• Amju Wolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    The difference with Linux kernel is that it’s way more complicated to persuade someone who just likes the idea of it to install it, so there’s really no protection needed - if you’re installing a custom kernel (or more likely, a whole OS using that kernel) you probably know enough not to end up downloading malware.

    That’s not so true about just providing “random” APKs.

    • kraniax@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      no need for a restrictive license! people can just take an apk and slap ads or malware on top. they do it all the time with fake candy crush apks. So I’m pretty sure they won’t care about this license.

      I think that in the license is just a excuse so no one is redistributing the app and they can make money from it.

      • ToxicWaste@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t claim to know what their true intentions are. But if you want your APK with additional malware removed from any appstore, it for sure helps to have terms which don’t allow ppl to do so.

        There is nothing wrong about wanting to earn money, but their approach is the weakest. I did not even see a dialogue asking me for money yet.

    • Prunebutt@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      A higher skill level demand shouldn’t change the licencing concepts behind a project.