Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Can't Remove Third-Party App Store Aptoide From Users' Android Phones, Portuguese Courts Rule (prnewswire.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

Earlier this week, the Portuguese Courts ruled a decision against Google in relation to the injunction filed by Aptoide, a popular third-party app store. It is applicable on 82 countries including UK, Germany, USA, India, among others. Google will have to stop Google Play Protect from removing the competitor Aptoide's app store from users' phone without users' knowledge which has caused losses of over 2.2 million users in the last 60 days. From a press release: The acceptance of the injunction is totally aligned with Aptoide's claim for Google to stop hiding the app store in the Android devices and showing warning messages to the users. Aptoide is now working alongside its legal team to next week fill in courts the main action, demanding from Google indemnity for all the damages caused. Aptoide, with over 250 million users, 6 billion downloads and one of the top stores globally, has presented this July, a formal complaint to the European Union's anti-trust departments against Google.

13 of 77 comments (clear)

  1. WTH was google thinking? by the_skywise · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Google's android smartphones are NOT closed (like Apple's) and never have been. Their attempt to forcibly remove a competitor store even IF installed by a vendor in violation of contract and not the users themselves Is completely unethical (they won't even force OS updates for security but, by GOD, they'll reach out to your phone to take out a competitor!).
    They're the Microsoft Windows of the smartphone industry trying to uninstall Mozilla.
    Expect Google to just start making their own phones here very quickly.

    1. Re:WTH was google thinking? by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Androids key feature over Apple iOS isn't anything technical but the fact you can get outside of the box applications for it. The types of things that Apple will just not allow, because they are afraid of legal action, or just isolating the big names. Because you may have a hard time trying to get Nintendo to make games for your phone, if you happen to offer a ROM emulator as well.
      Or giving us a programming language interpreter however this could potentially cause security problems.
      Now risks come with reward.
      Apple gets rid of a lot of risk, but sometime we want the reward.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:WTH was google thinking? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I must have missed the part where Microsoft tried app store on Windows 10, and monitored every keystroke, vocalization, and screen caps uploaded to their servers, and multiple desktops, preparing you for desktop virtualization into the(eir) cloud.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  2. Re:Applicable Outside Portugal? by Cesare+Ferrari · · Score: 2

    I'm not sure it applies across Europe either for that matter.

  3. I feel like I'm missing something by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

    There are numerous third party app stores, and I've never heard of Google forcibly removing any of them. I've bought quite a few phone from Amazon that include a discount in return for having the Amazon suite (including the Amazon app store) pre-installed, and none of them has had this problem.

    What is it about this specific app store that's making Google feel it has the right to forcibly remove it?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:I feel like I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a minor one.

      Google's dipping their toe in the water to see how it goes over. If they get away with it, others will follow, until Apple-style there is only one allowed.

    2. Re:I feel like I'm missing something by kerashi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Aptoide has long provided access to repositories of pirated apps, and has been less than willing to remove them at the request of app developers. Anyone can create a repository, load it with pirated apps, and publish it through Aptoide. That's probably what got Google to blacklist them.

      It's worth noting that Aptoide's own repository is clean, but with their linking to other repositories that they have zero control over, there's going to be plenty out there for Google to want to blacklist them for.

    3. Re:I feel like I'm missing something by kerashi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      F-Droid, which is a fork of Aptoide that uses a single repository instead of publishing other third-party repositories, is available on the Google Play Store, so I don't think Google has a problem with rival app stores. I'd bet money that Google's actions against Aptoide have more to do with the repositories of pirated apps that are published through Aptoide, since if you get a paid app for free through Aptoide, Google doesn't get their cut.

    4. Re:I feel like I'm missing something by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      I have a feeling that this is close to the right answer.

      Reading more, including other stories and the Wikipedia article, apparently the removal is done by the security scan part of the Play Store which reports on installed apps that might be untrustworthy. Aptoide isn't curated (the default repos may be, but the entire concept is that you add repos for the software you want), I suspect that it's flagged for that reason, as a potential source of malware.

      My guess is that if Aptoide didn't allow user defined repos, it probably wouldn't be being targeted by Google, because then it'd be just another curated app store, like the Amazon one.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. This is why I have that turned off by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    You can disable that. It's too bad, it would be a useful feature, but I always suspected that Google would abuse it and look, here we are. Don't be evil, Google.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Re:Kinda like microsoft? by spire3661 · · Score: 2

    How secure is it really if you dont hold the keys yourself? Thats what makes desktop more secure, not its form factor.

    --
    Good-bye
  6. Re:Applicable Outside Portugal? by truedfx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's about protecting the rights of Aptoide, a Portuguese entity, against the actions of Google, a business with a legal presence in Portugal. If Google only violates Aptoide's rights outside Portugal, a Portuguese court can still take action against that: having to respect the rights recognised or granted by a country to its citizens and companies is part of the cost of doing business in that country. If a US-based app store sued Google for the same reason, and a US court ruled that Google had to stop interfering, even outside the US, no, I do not believe there would be any uproar.

  7. Re:Applicable Outside Portugal? by stephanruby · · Score: 2

    Google Play itself is available in 145 countries, so if the injunction is only affecting 82 countries, that probably means some kind of treaty must be limiting its scope.