Re:Aptoide wins court battle against Google in landmark case
by ce4 on Wednesday October 24, 2018 @04:49AM
(#18290727)
And now where is exactly the difference to F-Droid?
The FOSS store f-droid also allows to add custom apt-like repositories, which for example CopperheadOS used to add a non-sanctioned patched version of the "signal" app. Moxie doesnt want forks of signal that are also using signal's servers. CopperheadOS did it anyway because signal is not compatible without Google Apps installed (removing google cloud messaging because CopperHeadOS doesnt include Google play services).
Re:Aptoide wins court battle against Google in landmark case
by wedlled on Wednesday October 24, 2018 @05:50AM
(#18290975)
As per their 'About page' no difference:
"The original F-Droid client app was based on the Aptoide app developed by Roberto Jacinto."
F-Droid is a fork of the original Aptoide project, it seems.
Re:Aptoide wins court battle against Google in landmark case
by ptx on Wednesday October 24, 2018 @07:04AM
(#18291300)
It was forked in 2010, so the the differences after 8 years of separate development are probably quite significant. (But both clients let you add third-party repositories, so in that regard there is no difference.)
I suppose you could send them an Electronic Commerce Directive take-down notice. Probably doesn't hurt them as such, but should get your app removed.
EDIT: The store seems to be somewhat decentralized, with stores being similar to APT repositories. So it may be difficult to target Aptoide directly unless there's a centralized list of stores, in which case I imagine you can get the user's store struck from it. Otherwise you may need to contact the store's hosting provider - which indeed could be a bit of a cat and mouse game.