Always amused me: Sky used to use a pint glass on subscription sports package for pubs/bars. But some sneaky publicans were sticking pint glass stickers to the corner of their screens to fool inspectors... So now the glass has a different filling depending on the day.
The Spanish football league app turns on the microphone to listen if a game is playing and reports back to La liga with the exact location to find bars and restaurants with pirate broadcasts.
Wow, surprised this hasn’t generated more coverage. They’ve turned a giant chunk of their userbase, likely completely unknown to a majority of users who understandably won’t read the small print, into snitches/whistleblowers.
This presumably also inadvertently returns the home address of anyone opening the app while watching a game in their own living room? Not a huge stretch to move from pursuing public places without the correct licensing to pursuing individuals for pirate streams.
> "It also specifies that the feature is only deployed in its Android app."
Probably because this nonsense would cause a hellstorm in App Review on iOS.
"App Review - We review all apps and app updates submitted to the App Store in an effort to determine whether they are reliable, perform as expected, and are free of offensive material."
And this sort of crap is exactly why I won't install your Android app unless I specifically need it and (usually) it's open source. Android permissions are terrible and practically designed for abuse.
Indeed - parent is not incorrect in saying that a more mature permissions model has been available for years. However, only for the last couple of months has it been mandatory to actually use that model in your Android app. It is now enforced (by requiring target of at least api26) when submitting updates or publishing new apps: https://developer.android.com/distribute/best-practices/deve....
I specifically said Android app because I don't have an iPhone and don't feel qualified to comment on iOS. I think you read more into my comment than I wrote.
Right, but an inspector visiting would just see that the pub doesn't pay for a subscription and yet they are showing the game. You don't need to check anything else.
Right, but rather than going in to the pub and looking at the watermark, why not just check if that pub pays for the proper service by looking up their address in the customer files?
Plenty of older pubs had/have landlords living on the premises; a residential license is perfectly justifiable provided it's only for their personal use.
