back to article Google AXES AndroidScript app used by 20,000 STEM coders WITHOUT WARNING

Google has removed a free educational app, dubbed AndroidScript, from its Play store, for breaching the ad giant's terms and conditions. According to the app's developer, Dave Smart, Mountain View abruptly yanked AndroidScript from its online shop without notifying him of the decision in advance. "Apparently we are in …

  1. ma1010
    Unhappy

    Blame the lawyers

    Unfortunately, in this country, if you allow someone to use your trademark name, you can lose it. So if Google allowed anyone to use the name "Android" or, for that matter, "Google" and did not take action to stop it, then a court might well rule that they've lost the trademark. This has happened in the past.

    Of course, that's not saying Google couldn't have contacted the author and asked him to change the name instead of just removing the app without warning.

    1. GBE

      Re: Blame the lawyers

      Yep, USPTO pretty much requires Google to do something to stop unauthorized use of the "Android". Exactly what that "something" is was up to Google, and that's where they should have done a better job.

      1. Zog_but_not_the_first
        Joke

        Re: Blame the lawyers

        I was going to write and say that you are mistaken but I can't find my Biro. I must have Hoovered it up.

    2. Jyve

      Re: Blame the lawyers

      The naming thing is catching a lot of people out, seems like the last 2 weeks they've started enforcing the name. A few apps got the headlines for being 'edgy' and something Google would want to get rid of! But then they renamed the app, removed the Android part (as the emails devs get suggest) and the apps are back.

    3. Kelimion

      Re: Blame the lawyers

      There was no need to stop it. Granting a (paid for or free) license to the trademark is also a valid way of 'dealing with it', in order to avoid a trademark becoming generic.

      1. Tom 13

        Re: There was no need to stop it.

        Yes there is. The way the game is played is the Trademark Owner must start by saying "you're not allowed to do that, stop it." Then the offender responds "What would it take for me to be able to do that?" At which point you can discuss the license terms. I've been there with a small outfit and a no-name lawyer and they played it the same way as the super expensive lawyer. And the truth of the matter was, we were honored that one of the big boys was tipping their hat to our little convention. It gave us exposure no amount of advertising money possibly could have. If you're a gamer, chances are you've even seen the trademarked character, but probably got the order of appearance wrong. Convention came first, character second.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Blame the lawyers

      No it will turn out some panicky admin exec overstepped the mark rather like people using the term 'health and safety' in safety make believe to stop something legitimate when in fact H&S legislation does not cover it.

  2. Chris 244

    Android named apps

    Quick trip to play store and then a search for "android" in the apps section shows about one in five of the first 100 apps returned violate the "for Android" rule. Including the very first result returned, "My Android" by InnovationM. AVG is also one of the offenders.

    So then the question becomes why Androidscript why now.

    1. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: Android named apps

      You mean apps named for Android?

    2. roytrubshaw

      Re: Android named apps

      They're probably in the process of announcing/developing their own scripting language and weren't happy to find it already taken...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Android named apps

        I wondered the same thing.

        1. the spectacularly refined chap

          Re: Android named apps

          There is a little more to it than that - the name "Androidscript" could easily create the impression that is is an officially supported Android component as opposed to a third party application. Protecting one's brand against that kind of confusion (deliberate or otherwise) is exactly what trademarks are for.

          1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
            Terminator

            Re: Android named apps

            Rename to C3P0script.

            Sorted.

            Will The Estate of George Lucas strike back? Well, there is a caching library called C3P0 already, so probably not.

            1. LaeMing

              Re: Android named apps

              Lucas was fairly forgiving about these things. But now it is Disney you have to watch out for!

  3. Crisp

    Technically, they aren't being evil...

    Just anal.

    1. Vector

      Re: Technically, they aren't being evil...

      Actually, this seems more robotic; the wheels of the machine grinding on.

      I guess now we'll see if there's anyone at the controls.

      1. tony2heads
        Terminator

        Re: Technically, they aren't being evil...

        ho human there - its just an android

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Isn't there an approval process to get apps into Google Play? If so, haven't they lost their trademark already because they've approved these /infringing/ apps?

    1. StareClips.com

      Nope. Sure, there's an automated approval process that makes sure all of the fields are populated and that the app doesn't have an obvious virus in it... but for the most part, you can submit your app and it will be available in hours. No human approval needed.

      1. Random Handle

        >No human approval needed.

        True for vanilla Google Play, but Google Play for Education has a human review process..... in-house technical review App Store style with the educational value assessed and metadata written by some kind of co-opted teacher panel.

      2. Gene Cash Silver badge

        And the automated process can't do "if 'ANDROID' in title.upper()" or the like and kick it upstairs to a human...?

        If they've already fucked up by not failing the app outright and it now has thousands of users, then they need to not be a complete bag of dicks and kill it w/o any warning to the devs.

        Android app devs are required to have a working contact email, so it's not the case they couldn't contact them.

  5. bigtimehustler

    Well, to be fair he should probably have read the terms and conditions he agreed to. Anything that happens after that is his own fault. Also, I think most people would have thought using a company brand in the title of their app might be dodgy and so doubly check the terms first. Due to this, my sympathy is limited.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Totally agree and they did announce these brand guidelines, I am pretty sure it was via the developer console.

      The (very clear!) brand guidelines page is here:

      http://developer.android.com/distribute/tools/promote/brand.html

      On this issue, I have no sympathy, it's a clearly written (short) document, nothing is buried in 9000 paragraphs of legal mumbo jumbo or in the T&Cs. If something goes wrong, you should probably look at what you could have done to prevent it rather than try and blame everyone else...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        If it was so clear....

        Maybe they should have been enforcing it from day 1.

    2. Tom 13

      I agree about the Terms and Conditions, especially for a developer who has probably written his own terms and conditions for an app. Not so sure most people would think using the trademark name in the title was dodgy. But T&C is enough to limit my sympathy as well.

  6. Anonymoist Cowyard
    FAIL

    rules are pretty clear

    Developer is clearly an idiot for thinking he didn't need to obey them.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: rules are pretty clear

      I won't deny that, but if you don't enforce rules from the start, you (Google) just end up looking like an ass.

  7. Tony W

    How many more? .

    A quick look In Play Store shows quite a lot of app names starting with "Android". It'll be interesting to see how consistently the rule is applied. It would be easy enough to screen for such names at the first application so clearly Google haven't been that bothered up to now.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How many more? .

      That's exactly my point.

  8. Aerik

    Google's poor attitude toward Android developers

    Apparently with Android's dominance in the market, they have developed a pretty cavalier attitude towards developers. I created a developer / play store account solely for the purpose of publishing my app which lets parents monitor their children's text messages (the child is notified that this is happening) and Google said it's "spyware". Apparently Google thinks supervising your children's activity is "spying", even if your child knows you're watching.

    When this happens, you get one appeal and if it's rejected the "decision is final" and they tell you they "will not be responding to any additional emails regarding this removal", and they 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" - so you can't even get any help fixing the perceived wrong!

  9. Frank N. Stein

    Who does Google think they are with this tactic? Apple?

  10. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

    Coming soon

    hypothetical Announcement

    Pluggh Inc is proud to announce their a new version of their Mobile Application 'Pluggh Rules Ok'.

    It is available for iOS[tm], [redacted][tm] and NowWindows Phone[tm] Devices.

    There you have it folks. Once the lawyers get through with this you won't be allowed to mention the name of the Operating system you are developing for even if you identify the name as being a trademark. Talk about shooting yourself in both feet.

  11. Fair Dinkum

    Swiftly..

    It"ll be their versionjcopy of Swift.

  12. LaeMing
    Trollface

    Starting over from scratch.

    Careful now!

    http://scratch.mit.edu/

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon