
Saudi Arabia ripped off my open-source app and published it on the App Store - mhdhejazi
I developed a Coronavirus tracker app for iOS and macOS and open-sourced the project on GitHub [1]. I tried to publish the app on the App Store, but it got rejected by Apple because it&#x27;s not from a health organization [2].<p>Today, I found my app published on the App Store by &quot;The Saudi National Health Information Center&quot;, a Saudi government institution, after they made slight changes and additions [3].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;mhdhejazi&#x2F;CoronaTracker" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;mhdhejazi&#x2F;CoronaTracker</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;03&#x2F;05&#x2F;apple-rejects-coronavirus-apps-that-arent-from-health-organizations.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;03&#x2F;05&#x2F;apple-rejects-coronavirus-ap...</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;apps.apple.com&#x2F;sa&#x2F;app&#x2F;corona-map&#x2F;id1503046302" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;apps.apple.com&#x2F;sa&#x2F;app&#x2F;corona-map&#x2F;id1503046302</a>
======
paxys
You can't add a GPL-3 license in your repo (which explicitly allows
modification, distribution, commercial use) and then also write "not for
commercial distribution" in the README. Pick one.

Even then, it can be argued that a national government publishing an app for
free is not commercial use.

~~~
kube-system
More than that, I's say it's a _pretty big stretch_ to say that a government
giving something away is in any way 'commercial use'.

~~~
mhdhejazi
I'm not concerned about commercial use here. It's about publishing the app
without complying with the GPL-3 conditions. It'd be fine had they respected
the license and attributed the project.

~~~
diebeforei485
Contact Apple about this.

[https://developer.apple.com/contact/#!/topic/select](https://developer.apple.com/contact/#!/topic/select)

~~~
mhdhejazi
I did. Let's see what they do.

------
mehh
First off, looks like a nice app, well done.

So what exactly is your objection? You open-sourced it under GPL, you
mentioned they made some changes, have they not open sourced them and thus
broke the terms of the Licence, is that what bothers you?

Or is it lack of attribution and notifying you, which would be a decent and
respectful thing to do?

What was your actual intention here: 1\. Create an app to help the world
during this terrible time? 2\. Build something you could make some money from?
3\. Build something to get kudos from?

As it stood your app wasn't available as Apple rejected it, these guys made it
available and thus if your goal was option 1 they helped you!

If option 2, then you failed upon failure and serves you right.

If option 3, I'm not sure you GPL requires attribution within the app, but
they do have to open source there changes and thus should make it clear, its
built upon your work.

~~~
mhdhejazi
It'd be totally fine had they respected the license or attributed the project.
It's great to know that people use your app and find it useful, and that's why
I offered the app to JHU to publish it in their name when Apple rejected it.
I'm bothered more by the way the app is published without attribution and how
I knew about that.

~~~
jiveturkey
how exactly did they not respect the license?

i just don't understand your complaint at all.

~~~
smichel17
The GPL requires that derivatives (A) credit you, and (B) release their source
under the same license.

IANAL but this is not nitpicky legal details; it's the entire point of a
copyleft license.

------
gojomo
You could likely ask Apple to take down Saudi Arabia's version as a violation
of your copyrights, and a violation of the license under which you offered
your creation.

It's the FSF's position that Apple App Store distribution necessarily includes
extra restrictions that violate the GPL:

[https://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-
compliance](https://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-compliance)

So, while your "no commercial use" addition itself contradicted the GPL, the
GPL itself, if relied upon as the governing license, may give you enough ammo
to lodge a complaint.

~~~
orasis
If this app is providing value to the Saudi people it would be unethical to
take it down. We’re talking about lives vs an authors pride.

~~~
gojomo
There are many other sources for the same info, to satisfy curiosity & impress
upon Saudis the urgency of the situation.

Poking the KSA government's public health bureaucracy to better cooperate with
others, & honestly acknowledge the work of outsiders rather than stealing it
to create a false sense of their own internal competence, might best serve the
health of the Saudi people in the long run.

------
scottlamb
“I have observed, throughout life, that a man may do an immense deal of good,
if he does not care who gets the credit for it.” — Father Strickland

Congratulations on your coronavirus open-source app getting distributed and
presumably used! I know it sucks that they didn't credit you or honor the GPL
by sharing their modified source, and folks downloading it from a not-exactly-
trustworthy government isn't my first choice, but I sincerely offer you my
congratulations nonetheless.

~~~
dependenttypes
I do not think that the quote is relevant to the topic.

~~~
scottlamb
I meant it as advice—better to celebrate the accomplishment than focus on the
lack of credit. The latter leads to stuff like getting Apple to pull the app
listing and having no one use it. I'd only do that if I believed Saudi Arabia
had made it harmful in some way (eg spyware).

Also, please don't pay attention to the dated/non-inclusive wording ("man",
"he"). I tried to just match the original version, although the
attribution/provenance is (fittingly, I suppose) a bit uncertain.

------
happytiger
You say here it’s open source, but your licenses read me says it’s ffnc use?

~~~
mhdhejazi
I published the app under the GPL-3 license, and with a clear statement that
says "It's not allowed to publish, distribute the app, or use it in a
commercial way". They neither respected the license nor the other conditions.

~~~
skissane
The GPL3 license allows people to "publish, distribute the app, or use it in a
commercial way" (provided that they comply with the other GPL3 conditions, of
course). So, when you say it is under GPL3, then say people can't do something
which GPL3 allows, you are contradicting yourself.

If you release something under self-contradictory licensing terms, and then
people use it in a way you didn't expect – maybe the problem was with your
self-contradictory licensing?

~~~
applecrazy
If I understand GPL3 correctly, they still have to make the modified source
available and state the changes they made. The header on GH that parses the
license also seems to agree with me:
[https://github.com/mhdhejazi/CoronaTracker/blob/master/LICEN...](https://github.com/mhdhejazi/CoronaTracker/blob/master/LICENSE)

------
rendall
Would you mind articulating how they violated your expectations?

~~~
smichel17
OP has done so further upthread. (Apologies for lack of link, I'm on an app
that makes this difficult)

------
mhdhejazi
Some details and screenshots here: [https://medium.com/@MhdHejazi/saudi-
arabia-shamelessly-rippe...](https://medium.com/@MhdHejazi/saudi-arabia-
shamelessly-ripped-off-my-corona-tracker-app-and-published-it-on-the-app-
store-dfcb672961d4)

------
zelon88
Did they abide by the terms of GPLv3? If so then I don't see the problem here.
I mean, you deserve an enthusiastic "Thank You" for your contribution to open-
source, and I think Apple should reconsider it's determination in-light of our
situation and your obvious desire to contribute... but you kinda signed up for
this. I would honestly be excited and proud that a nation-state found my time
and hard work so worthwhile that they essentially adopted it to benefit a
larger audience. I think I would find that extremely humbling myself.

------
mhdhejazi
I see your point about the extra condition I added to the license. And you're
right, you can see it as self-contradictory. But when I added it, I wanted to
make sure nobody will use the project to make money and thought it's ok to add
such a condition above the license.

That said, my concern here isn't the commercial use of the app, they're not
doing that. It's about publishing the app without complying with the GPL-3
conditions. It'd be totally fine had they respected the license and attributed
the original project.

------
dewey
I understand your frustration but as nobody is making money off this (pretty
polished looking!) app and it's maybe potentially even saving lives somewhere
you can be proud of your work. Credited or not, it's probably having more
impact on the real world than most people's side projects.

Have you written them? Who knows how this came to be, rushed out by some
programmer somewhere who doesn't know about the ins and outs of licenses and
just wants to get this to as many people as possible quickly.

------
Raed667
The splash-screen (in arabic) says "all rights reserved" with a copyright
logo.

And under it lists "the Saudi health council" and "national council for health
information".

So my understanding is that they're claiming copyright on this app?

[https://imgur.com/a/y6EW8CB](https://imgur.com/a/y6EW8CB)

------
diebeforei485
Sounds like you should ask the App Store Legal Team to take it down, because
the Saudi Government is distributing your work in a manner that is not
compatible with the GPL-3 license - so it is a rights infringement issue.

[https://developer.apple.com/contact](https://developer.apple.com/contact)

------
giardini
Find what you think is a reasonable price, explain to the Saudis and ask them
to write you a check. They'll probably do so if your claims are correct and
your price sensible. The Saudis are generous people.

------
onetimemanytime
You will probably be contacted by them. Ask for some money, they'll probably
pay and call it a day.

P.S. Don't click on any whatsapp link they may send you.

------
brudgers
A software license matters in proportion to wherewithal to lawyer up and
enforce the terms...just like any other contract.

------
pacamara619
You used the GPL and then tried to put it on the App Store? The GPL does not
allow that and you should know better.

------
jamesjamaes
Negotiate to get credit for the work or cash. You would not have been able to
register it. They did it with a change. you found that out. Now you hold them
responsible and Negotiate to get credit for the work or cash.

------
jamesjamaes
Negotiate to get credit for the work or cash.

------
gojomo
Create some compelling new features for your version. But include some
obfuscated back-door allowing you to insert other messaging later. Tempt the
copycats to integrate your improvements, including the backdoor. Then send
subversive messaging they wouldn't like, anything from simple credit, if
desired, to short utterances carrying the death penalty in their jurisdiction.

(Of course, it's likely too late to pursue this strategy in this case, and one
should be careful about such vigilantism against murderous organizations. But
I mention this to place it in the "idea library" for other HN readers, who may
find themselves in similar situations in the future.)

------
s_y_n_t_a_x
Did they maybe translate it so they could link it to their citizens?

I really see no problem with this, they should provide the source code, but
from what you said their modifications really aren't that sought after are
they?

Don't open-source something if you don't want someone to clone it. What did
you think was going to happen?

I don't see why someone would post the source to an entire app then watch the
app store for a clone waiting to complain about it...

