44
submitted 1 year ago by Asudox@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago
[-] amju_wolf@pawb.social -2 points 1 year ago

He had a sound reason why that's not the case, and that's to keep control over what people do to it. Namely they want to prevent redistribution with added trackers/ads/malware.

[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Has that ever prevented people from reverse-engineering an app?

[-] kraniax@lemmy.wtf 10 points 1 year ago

no need for that! 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 this case it's just a excuse so no one is redistributing the app and they can make money from it.

[-] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

No, but it gives them the legal avenue to go after malicious clones.

this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
44 points (83.3% liked)

Privacy

31609 readers
512 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS