> Because imho that alone is a problem.

That is already required to list an app on the Play Store. What app verification means is that if you've done that, you don't have to distribute through the play store. People can install your app (or app store) from your website and not get a scary warning about whether to allow installs for apps downloaded from your browser, as required by the judge's ruling. Nothing else changes. People who complain to their legislators about app verification will get laughed at. I already explained what they should complain about instead.

▲

NewJazz a day ago | parent [-]

Why do you think it is your place to tell people where to prioritize their personal lobbying efforts?

Btw very few of the apps on my phone are from the play store, so not sure what you're on about.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent [-]

> Why do you think it is your place to tell people where to prioritize their personal lobbying efforts?

If you lobby for something that is obviously nonsensical, you are wasting your time. I am educating people in order to prevent them from wasting their time and hopefully accomplish something useful instead.

> Btw very few of the apps on my phone are from the play store, so not sure what you're on about.

If you use a Google Android build, your life gets strictly easier because of app verification. That's what I'm on about.

▲

NewJazz a day ago | parent [-]

I am educating people

You didn't even provide a reason why it is "obviously nonsensical".

	▲	lern_too_spel 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		See my original comment. To repeat, app verification makes it strictly easier to install apps as required by the judge's ruling. Asking your legislator to stop app verification will get you laughed at. My original comment also explains what you should complain about instead to not get laughed at and to fix something that actually needs fixing.