Database Info

[SUGGESTION] How to tackle software thieves

I think everybody is well aware of the pain that software thieves like DavinciDevelopers and Chris Burchett is putting us through. Until Google cleans up their market policy and starts implementing some basic regulation, these robbers are going to continue stomping upon the intellectual property of the developers here.
As we all know, software thieves almost always exploit a very simple loophole: they delete signatures off the apks and then publish them to the Android market as a paid app under a different name, and everyone will be none the wiser. They make a quick buck from unsuspecting users who chance across the app and purchase it, and thus they profit off the labours of hardworking developers here. It matters little to them whether a thousand or a million users pass by their application page without choosing to install it, because every single user conned into paying for the app is a profit to them.
I strongly recommend that developers who publish their APKs here insert a pop-up into their application that appears on the first boot, stating very clearly that this app is freely published here (insert thread URL) and instructing the user to immediately seek a refund if he has paid for it, and to report the issue to Google.
In other words, probably something along the lines of:
PLEASE TAKE NOTE
This app has been freely published on XDA-Developers, and can be found at .
If you have paid for this app, PLEASE SEEK A REFUND IMMEDIATELY AND REPORT THE SELLER TO GOOGLE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Additionally, you might also want to insert this in the "About" section of the app, if applicable.
Software thieves may be capable of deleting signatures, but they can't remove app elements. With users alerted to these dishonest actions, they will not only distrust them but send a flood of complaints pouring into Google, and sooner or later they'll have to pack up shop and think of actually doing something productive for society.
I'm sorry if this has already been suggested, but given the severity of this issue, I thought that it would be important to highlight this to all developers in here and out there. Not everyone may be aware of the dangers making the dive into application development, and fewer still might actually think of doing something about software pirates and intellectual property thieves.
Remember, this is only a short-term measure to help starve these software thieves of their ill-gotten gains (and perhaps also to create awareness for you and your thread). It does not preclude the usage of other anti-piracy measures, and it could be circumvented by the more tech-savvy of the thieves. In the long haul, we will still need to get Google to overhaul its Android Market policy to respect the intellectual property rights of developers.
Mods, please feel free to delete this or lock this thread if I am repeating what others have already proposed.

Madrenergic said:
Software thieves may be capable of deleting signatures, but they can't remove app elements. With users alerted to these dishonest actions, they will not only distrust them but send a flood of complaints pouring into Google, and sooner or later they'll have to pack up shop and think of actually doing something productive for society.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wanted to point out that this is not true. I've also seen people say that the package name cannot be changed. That's not true either.
A skilled developer could often easily delete app elements (Using obfuscation like proguard is a good deterrent). A crappy one might still manage, pirates do (Sure they'll add bugs in the process, but they don't care because they don't have to deal with the bug reports, you do).
A non-malicious example of hacking the internals of an app is how I enable long-press of Search on the Droid X/2 in my HomeSmack app (https://market.android.com/details?id=com.teslacoilsw.homesmack). Motorola hard-coded long-press of search to launch com.google.android.voicesearch/com.google.android.voicesearch.RecognitionActivity. So my solution replaces Google's VoiceSearch.apk with a modified one where I renamed Google's RecognitionActivity to RecognitionActivityReal and created my own RecognitionActivity. I kept RecognitionActivityReal functional so VoiceSearch can still be used.
It'd also be possible for the theifs to upload using your app signature. The disadvantage of course is that they can't modify it at all, even in the future.

Google Play: Simply "rebranding"?

I just received an update notification for 'Google Play'. Being the cynical type, these type of changes make me suspicious. Oddly enough, a quick search throughout XDA and the internet seems to show that people's only objections to this change revolve mainly (perhaps only ) around the name change. Most don't like the way it sounds, the icons, theme integration, etc.
I find it odd that I can find no mention of Google's probable intent in this matter beyond marketing and 'unification' of Google services. I find it beyond coincidence that Google, just a week or two ago, started sending out notification of changes to their privacy policy.
More than that, I find it odd that no one suspects that there is more behind this than a simple rebranding. After all, Google is a corporate monster whose CEO has clearly and unequivocally stated that privacy of the individual is not only of no concern, but that violation of such privacy should be a given!
A quick look at some of Eric Scmidt's public statements leaves no doubt:
http://www.stateofsearch.com/top-15-of-eric-schmidts-remarkable-quotes/
http://www.seobook.com/eric-schmidt-quotes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/04/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-privacy_n_776924.html#s170420
No doubt at all in my mind. After all, to the contrary of what many may think, Google is not free. Google makes money (and lots of it) by collecting and selling our personal data.
I'm not sure, however, what can be done about it, other than to either root and lock down one's phone as much as is possible, whilst still retaining as much as possible of the functionality desired. One sure way is to give up my smartphone. The former is an ongoing practice here. The latter? I'm not ready for that (yet).
But does no one really see a day when smartphone tech will be used to track and control everything we do? Are we not anticipating that Government will see the value of this data collection technology and use it to their own ends, good or bad?
Another example:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/01/android-photos/
Our personal data is already being mined and profited from by untrustworthy entities, but at least they only seek profit. How long can we expect profit to be the only driving force?
Paranoid? Maybe. But remember the old saying: "It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you...". To my way of thinking, if they aren't now, they soon will be.

The solution is to crate a separate system. Like diaspora. An separate market, mabe an XDA-Market. I was searching the xda app on the market, yesterday it was there, today not but only the premium. This "update" is not normal, updates are here only for fix and repair from my point of view.
Yep is odd.
Let's create an indipendent system for freedom and liberty, open sorce to improve and sharing ideas.
No country restriction. One world, one nation, one free net global wide.
Peace
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA

As you have indirectly pointed out, one can no longer get into the Android apps market unless you agree to accept whatever Google's legal terms are for their 'Play' and 'Books' services. But I don't intend ever to use these.
I wonder how applications developers feel about this.
Google really is getting beyond the pale, presumably introducing this change on a day when they hope that attention will be focussed on whatever Apple are up to. I shall now be looking for alternate market places. A real nuisance for me as I have a new phone and had intended installing my standard set of add ons.

I think it's a nice idea to keep similir Google's apps under the same brand so it's easier to identify and ,for them , easier to put in market.

If you ever needed evidence that this makes sense then you only need to know the conversation I had with a work colleague today.
..stuff that lead up to this conversation...
Me: Yeah, the Android Market is now called Google Play Shop
Them: Really? Why have they called it that?
Me: Because Android is made by Google.
Them: Oh, I didn't know that!
Seems that Android is known as a brand of its own. I just assumed everyone (or most people) knew that.

I also think that "market" gives a bad connotation comparing to play store

Yes
Re-branding to compete, yes...

I hate it.
Sent from my Nexus S using xda premium

privacy ...
What do you think about this statement ? (in Google Play Terms of Service)
2.4 From time to time, Google may discover a Product on Google Play that violates the Developer Distribution Agreement or other legal agreements, laws, regulations or policies. You agree that in such an instance Google retains the right to remotely remove those applications from your Device at its sole discretion.
So, if i understand right, Google have the right to delete things in my phone ??? C`mon ... isn`t this weird ??? Google Play mean that Google can play with our phone`s content ???

joyradu said:
What do you think about this statement ? (in Google Play Terms of Service)
2.4 From time to time, Google may discover a Product on Google Play that violates the Developer Distribution Agreement or other legal agreements, laws, regulations or policies. You agree that in such an instance Google retains the right to remotely remove those applications from your Device at its sole discretion.
So, if i understand right, Google have the right to delete things in my phone ??? C`mon ... isn`t this weird ??? Google Play mean that Google can play with our phone`s content ???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't google retain this right with the market way before this change?
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium

Google Play
CharliesTheMan said:
Didn't google retain this right with the market way before this change?
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did it ? I admit i don`t remember, it was a stock-app and if there was a question about my agreement first time when I used market - well i didn`t read it because i was sure the stock-apps can`t be sooo ... malicious ?
Maybe is not the best word but how would one describe an app wich is able to delete his phone content without his permission ?

joyradu said:
Did it ? I admit i don`t remember, it was a stock-app and if there was a question about my agreement first time when I used market - well i didn`t read it because i was sure the stock-apps can`t be sooo ... malicious ?
Maybe is not the best word but how would one describe an app wich is able to delete his phone content without his permission ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's in Google's best interests to be able to do this. They're most likely only getting you to agree to it so that when you download that malware app that starts sending text messages to premium rate numbers, they can remote uninstall it when they find out. It's of benefit to both parties.
Wow - I'm normally really cynical!

It would still be nice to have the choice to decide if you want that done.
-------------------------------------
Sent via the XDA Tapatalk App

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1533775

[WARNING] N64 Emulator scams and suspicious behaviors!

UPDATE: Mupen64Plus AE was taken down with DMCA by Brad Geng. He is NOT real developer of Mupen64Plus, more details below in third post of this thread, or here: http://www.paulscode.com/forum/index.php?topic=422.msg4593#msg4593
Some of you already know N64 emulator called Mupen64Plus Android Edition, by Paul Lamb.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1260390
His app is still free and open-source, and everyone can download APK if they want to, while "paid" version on Play Store is only donation and auto-update.
Now, here are some problems. Other "devs" are trying to make copies of his own work and make profit while they don't improve emulator unlike he does. It would be better that devs which want to help, they should collaborate with Paul, not fragment into new app.
One of very "popular" (his emulator was removed temporarily, then it returned to Play market, causing low popularity for now) and unfair copies is "N64 Emulator" by "Emulator Publisher" A.K.A. "Brad Geng".
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.emudev.n64player
He just copied everything from Paul's work, and what did he added instead? ADS and PAID app links to his other programs.
THIS DEVELOPER CLAIMED FALSE DMCA VIOLATION, CITING A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION OF ORIGINAL MUPEN64PLUS. RATE IT 1-STAR AND WARN OTHERS, HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY RIGHTS TO PROFIT THIS WAY.
Description said:
It's the gist of OPEN SOURCE software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a note from Paul:
Paul Lamb said:
The true "gist"
Your comment on "gist of OPEN SOURCE" is misleading. Mupen64Plus AE is already free. It can be downloaded free on my forum as stated in the description. The 99¢ is for donations. If people buy without reading, its their decision. Donations I collect & distribute support many opensource projs & devs. By posting a free copy of my app, you undermine & have NEGATIVE impact on opensource community. Please remove this app!! Contact me to coordinate dev & address your concerns. Collaboration, not fragmentation!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What was the result before? An "dev" which added ads into that app, has over 500k downloads already, then removes app and returns it back to market. Yet, he takes down original version of emulator on market. Don't you think that's fair to steal and Paul's work and just publish it as yours, removing his work from market (yet even make Paul to refund all donations) and take all money away?
Yet, read comments in apps, all those who rated it 5 stars have no idea who actually made that app.
Another suspicious app is "N64 Pro Emulator" by "Game Console". Note: Name seems to change a lot of times...
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n64.emulator&feature=search_result
It seems he keeps changing it:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n64.pro.emulation
Even if it's free and ad-free, and even says that people should donate to original developer, here's a problem.
Paul Lamb said:
I'd just like to warn everyone about some suspicious behavior of the Mupen64Plus AE copy listed on the Market as "N64 Pro Emulator" (installs as "N64 Mobile" in the app list).
Firstly, the app asks for wide sweeping permissions (stuff like GPS location, write access to the browser history and favorites, startup on boot, etc).
Additionally, when you close the app, it continues running and must be force-stopped through the settings menu (Mupen64Plus uses "System.exit( 0 )" to prevent this, so the dev must have deliberately changed this for some unknown reason).
Rebooting the phone and returning to the settings menu shows that the app has silently started itself on boot. This is EXTREMELY suspicious. If anyone has installed this app, I recommend removing it immediately! I've emailed the dev to have it updated, but until then I do not recommend installing it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For now, it's not yet safe to install app due to such permissions, as such permissions aren't actually even needed. Hopefully dev won't make it for bad behaviors. I'm not that sure how safe the app is, and I don't intend to give this version of emulator as rip-off copy yet.
This Emulator was taken down by Brad Geng.
And just poor rip-off is "Mojo64" by "Mojojo", no comment.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mojo.n64&feature=search_result
The only not taken down one is Brad Geng's very retarded emulator.
Others should know about this problem, it's not that fair that some dev gets less respect than others which did almost nothing than add ads or something misleading.
Out of all other emulators, none of such copies were fast as original Mupen64Plus, FYI.
If you still like those ripped-off apps and think they are original, wait when Mupen64Plus AE project stops (which hopefully won't stop). You'll realize what they have done.
There are lots of developers which have similar issues. Don't support fake copies of programs!

I agree that it is wrong to add junk such as ads to an opensource app, or make money from it when you don't contribute to it. Its an easy way to make money using someone else to do the work.
As Paul says in another post, donations to his original have now fallen significantly. This is just greedy copycat devs slapping together copies of his work to make money and get a better developer rep without putting in their own effort.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

For more information about the Google Play Market removal, Brad Geng has lodged a false DMCA complaint, resulting in Google removing my app from the Google Play Market. The text of that complaint:
AutoDetectedBrowser: Firefox 1
AutoDetectedOS: Intel Macintosh OS X
IIILanguage: zh-Hans
IssueType: lr_dmca
Language: zh-Hans
agree1: checked
agree: checked
companyname:
country_residence: CN
description_of_copyrighted_work: Mupen64plus
dmca_signature: Huaining Geng
dmca_signature_date_day: 30
dmca_signature_date_month: 3
dmca_signature_date_year: 2012
full_name: Huaining Geng
geolocation: CN
hidden_dmca_category: image
hidden_product: androidmarket
location_of_copyrighted_work: http://code.google.com/p/mupen64plus/
represented_copyright_holder: Mupen64plus
url_box_1:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n64.pro.emulation
url_box_2:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=paulscode.android.mupen64plus.free
url_box_3:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=paulscode.android.mupen64plus
url_box_4:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=paulscode.android.mupen64plus.xperiaplay
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What this basically says is that my apps (as well as "N64 Pro Emulator") are illegal copies of Mupen64Plus. This is a false claim, because Mupen64Plus is copyrighted by the GNU GPL v2, which clearly allows derived works to be created. Brad's copy has changed names a few times, but is currently called "N64 Player (Free N64 Emulator)". It is an exact copy of Mupen64Plus AE v1.7 with ads slapped on to make money. He's made a few updates to the GUI, but hasn't updated the source code in over a month (and he's ignored my requests for the updated code, which is a violation of the GPL). The obvious reason for Brad's DMCA complaint was to knock of all competition to his ad revenues he's getting from "N64 Player". I've sent a counter notification, but I have no idea how long it will take to process. For anyone interested, here is the text of my counter notification:
The DMCA complaint sites Mupen64Plus as the copyrighted work. It links to http://code.google.com/p/mupen64plus/ If you go to that website, you can clearly see under "Code license", that this work is licensed by the GNU GPL v2. This is a common open-source license which authorizes derived works to be created and distributed following certain terms. I have abided by all terms of this license. See http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html for more details. Finally, the individual who lodged the DMCA complaint, Brad Geng, has a copy of my work listed on the Google Play Market with advertisements slapped on it. This is the very work that he is complaining is in violation of the DMCA. Mr. Geng has it listed as "N64 Player". Clearly, he lodged this false DMCA complaint to remove my original work that he copied, and to eliminate all competition to his ad revenues. (Please note that the "Add an additional field" script is broken under "Material in Question". Please refer to the DCMA complaint for all three of my apps that were suspended)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone who agrees with me, please install "N64 Player" from the Google Play Market, leave a 1-star rating and nasty comment, and mark my rating comment as "helpful".

N64 Player was taken down. I don't have any details for why, but I'd guess it is was either taken down by Google after reading the numerous negative comments, or by Mr. Geng himself to end the onslaught.

time to go back to N64oid

Microsoft's "Don't get Scroogled!" campaign - can developers clarify?

If you haven't seen it: http://www.scroogled.com/ (it's by Microsoft--their name is at the bottom): "When you buy an Android app from the Google app store, they give the app maker your full name, email address and the neighborhood where you live. This occurs without clear warning every single time you buy an app."
App developers: do you actually get the real names of everyone who downloaded your app? If so, that's not that private. I don't download these kinds of apps (haha), but does this mean that the developer of Korea Sexy Girl Puzzle could release a list of the real names of everyone who downloaded his/her app? And, what about locations? What is the purpose of knowing the zip code of who downloaded your app? This issue isn't that big (unless you live in a very unpopulated zip code), but I don't see the reasoning.
---
Preferably, if you're an app developer, I'm just curious what exactly you see. But, if you're a non-app-developer, if you have legitimate information, I'd be interested. And not that it matters, but I'm an Android guy. This post isn't some Microsoft fanboy trying to start a flame war. Just want to get some facts, as I'm a little hesitant to trust one company's claim about a competitor.
~Ibrahim~
P.S. The infographic they made: http://blogs.technet.com/resized-im...00-00-00-97-94/2318.scroogled_5F00_041713.jpg

sour grapes ? win 8 sales are not good so why not lets do some mud slinging on android. but I am not a developer and I am too eager to learn what a developer would have in reply.

OK, this "sharing" is the same sharing done by Amazon, Etsy, and "everyone else on the internet." Developers, like Amazon or Etsy peeps, agree not to share the data. The data is required for financial transactions, apparently. Source: http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/09/mi...ogle-developers-need-to-process-transactions/
Microsoft, apparently, responded with this:
"Google also claims that sharing this information is necessary to process your transaction and maintain your account — that is, to issue refunds, reversals and payment adjustments. But, similar stores — including the Windows Phone Store and Apple’s App store, don’t do this, because it isn’t necessary for an app maker to have your full name, email address and ZIP code to process the initial transaction, issue refunds or handle customer service issues. Google could easily provide more anonymous means to handle these transactions."
Source: http://blogs.technet.com/b/scroogle...on-t-get-scroogled-by-google-s-app-store.aspx
~Ibrahim~

[Q] App banned on Google Play. How to get an explanation if Google refuses to answer?

Our app has been banned on Google Play and we don't understand the reason.
We are a small company that developed a rather simple application that shows the users a list of tasks and tracks completion of these tasks. Similar to JunoWallet but a different one.
The app had been released in May and everything was fine until a few days ago the app has been suspended in Google Play Market. The reason was described in the e-mail:
"This is a notification that your application, XXXXX , with package ID YYYYYY, has been removed from the Google Play Store.
REASON FOR REMOVAL: Violation of section 4.4 of the Developer Distribution Agreement.
After a regular review we have determined that your app interferes with or accesses another service or product in an unauthorised manner. This violates the provision of your agreement with Google referred to above."
We had no idea of could be possibly wrong, so we asked the Google if it might be a mistake, or result of miscommunication. In response I received this e-mail:
"We have reviewed your appeal and will not be reinstating your app. This decision is final and we will not be responding to any additional emails regarding this removal.
If your account is still in good standing and the nature of your app allows for republishing you may consider releasing a new, policy compliant version of your app to Google Play under a new package name. We are unable to comment further on the specific policy basis for this removal or provide guidance on bringing future versions of your app into policy compliance. Instead, please reference the REASON FOR REMOVAL in the initial notification email from Google Play."
Great but not really helpful. I'm not even sure where to ask or if I'm ever allowed to ask anything how to fix the app.
The list of tasks is provided by a famous global vendor that's integrated into thousands of apps, so it might not be the problem. The only idea we have regarding possible "unauthorised access" is that the app scans the list of installed packages to detect fraud with BlueStacks emulators. But this action doesn't require special authorization, and there are lots of application in the Play market that scan installed apps, even specialised ones, like "App List Backup".
We even could delete this functionality, if we were sure that it's a problem.
I'm pretty sure that we are not the only one who fell in such situation. Does anyone have any experience on how to work this out? Is it possible to approach Google and get practically useful feedback?

My was recently suspended too, for a different reason. Can you please tell me how long they took to reply to your appeal?

shararti said:
My was recently suspended too, for a different reason. Can you please tell me how long they took to reply to your appeal?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure about the exact number of hours but it was certainly less than a day

I remember there is a on-line feedback in google play, you could ask questions by online phones calls, although it may be not related to the apps, but i think it`s better to be solved by voice communication rather than pale messages,
PS. we`ve met this kind of problem with Apple, as they claim we`re violating the "unauthorized" kind of problem. And we`ve done the resummit that app(revised) back and forth, it`s a quite tough experience.:crying:

Iankicksass said:
I remember there is a on-line feedback in google play, you could ask questions by online phones calls, although it may be not related to the apps, but i think it`s better to be solved by voice communication rather than pale messages,
PS. we`ve met this kind of problem with Apple, as they claim we`re violating the "unauthorized" kind of problem. And we`ve done the resummit that app(revised) back and forth, it`s a quite tough experience.:crying:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. But I was never able to get any number or anything from them. Officially I meant. The most informative thing I get from them was this text: "Thank you for your email. At the moment we're only able to respond to the emails submitted through our contact form in the Developer Help Center." And they simply do not have the form for direct questions. They suggest to use forum and never answer there.

My app was suspended 2 times
My experience:
1. I developed my next app. I Called it "Gmail Reader", and used a gmail-like icon with additional graphics around it. Not very wise probably - but as I saw hundred another apps having gmail logo in their icon, I thought it was OK. Aaand.. Suspended.
2. I wrote a reply to the suspension notification, and I got a machine reply. Then I replied second time, and finaly a man answered:
"While we are unable to provide specifics as to how to bring your app into compliance, please understand that usage of certain app titles and images may cause confusion among users who are searching for the legitimate app from the original creator. Please visit our Policy Help Center for more information and examples on our policy regarding Intellectual Property.
If we can assist you further, please let us know."
So That was it - the icon and the title, I thought.
3. So I repackaged, renamed, changed icon (drawn it myself). Instead of Gmail in the frist place I put "XYZ for Gmail". However, I noticed later, that I forgot in my screenshots on 2 places the previous icon - so not even in the main place, just somewhere in the screenshot.
Suspended again. This time, no answer, I filed an appeal, answered in half day - no dispute, app terminated. But i RECOMMEND to file an appeal - there is a form for that - as you might get closer to the reason why. I got this:
If your account is still in good standing and the nature of your app allows for republishing you may consider releasing a new, policy compliant version of your app to Google Play under a new package name. You can learn more about why your app was suspended by reviewing our policy on impersonation. We are unable to comment further on the specific policy
I have NO idea WHO the hell I impersonated. I would really like to know.. And even more I'd like to receive a warning before suspension.
Up in the corner of developers console there is a questionmark and in certain hours if you click it, instead of EMAIL you will see LIVE CHAT. From that chat I learned, they will not and cannot give you ANY support regarding the policies.
I also learned, that a "account in good standing" means that you can still publish apps.
4. Previous app had thousand unique installs in 3 days. So of course I repackaged....etc.. everything again, now extremely carefully, no Gmail word used in title. But I'm aware now, that I cannot know everything and they can suspend for any reason I'm not aware of - I maybe used some words mattel copyrighted DD SO it is really "fun". Let's see.
That's my story until now, will post again - hopefully will get wiser without further suspensions - it is time consuming sh** !!!
BTW, I wrote a letter to Google Dev Support, so they think of creating support for policies - as there are many developers with good intentions contributing a lot, not knowing WHY they are stopped.
Best of luck to all...

Hello, we are facing same problem for one of our app which is as of now available in India only.
We are curating videos from youtube. We have not taken written permission from youtube or content owner.
We are not monetising anyhow as of now.
However, there are various app who are indexing videos from youtube similarly like us.
Please help us with this sorting it out. As this is very important to us. Also how do we contact youtube for written approval?