available is silly. There are many things that, while you can technically put
on a phone, really don't thrive there. Phones are low powered, minimal form
factor devices with inferior inputs. You do stuff on the phone because the
benefit of doing it from any location far surpasses the unpleasantness of the
interface. For example getting a cab, or figuring out how to get from A to B,
or sending a quick message to someone when you are away from the house.

If it's not related to helping you move around from place to place, or helping
you connect to a friend quickly, it's not going to _thrive_ on the phone even
if you put it there, and if you look at the _usage statistics_ of phone apps
versus regular PC apps, you'll see this confirmed.

~~~
macintux
> When they want to do real work or real play they don't do it on their phone,
> they need a larger form factor with more power, a bigger screen, and better
> input technology, whether that is a laptop/desktop or game console.

That’s clearly not true. For a large portion of the world, the smartphone is
their only computing device.

There are about 6 billion smartphones in use. Last I heard, the desktop/laptop
install base was around 1 billion, but that’s a fuzzy memory.

~~~
rsj_hn
Counting install base doesn't matter when you are comparing such different
devices. There are more shoes than cars in the world, but that doesn't mean
you are going to sell hood ornaments to people who only have shoes. The large
number of cheap smartphones simply aren't going to be useful to run your
office app, regardless of the size of the install base. And for the types of
phones that will run your app well and give you access to the customers with
the spending power you care about, you will discover that they cost a lot more
than a standard desktop and about as much as a decent laptop. People who can
afford those phones have options to use the best form factor and will use
their phone when mobility is much more important than a lousy interface, which
is why there has been so little success in the mobile app world outside of the
top 10 apps, which are stuff like Uber, google maps, etc. But if your
reasoning is to be followed, it must be the case that billions of people care
mostly about maps, connecting with friends on facebook, and getting taxis than
about using other applications, which isn't the case at all, it's just that's
what people do on their phones.

~~~
macintux
Roughly half of lower-income Americans don’t own a PC[1], and we have some of
the highest market share in the world. I don’t have numbers handy outside the
U.S. but again, 1 billion PCs doesn’t cover much of the population.

The trend has been obvious for years: more and more people do all of their
computing on smartphones.

[1] [https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/07/digital-
div...](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/07/digital-divide-
persists-even-as-lower-income-americans-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/)

~~~
rsj_hn
89% of US households have a laptop or desktop. That doesn't mean each family
member has their own, whereas it's more likely to have each family member have
their own phone, say on a family plan. But in terms of revenue generating
opportunity, if someone cannot afford a laptop or a desktop, they will not own
an iPhone either, which accounts for 2/3 of mobile revenue, and they are not
going to be running your complex smartphone app on their discount android
device, so you haven't responded to my argument at all; you keep fixating on
counting the number of devices rather than looking at actual addressable
markets and the best way to generate revenue from people who can afford to pay
for your product or that advertisers will pay to market to.

Just to throw some numbers out there, as of 2018:

iOS revenue: 47 B. (global, all sources, software, ads, etc) [1]

Google play: 25 B (global, all sources, software, ads, etc) [1]

Global software revenue: ~450 B (global) [2]

Total software revenue (US only): ~260 B. [3]

You are right about the 90% and 10%, but it's not pointing in the direction
you think. So you can keep counting devices with very different
characteristics and insisting that one number is higher than the other, or you
can start counting dollars.

[1] [https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-
revenues/](https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/)

[2]
[https://www.statista.com/markets/418/topic/484/software/](https://www.statista.com/markets/418/topic/484/software/)

[3] [https://www.statista.com/statistics/184124/estimated-
revenue...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/184124/estimated-revenue-of-
us-software-publishers-since-2005/)

------
jimmaswell
However Google frames it, I see this as nothing more than them grabbing a
chance to monopolize a popular search term for their own revenue with
plausible deniability.

------
tomaszs
Google did not behave like a reasonable business partner. Maybe it would be
good to ditch it and support independent web

------
generalpass
And how long before Google decides that all detected side-loaded apps are
harmful and automatically removed?

~~~
FreakyT
I mean, at least they allow sideloading at all, which is more than can be said
for that _other_ App Store ecosystem. Still hoping the EU will force Apple to
allow sideloading on iPhones, but I’m not super optimistic.

~~~
vanviegen
Indeed. And they allow third-party payments from within apps. And they have
long since supported the most important PWA features (including notifications)
in the mobile browser, making the unrestricted web a viable platform for
delivering apps.

I sometimes find it difficult understanding all the complaining about Google
and all the love for Apple, with regard to doing what's right.

------
rootusrootus
Since Google is taking such a strong position against what they view as
COVID19 misinformation, are they liable if I get sick as a result of some
misinformation that managed to get through their filters? I might not try to
go after some small time app developer or other rando on the Internet, but if
Google is willing to stand behind their guarantee with those wonderfully deep
pockets...

~~~
tourist2d
That's like saying the police are liable for you being robbed because the
thief wasn't in jail.

~~~
wtetzner
I think the point is, if Google isn't liable, then why are they censoring apps
based on COVID-19 keywords? Doesn't seem to be any of their business.

~~~
danShumway
And if the police aren't liable, why are they putting people in jail?

Liability is not the only reason Google might choose to censor Covid keywords.
They might do it because their users expect them to. They might do it because
they think it's the right thing to do. They might do it because they care more
about blocking disinformation than allowing useful information. They might do
it because a programmer has been working on this really cool censoring
algorithm and they want to test it in production. They might do it because
they're tired of people talking about Covid on their platforms and want it
shut down in general.

Section 230 applies to every major/minor platform in the US, granting all of
them immunity from liability for most content. And yet, virtually all of them
from Facebook to 4Chan, from Youtube to Pornhub, from Reddit to tiny
200-member Wordpress forums -- all of them censor some content. So liability
is clearly not the only motivation for platforms to moderate, otherwise every
comment section would be 8Chan.

------
brenden2
I've banned Google from my life, and everyone else should too.

------
kvnnews
Google is not the benevolent dictator of the internet. They are a profit drive
soulless corporation. Not saying that’s good or bad, just saying you should
expect zero favors from a sociopathic entity.

------
happppy
#boycottGoogle

------
VMisTheWay
I'm not a fan of censorship at any level. But at least you can always have
Android users install themselves.

Sure you don't get their massive advertising platform Play Store. But that's
Google's decision.

You can organically develop users, you don't need Google.

~~~
bcoughlan
That's an option that requires some tech savviness. The choice architecture of
Android heavily favours Play Store, so it's deflecting the issue to say it's
not a form of censorship because there's a workaround.

------
calin2k
stop using COVID-19 as SEO keyword!

------
throwawaysea
Google (and Facebook and Twitter and Medium....) are turning into absurd comic
book level censors. They have too much leverage and influence over society,
and moves like this meaningful harm people’s ability to communicate and
conduct basic activities. Google is the worst of them, and should be broken up
immediately on antitrust grounds. But let’s not ignore that COVID-19 has
exposed the hamfisted authoritarian rule of the digital public square by
virtually all technology companies.

