Originally Posted by martintzvetomirov
Google are actually breaching DMCA section 512(g)(2)(C) by not reinsantiating access to the app they have removed. I mean, I am ready to reveal my source code in front of a lawyer or a judge just to prove that I haven't copied anything from anyone if required. But as an indie developer the time investment is not worth it, what is important is that people that really want ot have the app can download it and use it.
P.S. Presets and waterfall are on the top of the TODO list for the next version or two
For frequency setting could one just send a packet to the rtl sdr dameon ?
OK, I feel I'm 100% on "your side" on this matter, so please don't misunderstand when I say this:
1 - Google tries to be an "almost everything is computerized" company. They do their best to minimize human contacts and the need for them. In a focused pursuit of money, this is an effective business strategy.
I refuse to be one of the many Internet "armchair CEOs" who think they know better how to run one of the few richest companies on Earth. I'm positive 99.9% of us couldn't run Google any better (strictly money wise) than they are. How can you argue with such success ? The "armchair CEOs" will say their way (IE being "nicer" to developers and users) is better in the long run.
So, in the strict pursuit of money, I think it likely makes sense that Google put very few resources into defending app devs against DMCA or similar requests. How many engineers and lawyers would it take for Google to analyze each situation and defend the devs ?
Yes, on the other side there may be more app sales which always helps Google. I'm sure they help defend larger devs, and/or the larger dev companies themselves are the DMCA target instead of Google.
2 - I don't know all DMCA particulars, but I'm not convinced Google is breaking any laws with their lack of response to DMCA counter claims.
If they ARE breaking laws, I hope and I'd expect that someone somewhere will take them to court, civil or criminal or whatever.
Each news item of a few I've read about this issue, sends some "shame" in Google's direction, but hasn't accomplished anything yet. Maybe some better "shaming" or "leverage" method is needed.
For apps, Google is not merely a file hosting provider, or a "You-tube" style provider. Google Play is very much more "curated", and they have a "contract" with all registered devs that is likely very one sided. I've never even bothered to read it, other than a few parts about bypassing Google's 30%, because I have zero leverage as a sole individual.
I think it's similar to this:
- In public spaces you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of race, religion etc.
- In a private business the owner is 100% within his legal rights to decide to admit people or not on the basis of race, religion, political affiliation, hair color, whatever they want. He may be a jerk, but it's his property and his choice.
Google is the private business owner on whose virtual Play property the apps are displayed.
Google can indefinitely pull apps for any or "no" reason.
Again, I'm not intending to defend Google; Except in the same way I defend free speech, even when I find that speech distasteful.
I, or the CM guys, or anybody can start their own app store and decide what apps will or won't be allowed.
Now, a further argument could be made that Google is dominant in the apps space. We could further argue that the apps space should be considered a public place for the good of all. We do the same (somewhat, still...) with the "public airways" of radio broadcasting.
But then, you've got some kind of governmental, or world body type entity that's deciding what apps to allow or not. LOL !