There's nothing more effective than cutting off the revenue streams for an ad network in order to get them to change their policy :).
Seriously though, it is a developers responsibility to make sure their entire app behaves appropriately, and that includes not popping up inappropriate ads, after all the developer made the choice to include that ad library. Al. -- Al Sutton - Funky Android Ltd. (www.funkyandroid.com) T: @alsutton G+: http://goo.gl/ymi9b The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries. On 1 Aug 2012, at 18:38, John Coryat <[email protected]> wrote: > So and new policy has been released. The tone is decidedly aggressive. I feel > like a child being scolded by the "bad" teacher. > > Mostly, it seems reasonable and understandable. I'm concerned about the topic > of advertising. It seems that the policy puts the onus on the developer for > the ads and behavior of the various ad networks. It would seem more efficient > to go directly after those networks and their SDK's instead of punishing the > developer who won't have much data on the types of ads nor the hidden > functions of a malicious SDK. > > On the positive side, will this be the end of Airpush? One could only hope. > > -John Coryat > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Android Discuss" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/android-discuss/-/wznp3pWdrscJ. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
