Remove all direct links to languagetransfer.org

[SyntaxBlitz]

UPDATE: The app has been reinstated! #45 reverts this PR.

Google has removed Language Transfer from the Google Play Store.

Some history

When we first published, the app was rejected because we had a link to Language Transfer's Patreon:

Since this was a way of soliciting funds (for our free, open-source project) that didn't give Google a 15% cut, it wasn't allowed. This sucked, because Language Transfer has always been run entirely on donations (which pay Mihalis's rent), even before a mobile app existed at all. The mobile app became our best way to get these language courses out into the world, and it isn't allowed to link to our fundraising platform. The app doesn't provide any special features to people who donate; it's just a way to help support the project. Google makes an exception for tax-exempt nonprofits, but Language Transfer is a small project run by one guy. If we want to let people donate, Google wants a cut.

To appease Google, we swapped out those links for links to the Language Transfer website so that users could learn more about the project themselves. We don't have any text in the app anymore about contributing or donating to the project. Google accepted this version of the app to the Play Store, and (about a year later) it's now on around 50,000 devices.

This morning

Today, Google pulled the app from the Play Store (with no notice, as is their way) with this series of screenshots attached to the rejection:

That's right; someone at Google reviewed this app, visited the LT website, scrolled to the very bottom of the page, and clicked through twice to find a way to contribute funds to the project. Our app isn't allowed to link to the homepage of the project's own website unless we completely remove our users' ability to discover a way to give us money. This isn't a change, by the way; this link was on the website when Google first approved the app.

I'm hoping this PR does the trick, but we're still linking the GitHub page (which seems, yknow, reasonable, for an open-source app) and the Facebook page (again, doesn't everyone do this?), and of course it will be possible to find ways to donate through either of those links. We'll just have to hope that this is good enough for Google.

[SyntaxBlitz]

tested on my device, works :+1:

[bezubaba]

Rewrite it as PWA and let users directly download it from your site.

[KevinColemanInc]

Google's cut is 15%, not 30% (source).

[Greg-Boggs]

Is it possible an open source nonprofit may be able to assist in supporting the app so it can get an exemption?

[SyntaxBlitz]

Google's cut is 15%, not 30% (source).

Ah, thanks for the correction. I forgot they had changed that.

[a1batross]

Google as always. There is a form buried in the email or on developer console where you can try to send an appeal but it may take too long.

Also, you can send APK with no changes and see if they will reject it, sometimes it works too.

This need to be covered by the media, like sharing on the Hackernews or like that, many people read it.

Consider adding your app to F-Droid as well, these guys don't mind when FOSS apps show donation links.

[adeekshith]

Also consider making it available on alternate app stores F-Droid or IzzyOnDroid to reduce dependence on Google. Let me know if you need any help with that.

[SyntaxBlitz]

I'm hoping to submit to F-Droid eventually, though at the moment we don't have an explicit open license on the actual content being served by the app, so we'll need to get that worked out first.

[theonewolf]

Kind of a line of thinking with @Greg-Boggs, but would it be prohibitively costly to file for and create a non-profit LLC for this app? Totally understand if you think that's too much work @SyntaxBlitz.

[ocdtrekkie]

Contact your Congresspeople and ask them to support and vote for the Open App Markets Act as soon as possible: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/08/11/apple-google-senators-app-store-conflict/ (The primary goal of this bill is to prohibit Google and Apple from punishing app developers from soliciting payments outside of their platforms.)

Also, consider hooking up with the Coalition for App Fairness, who may be able to help draw more visibility to your issue: https://appfairness.org/

The only solution to constant abuse by app market actors is legal action.

[lodenrogue]

I'm deleting all my Google accounts if they don't fix this

[SyntaxBlitz]

Kind of a line of thinking with @Greg-Boggs, but would it be prohibitively costly to file for and create a non-profit LLC for this app? Totally understand if you think that's too much work @SyntaxBlitz.

I've thought about this before, but I don't personally run the Language Transfer project (I just work on the app). Mihalis Eleftheriou would be the one to file, but I think it would be tricky for him to set up a legal entity for the project because he's a bit of a nomad (and he already has a lot on his plate).

[Greg-Boggs]

I don't think you'd need to form a new nonprofit for the app. Rather you could be supported by an existing nonprofit that already has 503 status.

[ted-gould]

+1 on using an existing charity. One example is https://sfconservancy.org/

[ashsidhu]

The only long term solution is to support the open web. More we give in to gated gardens, more they are going to subjugate indie app makers. Both Apple and Google are upto no good. I can help you write a PWA which will be at par in performance and features with the android app. While we know Play Store has more users today, we're duty bound to serve everyone through the open web non gated platform first.

[lachesis]

Now that this is #1 on HN, hopefully Google will reverse their decision. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28172490

[adeekshith]

I'm hoping to submit to F-Droid eventually, though at the moment we don't have an explicit open license on the actual content being served by the app, so we'll need to get that worked out first.

IzzyOnDroid F-droid repository is more lenient so may want to consider that at first. It is easy. You just need to provide a signed APK. Also F-droid will accept it without having an open server side license. It will just slap a "Non free dependency" warning though.

[dessant]

Now that this is #1 on HN, hopefully Google will reverse their decision.

@lachesis, this has happened several times before, but so far open source developers have caved in within hours and removed links to their websites or donation pages. Google will never have to reverse their abusive decisions, if no open source developer is willing to stand their ground.

[piotrblasiak]

Same thing happened to us with Attendium on the app store a couple of years ago. We had to add a query parameter to any links that we have in the app/description to remove links that could lead to a payment page. Basically stripping the header & footer.

[ocdtrekkie]

@piotrblasiak That's a brilliant workaround the issue in the short term, though it's frustrating people who find you through Google Play can then no longer find how to support you. :/

[SyntaxBlitz]

@piotrblasiak I thought about that kind of solution too, but it'd be tricky. The owner of the project runs the site himself with Squarespace; the project itself isn't really a tech project, only the app is. I wouldn't want to make it harder for him to make updates to the website by adding a bunch of awkward server-side code.

[piotrblasiak]

Ok, yeah I see the problem with people visiting a site and then not finding a way to support it might seem as if there is no way - which might be worse than not linking to the site at all. Then this could be better - as you are not allowed to add a "call to action" on how to pay, at least you are allowed to tell them what you can not do. So I added this to our app and people seem to get it most of the time (see screenshot below). You could keep the button but direct them to a screen like this and let them figure out themselves where to donate.

[SyntaxBlitz]

Ok, yeah I see the problem with people visiting a site and then not finding a way to support it might seem as if there is no way

Yeah, I'm a little concerned even with the version of the app that got rejected; the app is likely to draw in people who would've found other ways to consume the course content (like YouTube or SoundCloud), where we're able to include Patreon links. So by being barred from including links to the donation page, we're potentially reducing income. Fortunately I think so far this effect has been offset by the increased distribution we've gotten by having a mobile app.

[ArneBab]

Maybe get in touch with conservancy? I know it sucks to just go along, but you’re already Free Software, so let folks give you the orga needed: https://sfconservancy.org/ — that’s what they live for: liberating free software projects from the burdens of bureaucracy to get the organizational structure that matches their approach.

[SyntaxBlitz]

Thanks @ted-gould and @ArneBab for the pointer; it's annoying that we'd have to route contributions outside of our existing setup, but I'll definitely have a look.

[patcon]

Came here from hackernews front page.

Google makes an exception for tax-exempt nonprofits, but Language Transfer is a small project run by one guy.

Have you heard of or explored Open Collective? They do international fiscal sponsorship of open source projects, essentially making you a project if their nonprofit, with a platform to streamline expenses (incl contractor invoices/payouts for project contributors/maintainers)

cc @SudharakaP

[scott-joe]

There are “shell” non-profits that act as financial agents for smaller non-profits.

[HartS]

I've used Language Transfer (though I haven't used the app) and it's amazing. I'm wondering if you take cryptocurrency donations (ideally other than bitcoin)? Perhaps you could also create a paid version of the app that's the same as the free version, and ask users who like the app to purchase the paid version.

[mrunkel]

Sorry, but why not just accept donations through the app through the google play store?

if it’s a moral decision, I understand, but surely 85% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

That should alleviate google’s perception of you trying to make an end around of their policies and should net you increased funds.

From google’s perspective they have provided you with a Dev platform, market, and ecosystem for delivery, payment, etc. In return, they expect a cut of your revenue.

[dic1911]

if it’s a moral decision, I understand, but surely 85% of something is better than 100% of nothing. ... From google’s perspective they have provided you with a Dev platform, market, and ecosystem for delivery, payment, etc. In return, they expect a cut of your revenue.

It's better than nothing for sure, but still that's just Google being greedy and an a**hole.

[SyntaxBlitz]

Sorry, but why not just accept donations through the app through the google play store?

Would that solve the problem, though? We gave in and decided against putting a donation link within the app. But now Google is saying that linking to the website at all isn't ok. The project has been around long before there was an app, and there are plenty of people who listen to the audio courses in other forms (and lots of the donation revenue comes from those people). It seems like Google saying I'm only allowed to fundraise within the mobile app (or I'm not allowed to include any links to the project page at all).

[mrunkel]

Hmm

reading this:

Can I communicate with my users about alternative ways to pay? Yes. Outside of your app you are free to communicate with them about alternative purchase options. You can use email marketing and other channels outside of the app to provide subscription offers and even special pricing.

Within an app, developers may not lead users to a payment method other than Google Play’s billing system. This includes directly linking to a webpage that could lead to an alternate payment method or using language that encourages a user to purchase the digital item outside of the app.

Developers can refer users to administrative information–like an account management page, privacy policy, or to a help center–as long as the webpage does not eventually lead to an alternate payment method.

For services and products that are consumption only (apps that do not enable users to purchase access to digital goods or services from within the app), developers may choose to provide additional information about purchasing options without direct links, including using language like:

"You can purchase this book directly on our website" "Go to our website to upgrade your subscription to Premium" "This movie isn’t available to rent in the app. However, any movie you rent through ourwebsite.com will be immediately available to view in the app" "Need extra lives? Head to our website to purchase more"

it looks I was wrong, I’m not that familiar with the google play store, I had assumed they had parity with Apple’s policies.

It looks like only a text description is allowed.

[piotrblasiak]

@mrunkel that's a valuable find. So it seems putting in a link that opens up the page (especially within the app) is not allowed, but mentioning the website address (at least with a .com) IS allowed.

[SyntaxBlitz]

@mrunkel Thanks for finding that! That helps a lot (and in fact it looks like I can re-include some of the copy that I originally got rid of when I removed the Patreon link).

[SudharakaP]

Came here from hackernews front page.

Google makes an exception for tax-exempt nonprofits, but Language Transfer is a small project run by one guy.

Have you heard of or explored Open Collective? They do international fiscal sponsorship of open source projects, essentially making you a project if their nonprofit, with a platform to streamline expenses (incl contractor invoices/payouts for project contributors/maintainers)

cc @SudharakaP

Thanks for tagging me @patcon. You can find more information about OpenCollective at, https://opencollective.com/ and at our docs, https://docs.opencollective.com/help/. If you have any questions feel free to reach us at our slack channel; https://slack.opencollective.com/. 😄

cc: @SyntaxBlitz

[kamazeuci]

We really need to end google play's monopoly ASAP

[kamazeuci]

Is it possible for you to distribute the app via f-droid? I don't have google play access.

[preeefix]

Heyo,

The Google Play Team has decided to reinstate the application without any modifications. 🎉

(Disc: Googler, not related to play)

[SyntaxBlitz]

Thanks for the update! That's good to hear. Still frustrating that we don't get any notice on this kind of thing, but that's another battle.

[dessant]

@crdnl, will the Google Play Team allow open source projects to add a donation link to the app menu from now on?

There are several projects that were hit with suspensions for the exact same reason, including WireGuard. It would be awesome if the Google Play Team could clarify what is their current opinion on donation links in open source apps, so that projects that are currently losing potential contributions because they fear a takedown can resume accepting donations.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21268389

[piotrblasiak]

There is hope: https://www.axios.com/apple-settles-developer-class-action-c13bb308-daf3-4231-a399-ffd48b6b2c52.html