For as long as Android has been around, Android apps have been launched in the APK format (which stands for Android Package). However, in 2018, Google introduced a new format called Android App Bundles, or AAB (with the filename *.aab). Google touted that this new format would result in smaller app file sizes and easier ways to control various aspects of apps. Of the millions of apps on the Google Play Store, thousands of them already use the AAB system.
Today, Google announced that the AAB format will now officially replace Android APKs. This means that starting in August of this year, all new apps submitted to the Google Play Store must come in the AAB format. Apps that are currently APKs can stay that way — at least for now.
Alright, where’s the catch? There’s going to be a catch, right?
Unlike APKs, Android App Bundles cannot exist outside of Google Play and cannot be distributed outside of it. This means that developers switching from APK to App Bundles can no longer provide the exact same package or experience on other app sources unless they opt to maintain a separate APK version. This naturally puts third-party app stores at a disadvantage, but Google will most likely play up the Play Store’s security as a major reason to avoid those sources anyway.
There it is! Of course any technological step forward in the modern monopolised world of technology has to come with anti-consumer features or limitations that take control away from users. It’s like a law.
This raises a few questions for me. Is it merely the case that google will have the first android store with the new packages and others will be able to add support over time? Or is google doing something more nefarious by actively blocking others from implementing the new package format?
I wonder what this means for AOSP alternatives like lineage OS? I’m afraid that google could effectively kill the competition by ensuring that software won’t be available outside of google play.
Those are very valid concerns. I can’t imagine though that if Google is attempting to play dirty, that it will not be met with significant backlash. Then again, consumers have a habit of getting used to the beatings they receive rather than standing up against them.
Several of the APK-mirroring sites are using their own installers for mirrored AABs at this point.
Why Google hasn’t provided the ability to sideload directly from AAB is another question.
https://xkcd.com/927/
Well, no, not exactly, needs evolves, hence technology adapt. It’s like saying wood wheel then rubber wheel, then pneumatic wheel are competing standards while they are just evolution to adapt to the need with more proper technological solution.
Otherwise 640KB would be enough for everyone.
I imagine Microsoft will be sticking with APK’s in Windows 11, so if Android developers want to keep compatibility with Windows 11, or other 3rd party app stores, they’re now going to need to package their application in 2 different ways. This leads to fragmentation and more con fusion in the Android space (when there’s already enough confusion anyway)
There’s nothing wrong in theory with a new more “efficient” distribution mechanism. I’m not sure what the motive is but it may be Google wanting to minimise the load on servers. Perhaps other reasons too. The real loss will be people with Android wanting to archive an APK and sideload. The new distribution format will make sideloading on multiple Android phones pain. I have a couple of Android apps available on newer versions of Android but not distributed for the older version on one of my older phones.
Android devices earlier than 4.4 can only support APK. It is an interesting quirk of Windows 11 that it will support Android and possibly older Android at that while cutting off its own historical users of its own platform.
As usual the last people they ask or consider are the end users.
Windows 11 uses Amazon’s app store. So I guess the burden would be for Amazon to try to get devs to support APK or they would need to support the new thing.
How this works is not exactly new at this point.
https://developer.android.com/studio/command-line/bundletool
bundletool build-apks –bundle=myapp_bundle.aab –output=myapp.apks –mode=universal
unzip myapp.apks -d apks
Now in that extracted apks directory you have the old apk version what was in the aab file.
Yes that bundletool –mode=universal is same mode for making testing apk for sideloading its not as space effective as having the aab file generate the exact apk for the device.
I don’t see this as google playing dirty. Google did include means to convert aab back to old school APK without rebuilding application. Problem is making app store support the per device nature of aab is a lot more trick.
Yes it really simple to miss that aab is used with bundletool to generate a targeted to device APK that is small or a full feature APK that is a universal that is like the old APK that we are use to.
Fun point what is installed in the Android devices themselves does not change as in APK files.
If a developer wants to provide the same application on third party stores outside google store that does not accept aab files and application is not using google play parts they take aab run it though the steps to make universal and upload it to the third party store. Please note lot of cases if your application is using google play parts and you are wanting to put it on stores outside google store you normally have to rebuild without using them.
If a third party store wants to accept aab files yet their store systems has not been updated to support aab files they can and keep their setup the way it is and they can run the bundletool to turn aab from developers into a universal APK file or into multi targeted APKs depending on how their store works.
Up until this point nothing is really that complex.
If a party who is not the developer want to raid google play for a application and put it on a different store or device think google play does not have to send device the raw aab file just the device targeted apks file(with device targeted apk files to install the applications in a zip file) they are in trouble here. Lot of ways this is stolen works.
End users attempting to backup already downloaded applications from google play to use on different devices in trouble here.
Please note End users with what the aab does makes application backup harder for reduced download usage doing updates. Google changing over to aab also saves on network traffic due to only sending devices the amount of software need for that device instead of sending out for all of a particular cpu type or the like.
The big effect here of the change to aab is there are lot of third party android app stores that when you look closer its not the developer of the application in fact putting applications in their stores. They are raiding google play store use of aab ruins that due to now having device targeted APK files because of aab. The side effect on users who backup their applications could be classed as a problem.
OK, but really this is a problem created by the fact that APK (AKA a zip file with some metadata) is a garbage package format carelessly borrowed from Java in Android’s infancy and they’re doubling down by layering more crap on top.
Imagine instead they just invented a new package format that was designed to be streamed. You could have small manifest that listed all the files in the package, configuration data, hashes and a signature block and the offset to the data. The installing device downloads the manifest, plans the install and then issues HTTP byte range requests to download only the parts of the data needed. Then if you wanted to back up the whole package you could request and download the whole thing. Lets be super original and call this obviously utopian design SISX.
One package for all devices, signed once by a key the developer owns, and the end user downloads only the data needed for their device. Everyone is happy.
1. Windows 11 will run Android apps, but (most probably) won’t have Google Play, so you’ll have to use alternative sources.
2. Google announces a new package format, which won’t be outside Google Play, making developers either not support alternative sources or maintain two package versions.
All this can for sure be just a coincidence, couldn’t it?
Android App Bundles is a master format to produce APK files. The reality as a developer you upload as AAB file to the google play store as the end user you download APK files.
Logout developers don’t need to maintain two different package versions. Why AAB files can make universal APK files the result is two files of exactly the same version..
AAB files can make universal APK files and device targeted APK files. Of course device targeted APK files are smaller.
The work for AAB future started before windows 11 said Microsoft was going to have android support.
Yes indeed! I keep seeing all these misinformation articles about APK’s going way, Glad someone is setting the record straight.
The reason the AAB format exists is so all the different “localizations” (that is, translations and locale-specific icons) can exist as different “APK slices”, downloaded separately from the “main” APK. This saves bandwidth for the Play Store servers and saves space on the user’s phone. Which sound all nice and neat, until you realise you can’t programmatically request APK slices for different locales from the Play Store. You have to change your Android device’s language every time and re-download.
Sites like APKMirror simply can’t do this for all locales. This means that unless your locale is English, Russian, Chinese or some other “big” locale, APKMirror is useless for you, since it’s highly unlikely APKMirror will have the APK slice for your locale. For example, I tried downloading an old version of Google Maps from APKMirror and was stopped dead in my tracks because of this issue. You see, for navigation apps, having road names spoken in poor English instead of the native language makes the app unusable.
But anyway, if APKMirror has the APKslices relevant to you, they have created an “apkm” format and an installer that helps you install them. Yes, the installer is proprietary, but this is the smartphone space, just be glad you can still install apps outside the store.
kurkosdr,
I don’t use google apps (on purpose) and did not know this is how it worked, but if so that’s a terrible design limitation on google’s part. TTS is done via an external process that I’ve seen working completely independently from device localization in other 3rd party applications. OSM maps handles this much better and allows the user to install/use whatever TTS language is desired without having to download a new localized version of OSM maps. Heck a lot of programs allow the user to download & install new localization features (like spell checking etc) without having to download a localized installer. I’m surprised google did that.
I noticed that, and unfortunately their proprietary installer will not work on my lineage device where I needed APKMirror the most. I don’t know if this was a bug or limitation, maybe I can try it again. At least there are other alternatives.
BTW I admit I wasn’t too clear in my first message. If you change your device’s language setting, it will (re)download the apk slice for your language (I am almost sure it doesn’t re-download and re-install the main apk). But still, Android devices take some dozen seconds to switch language, which apparently it makes it hard enough for APKMirror to not download all locales.
Google making the voice navigation audio of Google Maps available as standalone files would mean they would have to commit to a file format, which would mean third-party apps could benefit from it (Google’s voice navigation is surprisingly good even for semi-obscure languages like Greek, so it’s a competitive advantage of theirs), so they prefer to make it available as a semi-opaque apk slice. To be fair, this also allows them to innovate on the code side without worrying about backwards compatibility.
What do you mean “not work”? It’s probably not an API level thing, since you are using Lineage OS, so I assume you have the minimum API level required (Lollipop, MinAPI 21), because Lollipop ROMs exist even for ancient devices. I also assume you are savvy enough to figure unknown sources and make sure you have 10-15% of disk space free so the APK Package Manager doesn’t fail. So, I assume you got some other error message? What is it? If you don’t get a message, try sideloading via adb (there are guides on the web) which might give you a more detailed message.
Haven’t seen any APK randomly failing on devices that meet MinAPI requirements and have the required space, so I am curious.
PS: You can also install Play Store and Play Services on LineageOS, assuming you want them. There are guides online.
kurkosdr,
I tried the latest beta just now and it seems to work fine, so never mind. Thanks for your suggestions!
Yes, but IMHO the major selling point for LineageOS is to get away from google. I would think the majority on LineageOS’s users are there for exactly this reason otherwise it’s not really worth the effort.
This is the catch. bundletool build-apks –bundle=myapp_bundle.aab –output=myapp.apks –mode=universal if you have the aab file it self you can use bundletool to generate what ever APK you need. Include the universal what is every translation and every bit of binary for every device support by Android in one APK.
Its not only translations that bundletool can do custom splitting on it. Like your application might have X work around library for old versions of Android since users phone is newer version of android it does not need that library. Or can be that you phone does not have X physical feature as well.
So APKMirror and other services like it that have not been dealing with the maker of applications instead raiding play store for content are in trouble. So yes you have a English local and the apkm file may not work for you because you android device is not in the profile APKMirror or equal used to raid their APK files from Google Play store.
The reality if APKMirror starts going after developers to send them their aab files they could use bundletool to generate all the APKs to make their apkm files.
The f-droid repositories are that effected effected by google change aab because the developers are just make universal APK using the bundletool from the aab file. Its part of the SDK any how.
Also note unlike the apkm format the aab format is open source and open specification.
oiaohm,
The reality is other app stores are niche and will never have consideration from the overwhelming majority of android developers who typically have very little interest in targeting << 1% of the market. For better or worse, google is the defacto supplier of android software and everyone else is expendable. You and I might want it to be different, but you and I don’t make up a critical mass.
Alfman it also means for the developers that don’t target amazon store or any of the other stories they have no interest in supporting those applications properly either. Next if developer sells their application on google play and its being mirrored for free this is another problem.
Security flaws/updates is another problem.
The sites mirroring so not having to deal with the developers of the application has their fair share of problems.
There is a problem stores like Amazon store, F-droid and Applivery that deal directly with applications developers have been mixed with stores like APKMirror that depend on mirroring a lot. You hear repeatedly from anti-virus vendors don’t use a third party store with android because your risk of malware will go way up. The reality here is the third party stores that deal with developers directly generally just as safe as google play store or safer. Those who deal with mirror majority have been caught with malware modified versions of applications. Yes APKMirror has put a lot of steps in place to prevent this but nothing really beats having direct link to the developer themselves to be informed of security issues and other things before they are public knowledge.
The reality here is not all android third party stores are created equal. Making it harder to host applications in an android third party store without having to deal with the developer long term is most likely a good thing. Will this mean users who are not using google play will not be able to get particular application yes this is true. Will it make those users generally safer also most likely true.
Please be aware that with amazon store on Windows 11 its likely that its going to be more than 1% market you are missing out on without targeting at least 1 third party store to google play. At this stage Amazon store is still mandating you upload universal APK.
Please remember APK/aab files upload to google play store are allowed to presume you have google play services installed so fail when you get those applications for a mirror site on a device that does not have google play services these applications fail as well. Stable well behaving applications on devices that don’t have google play services you want those applications form developers who built the application for that. Not taking random pot luck with files mirrored google play store.
Also this is not the only difference before aab the google playstore had max sizes of APK files they supported so you had to perform splitting and amazon did not. So developers have been need to make a split APK files and single APK file when supporting google play store and amazon store(and other third party stores). Yes this still had AAB file being made as well as the middle man file. So google play change in fact saves developers hosting on multi stores time. Why google play store was only store for android that you had file size limits on APK files.
Alfman this is not as simple as it sounds. The third party android app stores that have been dealing with developers directly this change to google play basically means nothing. These stores have also been providing users with applications of predictable quality.
The third party android app stores depending on mirroring from google play or others these have had higher rates of malware issues and have had higher rates of applications that don’t work on people devices who do not have google play services or what ever is that app store they are mirroring from equal. Yes amazon store you mirror from that you can get a file that depend on amazon payment services that may or may not be installed. Yes if you have not installed the amazon store the payment services of amazon is most likely missing.
There is a fun extra side to this problem. Yes having mirrors of questionable quality does discourage application developers from releasing on more stores. Does result people who would want to use that application not asking for that application to be outside google play.
The idea that a APK file works everywhere is not true. APK files in google play store, Amazon Store… before AAB if you mirror them they were not promised to work without the store they came from and its mandatory installed parts. We need third party stores that build relationships with developers to be more successful to make uses of android without google play life better and to give sales competition to google. APKMirror for example that not a market for a application developer to sell their application with a different margin level than Google play. Amazon store does provide a different market that developers can sell applications.
oiaohm
You’re right, developers may not be interested in targeting the amazon app store either. It depends if their android store can reach critical mass.
You’re trying to convince me of things that I already know. But my point still stands: typical developers are focusing on stores with massive market share, everyone else is pretty irrelevant.
If you’ve got a cash cow and billions of dollars to break into the market, you might have a chance. But a small company on it’s own merits will not have much of a shot against the giants at this point. I’d leave an exception for corners of the market that the giants have chosen not to cater to. As a crude example: an app store that specialized in pornographic content would probably do well.
Naturally, whatever source you use needs to earn your trust.
The problem is it’s far easier to say that than to make it happen. Competition is losing out as markets keep becoming more and more consolidated. There are many of us who protest this just like you. But without a realistic plan to overcome the economic imbalances and dismantle the positive feedback loops that keep yielding more and more power to the very top, we’re not going to be able to change the status quo. So I understand your opinion, but do you have a plan?
Alfman I don’t have a 100 percent plan. But those mirroring what is on google play store don’t help.
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.apk.editor/
Take this application I referenced on f-droid the version on Google Play Store has particular features disabled so that it can be submitted to Google Play Store. Lets say we look at APKMirror people say over and over again to use. The version that APKMirror will have is the Google Play Store version even if the developer of the application wish them to host the f-droid version instead because the f-droid version does not match the Google Play version. Even in cases when for people like you using line LineageOS or equal where google play store APK will not work.
–You’re right, developers may not be interested in targeting the amazon app store either. It depends if their android store can reach critical mass.–
Lets look at this a bit closer.
Ok I release on google play store I do nothing and get the user base of APKMirror and others like it for nothing for nothing because other people do the work. Of course the users using APKMirror or equal have major issues with my application I get to ignore them because they download the application from a non approved source right.
The horrible reality is items like APKMirror just increase the critical mass of google play store because they are a mirror of it. Yes at the same time increasing google play store critical mass APKMirror and ones like it fill in the market spaces for possible proper competition.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2728248
There has been many studies into Software Piracy/Copyright infringement and its effects on markets. Yes places like APKMirror are technically copyright infringement.
If places like APKMirror have to start doing proper arrangements with developers to host their applications places like APKMirror are going to be for a while short content. People may find their way instead to f-droid and other places where the developers are interested in supporting their applications.
–It depends if their android store can reach critical mass.–
The reality a legal above board competition to the google play store from smaller vendors will not be possible while we have illegal vendors in the market.
The illegal vendors:
1) Are in effect providing users with second grade applications this results in third party markets having constant referred to as bad.
2) The mirror process just makes google critical mass a large problem to get over.
3) Covering markets that google play does not directly cover so that developers don’t have to deal with other third party market to get that market share.
Yes lets just copy from google play store against the term of use has been a fast and easy way for them fill out their stores without having to do the hard work of getting developers with the mirror of removing the reason for developers in google play to properly work with third party stores to get more market share.
There is a horrible fact scary there is just as many devices out there without google play as with. Yes without mirroring from google play covering those markets there would be quite a huge market for application developers to make a profit in. This just need items like APKMirror to go away. Users complaining in those areas that google play does not cover complaining about applications on android not being quality and the case is because they are google services applications requiring being install on devices that do not have it also does not do google market of Android to device makers any good either.
Alfman I don’t have a lot of niceness for taking short cuts that are illegal to attempt to make a market for yourself. The illegal route normally end up hurting everyone in the end. Yes end users are hurt by items like APKMirror because they get applications that don’t work properly. Google is hurt because the poor quality applications do kick back on google. Of course this was going to at some point result in google to change something that would make APKMirror and like it life a lot harder as legal action would take far too long.
Remember the change to aab the vendor of phone app stores are not effect, f-droid not effected, amazon store not effected, itch.io android store not effected… All the third party stores with direct deals with developers that are not google play not effected at all by the aab change.
Effected parties by the change to aab are all the mirroring places of APK off of the google play store that don’t have the legal right to-do that in the first place. The other effect is on users who wish to back up their APK files.
The illegals have had a good run at some point it was going to change. Getting rid of the illegals mirrors should open up market space for the developers who are willing to release outside the google play store and support what they provide so make in the end those who don’t want google stuff life better. Of course I am not saying that the short term will be nice.
oiaohm,
But that’s just it. They are not doing it because it’s ideal. We all know that it isn’t. They are doing it because it’s the most effective way to bring apps to android devices that don’t have google services. And until that changes, I want them to continue to provide reasonably usable mirrors than become desolate stores that don’t have the applications we need. Let’s not kid ourselves here, If we loose the ability to install application via mirrors, the lack of application support would be the demise of google-free android distros. Many mobile platforms have experienced this fate because they didn’t have applications.
You’re talking about android right? Claims like this needs a reference.
https://www.pocketgamer.com/articles/083365/what-its-like-to-abandon-google-play-for-taptap/
–You’re talking about android right? Claims like this needs a reference.–
Alfman if I had asked you the second biggest android application market you answer would not have taptap. The reality is inside China you get a phone the most common appstore is not google play its taptap. Google service don’t exist on your common android phones in china.
–They are doing it because it’s the most effective way to bring apps to android devices that don’t have google services.–
This is not in fact true. China cracked down on stores a long time ago that were doing just google play mirrors inside china this results in markets like taptap getting a solid foothold inside china. Of course those markets don’t have a solid foot hold outside china.
–Let’s not kid ourselves here, If we loose the ability to install application via mirrors, the lack of application support would be the demise of google-free android distros.–
Really Alfman stop kidding yourself. China proved that you crack down on mirrors from google play and you then get other market able to form. Of course when you have large number of customers in the China case that you are not getting because you are only on google play so are not getting into the China market…. The will to deal with non google play market has appeared.
Yes china crackdowns caused a brutal lack of applications in china android application market for a while. But long term it has result in the China being way more competitive with application stores than our market.
Alfman I am not kidding with the idea that roughly 50% of android phones don’t have google play or google services. There is a huge volume of phones in china.
oiaohm,
You still haven’t linked to marketshare data to back the facts you were claiming. I find that you do that a-lot, but at least now I know what you were talking about. In any case china have a similar problem regarding market monopolization, it just so happens that their government have intervened in order to make sure their monopolies are chinese rather than foreign. I’m pretty sure the USA would do the exact same thing if the situation were reversed.
Well yes obviously if you have a government willing & able to intervene in the market, you can clearly change the balance of corporate power. I don’t know where you live, but here in the US that is not happening and isn’t likely to happen either. If anything our governments and corporations have a symbiotic relationship, which is part of the feedback loop I was talking about.
Alfman just because I have access to particular stats does not mean they are on public sites.
Something else to be aware of you don’t need to use a Mirror to install google play applications. https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore AuroraStore that is a open source remake of the google play client is also not effected by AAB change but this is because it going directly to google play without a middle man to get the applications you want off google play so you don’t have the third party Mirror issues. Yes because you can download for your devices requirements straight from google play also means you don’t have the issue that developer has updated due to a security issue on google play but since you are using a mirror you are missing out on it.
Also notice something else f-droid and AuroraStore are fully open source clients yet places like apkmirror are closed source clients. There have been cases where the third party mirror clients have been updated to add spyware or malware or ads.
Something like AuroraStore may be against google terms but can be argued that it was done inside the copyright laws allowance for compatibility as end user and the developer of AuroraStore are not using this to make money. Now something like apkmirror does have to make money to cover hosting.
The realities here the stores with their own content are not effected by the google aab change in any major way, the third party client option to google play like AuroraStore are also not effected. The only parties that are effected by the aab change like apkmirror that are mirroring google play content now that mirroring is made many times harder.
Mirror sites like apkmirror have the habit of being out of alignment with what is on google play as well. Providing old versions of applications sounds like a good thing until you wake up how often a google play application update is for a known security fault and then you find them still on google play. A place like f-droid providing old versions of application that is working with developers can tag this old version is insecure don’t install it without taking the required safety measures. Place like apkmirror without developer link up is out of the loop.
oiaohm,
With all due respect you must realize this creates a credibility issue for your claims, especially when they’re being questioned and you provide no evidence.
Neither yalp store nor aurora store are working for me at the moment. These have their own reliability problems that are worse than the mirrors. They may work tomorrow and stop again the next day. It could be because google is making changes behind the scenes or maybe because they’re blocking the google accounts being used.
Additionally both yalp and aurora warn users that if we authenticate using our own personal google accounts we are in violation of google’s TOS and that google may terminate our user accounts.
https://github.com/yeriomin/YalpStore
https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore/-/blob/master/DISCLAIMER.md
In any case for users who don’t wish to be tracked by google, the mirrors are better for privacy than clients that require we connect directly to google. So for people like me, I still think the mirrors are preferable over something like aurora and yalp. Of course you can have your own opinion, but keep in mind it does not dismiss the value of APK mirrors for others.
–These have their own reliability problems that are worse than the mirrors. They may work tomorrow and stop again the next day. It could be because google is making changes behind the scenes or maybe because they’re blocking the google accounts being used.–
Alfman that is not a maybe google does block accounts. The difference here when using Aurora or Yalp you know about it. With a mirror this can be at times many months without updates with you knowing nothing because of these problems.
–Additionally both yalp and aurora warn users that if we authenticate using our own personal google accounts we are in violation of google’s TOS and that google may terminate our user accounts.–
This is true good part is yalp and aurora warned you. Pays to read that google TOS of this closer. The google TOS is reality nasty. You download application by APKmirror that was hosted on google play you have to register for some reason you use your google account this is breach of google play TOS so google stops you google account and you now no longer can collect email or anything else.
Alfman I avoid google play as much as possible due to the term of service but using a mirror does not make it safer for you. Using mirrors you are still under that google TOS with all the evil counter measures for every google play sourced application on there.
Yes you are not the only one who to me has raised the TOS warning on Aurora or Yalp as a reason why mirror are better and just like those people you did not look closer to see that the google TOS rules apply even if you use a mirror.
The reality is the google play store has a lot content being applications but it has some serous protections. Mirrors are not protections from the google TOS. Using service that deal with developers directly is the legally safe route.
oiaohm,
Well then we should agree that aurora and yalp are not a real solution.
So while the mirrors are not ideal, from my point of view they’re still providing an extremely valuable and even critical service for users running android minus google’s proprietary stuff.
That’s an interesting point, however when you use a mirror, the mirror is violating google’s TOS instead of you. At most they can go after the mirrors.
Ideally yes, but again I have to point out that if you don’t have critical mass the point is mute.
–That’s an interesting point, however when you use a mirror, the mirror is violating google’s TOS instead of you. At most they can go after the mirrors–
Alfman sorry but that is not facts as written in the TOS. Read over the google TOS again
https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore/-/blob/master/DISCLAIMER.md
This time read carefully don’t miss the word “transfer”, When you download from the mirror to your device you transfer the google play protected content so yes you have breached google TOS exactly the same as if you had used aurora and yalp except its not from a legal source.
Google TOS on google play is very complete. So google is in their rights by the TOS to go after the mirrors and the users of the mirrors.
There is a difference between aurora/yelp to the mirrors. Both of aurora and yelp could be argued to fall under interoperability that are a implemented to take content from google play and make it work on incompatible devices. It would be possible to get a legal ruling in aurora/yelp favor. Problem here is having the resources to take google to court to win this. So there is a chance that aurora and yelp are both legally valid but its having the resources to prove it.
Please note using a mirror is only google TOS that you have to worry about. Mirror hosting content that was not approved then distributing it to other parties… This is straight out copyright infringement to start off with. Then you are going there to perform copyright infringement right? see problem here. Next applications can have been removed from google play for copyright reasons like the right use X image/song as been revoked that opens up another form of class action.
There are other things like licenses to use particular third party libraries that the payments were based on the number of copies download from google servers this would also result in you using software without a valid license.
Then you have applications own TOS some of those say application acquired from google play remember aurora and yelp the application was technically from google play servers so you might win this point in court but from minor it was not from any part of google play directly right.
Alfman the mirrors are a legal nightmare. Aurora and Yelp are legal head aches that could be solved with enough resources to get legal rulings. The past precedents against the mirrors say the mirror will lose in court and users will lose in court. The past precedents say that the Aurora and Yelp problem would most likely result in a win requiring google to alter their terms of service like stating what features third party store software must provide and if they are any types of applications the google play store that must be off limits with clear explain why. To correct saying you could not download applications needing google payments or stacked full of advertisements would not upset most people.
oiaohm,
You are wrong about that.
Google can go after the mirror for unauthorized access and breach of service because they are committing the act. But they have no legal standing against users who neither accessed google’s services, nor agreed to google’s terms. TOS cannot be enforced against people who are not party to the agreement. If you haven’t signed on the dotted line or at least clicked “I agree”, then the TOS does not apply to you. Consider that suggesting otherwise would be as ridiculous as me trying to enforce my own TOS against you without your agreement or even your knowledge.
Google could have a case against end users if they were violating copyrights, but in the case where users have downloaded APKs that google doesn’t own the copyrights on, that’s not going to fly either.
Ultimately you can do whatever you want to do, but even if you chose to disagree you are going to have to accept that fact that plenty of us consider the mirrors useful regardless of whether you think it’s a good idea for us to use them or not.
–But they have no legal standing against users who neither accessed google’s services, nor agreed to google’s terms. —
This argue all you like its not true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_damages_for_copyright_infringement
Receiving a copyright work without the authorization goes straight into Statutory damages and its 200 dollar per application by claiming you don’t know in the USA and many other places.
–Google could have a case against end users if they were violating copyrights, but in the case where users have downloaded APKs that google doesn’t own the copyrights on, that’s not going to fly either.–
This is incorrect the mistake here is the idea that google does not own the copyright and that is end of story there is more to who can push a copyright case there is another group of parties who can that are not the owner.
**The party that can push a copyright infringement case is the copyright holder and agents representing the copyright holder.** There is a prior case by valve against a party illegally distributing a game that was copied from the steam store. Yes valve did not own the copyright on the game and the game company was no more but since valve was the licensed distributor they were the authorized agent for that copyright holder so able to appear in court on the copyright holders behalf this case was even more warped because the copyright holder no longer existed. Who is the agents for the copyright holder is something you have to consider as well.
Alfman like it or not the mirror downloading from google play means that google as the distributor behind google play is the authorized agent for the copyright holder for all hosted applications. The mirror sites don’t have the copyright holders approval or copyright holders agent approval and if they don’t have the approval you downloading from them cannot get approval either so what you download is infringing copyright without question it now comes down to willful vs no aware. The best you can argue using the mirror site is that you unknowing infringed and its 200 dollars per instance. “willful infringement” is what the mirrors can get done for.
–But they have no legal standing against users who neither accessed google’s services, nor agreed to google’s terms. TOS cannot be enforced against people who are not party to the agreement. —
This is another mistake. Think GPL. If you have a GPL work and you don’t agree to the GPL terms do you magically get out of the GPL terms the answer is no you don’t because the problem is you don’t have a copyright license/permission in the first place if you do that. The google play TOS is for large number of so called free applications on google play is the only license that gives you permission to use/distribute in any form.
As I said google play TOS is a very well crafted agreement. Not being partly to the agreement gets you in the same way GPL does. Yes just like GPL you can get around this by having proper agreements with the developers of the application.
Alfman saying you did not see/agree to the google play TOS basically screws you for using not licensed work.
The cases where parties when to court and attempt to argue that GPL did not apply to them because they never saw then lost in court a clear warning about this problem but there are may other examples out there if you look.
oiaohm,
Re-read my post because I specifically brought this up. Google does not own the copyrights on the APKs that are being downloaded. No court would give them standing.
Anyways you’re entitled to believe what you want, it still doesn’t change anything. The users who remain dependent on the mirrors will still use them regardless of your opinions against them.
–Re-read my post because I specifically brought this up. Google does not own the copyrights on the APKs that are being downloaded. No court would give them standing.–
Problem is this is correct and incorrect Alfman. What google has done is based on a way older precedent. Its the precedent that allows book publishers to take out copyright infrignment without the authors approval.
Alfman I guess you have never done the legal about uploading a application to google play.
Because you in the following bits that the copyright holder is agree to when they upload to google play.
https://play.google.com/about/developer-distribution-agreement.html
–3.1 You hereby appoint Google as Your agent or marketplace service provider as outlined here to make Your Products available in Google Play.–
This line is problem. Because this line makes google the agent of the copyright holder so legal standing to bring a copyright case. Next is what is outlined.
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/10532353?hl=en-GB
–You acknowledge that users may also be subject to other Terms and Conditions as determined by Google.–
Both of these bits combind the copyright holder made google their agent and granted google the right to enforce the Google TOS on the work. The agent grant here by the copyright holder is same form used employ a lawyer to be their agent. Then the copyright holder gave Google the right to add there TOS to the license of the application. This is the same underhand way book publishing firms have done it for over 100 years with tones of precedents on being 100 percent enforceable.
Alfman you are making a mistake two groups of people have the right to bring a copyright claim not one.
1) Copyright holder.
2) Copyright holder agents.
Google with google play is number 2. Yes the agent has legal standing to bring a copyright claim. Yes the copyright holder agent does not own the copyright even that they have the legal right to enforce it. Yes a lawyer representing you in court is technically your agent.
Please note the Copyright holder due to granting google the right to add the TOS to google cannot say in court that since you downloaded from google play with their permission you don’t have to obey the TOS because then they would be breaching their contract agreement with google. The copyright holder is contract bound to obey google here.
The reality here the copyright holder is not required in court because google has all the contract agreements from the copyright holders of the APK/AAB on google play they need to use copyright law.
Of course being a agent google would not be allowed to pocket the total damages claim as a percentage would have to go to the copyright holder out of any enforcement that does not help you as a end user.
Alfman when someone says they are going to be your agent this has very far reaching legal effects even more when you grant them the right to-do what every they like as in the google play case.
oiaohm,
Again google is not copyright holder. An agent is a subordinate. When they’re acting on behalf of the principal owner, they’re not allowed to do whatever they want that hasn’t been agreed upon. The agreement outlines google’s activities per the agreement, which is selling your software in their store. That’s it. They can’t automatically start representing the copyright holder in lawsuits without the copyright holder’s permission. That would be truly insane.
Also note that neither apkpure nor apkmirror are mirroring software that needs to be paid for, only the software that google themselves are distributing for free with no credit card. In the case of paid software APKPure even provides “Get it on Google Play” links so that users can go buy it there legitimately. I think most developers are fine with it. They get more exposure for free and not costing them anything. And to the extent that any developers are against it, I suspect the mirrors would honor their request to be delisted.
So once again the conclusion doesn’t change: I know the status quo is not ideal, but the utility of mirrors is much higher than their harms. No need for us to blow this out of proportion.
–They can’t automatically start representing the copyright holder in lawsuits without the copyright holder’s permission. That would be truly insane.–
That the problem Alfman the reality is the copyright holder has given google the permissions they need. People who publish books who have the publisher without any extra consent have the same terms in their contracts as what google has.
–An agent is a subordinate. When they’re acting on behalf of the principal owner, they’re not allowed to do whatever they want that hasn’t been agreed upon.–
This is you have not read what the principal owner agreed to when they uploaded to google play because the principal owner to set the TOS stuff how ever google wanted. Its a mistake agent is a subordinate but there are cases where agent can be given massive authority. Yes google terms to developers do give them all the powers they need.
https://reports.exodus-privacy.eu.org/en/reports/com.apkmirror.helper.prod/latest/
Its really interesting when you look at apkmirror program. You notice something people say they use apkmirror to avoid google. Horrible reality here is apkmirror closed source program provides information to google because it contained embedded trackers of google.
–Also note that neither apkpure nor apkmirror are mirroring software that needs to be paid for, only the software that google themselves are distributing for free with no credit card.–
You did not read the terms I linked to do you.
https://play.google.com/about/developer-distribution-agreement.html
–4.5 You may not use Google Play to distribute or make available any Product that has a purpose that facilitates the distribution of software applications and games for use on Android devices outside of Google Play.–
Now this should have you asking questions how can APKMirror be on google play. APKMirror is not under the same terms as general applications uploaded to google play.
The reality is most likely APKMirror is a google fake face. So google is banned from particular markets so they can keep their market share they under table work with particular parties who agree to do what google want like including trackers and other reporting back to google. Of course what this means Alfman as you said you don’t want to have google tracking or to use on devices google does not approve of both you can bet there is going to conditions on APKMirror from google limiting this. Problem a face face you are still being tracked by google because they are not real competition and just something that does not appear to be google to get around legal limitations. Due to being a fake face the terms will normally not be done to protect the end users so that if the day comes that google does not need the fake face any more they have something contracted in place to shut it down.
So lets say google terms did properly support mirror services. There would be a method to download the AAB files right. The fact that google has the right to change the TOS because everyone who has uploaded applications has agreed to that. Google could alter the TOS any time they wanted to make mirror legal. Google also by the terms could provide a interface to allow AAB files to be downloaded.
Google has a lot tighter grip on this market than you think. The reality here you do want with a app store program that is a mirror to be able to see it source code or proper audits so you can see if it a fake or a real competition. Fake competition is just a method for crushing real. Do note APKMirror will not host anything that is not in google play so this does not provide a different market for application developers to use.
oiaohm,
I already read the developer terms and they do not give google the permission to go to court representing copyright owners. If you disagree then quote it specifically.
I did, but once again google’s TOS are irrelevant to parties who have not agreed to the terms. The fact that’s google’s written them doesn’t make them enforceable against parties with no relationship to google. The mirror may get in trouble though for accessing google’s servers against the TOS.
tl;dr: AAB apps can exist outside the Play Store (thanks to the third-party “apkm” format and installer), but usually not in a complete form.
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.apk.editor/
This here is not the name you would look for. But if you can get your mits on aab file the complete thing. Using the APK Explorer & Editor you can directly side-load the aab file. AAB can exist outside the Play Store without the apkm format and installer. Yes outside the Play Store in the complete form. Yes APK Explorer & Editor is a tool where you don’t want the google play version because the google play version is crippled to obey google rules to be uploaded.
Yes be it the developer be it the store be it the end user all 3 parties can use tools to convert a aab into the install-able APK files that users need. That is of course if you can get the aab file from the developer.
The aab installers exist they could be made more user friendly.
Reality open specification aab format should allow closed formats like apkm to die.
Developers have no reason to distribute the aab when they can also distribute an “full” apk (see another person’s post above for how), but whatever, it doesn’t matter. This change is not really targeted at developers but targeted at making it harder for services like APKMirror to “mirror” the PlayStore fully. Which is why I said you won’t be able to usually get an AAB-type app outside the PlayStore in its complete form. Your mirror has to make sure they get every locale (plus whatever other reasons exist for splitting, don’t know) from PlayStore by visiting with different device settings each time.
And no, not every developer of popular apps will play ball with APKMirror and give them the AAB file or a “full” APK, Google themselves being such a developer. This is where the problem is: A few developers will send the AAB file of a “full” APK to APKMirror, for most developers you will usually be unable to get a complete form of the app from APK Mirror.
–And no, not every developer of popular apps will play ball with APKMirror and give them the AAB file or a “full” APK, Google themselves being such a developer.–
Yes this is true but there are catches to it. This also means that since you are mirroring with the developer consent means you are not in the loop to be informed directly from the developer about new versions. Also not directly in the loop to be informed if a new version has a new feature requirement.
–A few developers will send the AAB file of a “full” APK to APKMirror, for most developers you will usually be unable to get a complete form of the app from APK Mirror.–
Already there are issues with services like APK Mirror not being up on updates and other changes made by the developers as well. Yes a few developers don’t want to have a bar to-do with APKMirror as well because in the past they shipped malware infected version of their apps before they got their act together.
Yes I agree this mirror sites will be hit hard by this change but the parties like f-droid that dealing with developers to get source access the AAB change means nothing. People have been asking f-droid to support AAB for the last 4 years because this would make f-droid application installs smaller but this also would screw up f-droid means to work device to device installs. Developers releasing on Amazon store the AAB change means in fact less work because they need to upload a APK univerisal that they have had to be producing anyhow. Google for a long time has had APK file size limits and Amazon does not so you have required to make the AAB two sets of APK files the google change now means you make the AAB and 1 set of APK files.
Parties like Applivery already support developers uploading the AAB to them and they convert it to universal they are already work on server side support with their install application to do device targeted.
One of the hard facts is over time we will see more and more of the android app stores dealing straight with developers move over to AAB and dynamic installs. Google in this case is just the first to move.
Enough European law exists to challenge Google’s Playstore monopoly. If other vendors can provide a suitable equivalent there is enough law to draft an outline argument. There is also a regulatory issue. European law views monopolies different from US law not just the strict definition of monopoly but also the balance of public versus corporation good versus national good.
From what I can tell enforcing copyright rests with the developer not Google. If there is a mechanism in Google’s TOS for Google to enforce copyright where is it? Please also pay attention to Google’s TOS being subject to the European jurisdiction. Click-through aggreements are not viewed favourably over here nor do US coporations T&C’s necessary have any effect in law. Mostly they don’t.
European law is influential around the world. Brexit notwithstanding UK law is very influential. Part of this is because of the common legal base. Part of it is because the UK has a well developed legal systen and smaller countries or countries with less well developed law cut-and-paste statute and legal precedent from UK law. On human rights and broader law the EU is politically very influential to the point where this is openly described as Europe’s superpower.
Not everyone in the US is an idiot with an insulated worldview. Indeed, many look to Europe for inspiration on economic reforms and healthcare and welfare reforms. EU regulators have made themselves felt on competition law to the point where US regulators have started cracking down on too big for their boots corporations, and things like the GDPR had a fairly swift effect. The US can and does innnovate and can and does influence but, please, Americans get off your flag waving high horse. If I can do background research such as hitting the search engines to look up the US constitution and the oh so loudly and so often reported US discussions of politics you can do the same for European affairs. The Europeans are not your personal search engine or pro bono lawyer. We have enough to do developing Europe and our personal lives so take a moment to get up to speed. It is the respectful thing to do.