zlacker

While I like to jump on the Google bash train as much as anyone, this is to comply with EU laws.

Apple implemented a similar change for the EU App Store earlier this year to comply with the Digital Services Act (DSA), a regulation that now requires app developers to provide their “trader status” to submit new apps or app updates for distribution.

>>JustEx+(OP)
They usually fight harder against such laws if they don’t suit them.

>>JustEx+(OP)
So they (or rather TC) claim. Does the DSA actually require it, though?

>>JustEx+(OP)
There is no law in EU which requires Thailand-based developers to provide their trader status in order to serve Thai customers. Stop making shit up.

>>JustEx+(OP)
IANAL, but I don't see how that applies to apps that Googled doesn't distribute.

>>JustEx+(OP)
Just wonderful. Why does Europe insist on imposing regulations like this that companies then force on the rest of the world? It's one thing if they're benign but this very much isn't.

>>JustEx+(OP)
> for distribution.

I.e. it doesn't require this at all, it merely requires Google require verification for apps that they themselves distribute. What they've been doing all along until now plus or minus minor bookkeeping details on what data they collect.

>>JustEx+(OP)
But this is for apps outside the Play store, so the DSA isn’t at play here insofar as Google needs to be concerned. I don’t think there’s any solid decision on whether third-party app distribution is subject to the trader requirements, but if/when there is, it’d presumably be on the alternative distribution platform to enforce, not Google. Plus, Google already adjusted its policies to comply with the DSA.

For the record, Apple notes that the DSA requirements only impact developers distributing through the App Store, not through alternative distribution [1].

[1]: https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-co...

>>201984+y2
Only monetized apps (whether that be directly paid, microtransactions, ads, etc.) are legally required to go through that process - and it's a perfectly sensible requirement for the government to say "if you want to run a business, you need to do so as a business".

That is most apps - but not the kind of apps Google is attacking here (personal-scale, actually-free, third-party, etc.). And "apps that are not monetized" is actually a very nice thing to filter for from a user perspective.

Of course, the world's largest malware vendors love to use government action as an excuse to do something else malicious.