<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#333333">
<br>
<br>
On Tuesday 05 July 2011 09:47 PM, McTim wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxi+nzmC7n1YNawafujH1EFsaq_hyo+ZkVX1xVbUfmvd+g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<div>If anyone is blackmailing anyone here it is the the
Taiwanese blackmailing Google? Google is the one to pay the
fine. If we were really serious about "intermediate
liability" we would say that Google supplies the marketplace
ONLY and that app developers are the ones who must figure out
how to abide by local laws, no?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
From the news item<br>
<h3>“Android Market already provides a 15-minute refund window for
all paid apps — which reflects the fact that apps are delivered
over-the-air instantly and most users who request a refund [could]
do so within minutes of their purchase,” the company said in the
statement.</h3>
It should be obvious that whoever controls the market and provides a
15 minute refund window must also be the one considered responsible
for *not* providing a 7 day window as per the requirements of the
local law. When Google is accepting that it is the responsible party
I am not sure, McTim, why do you have to play being more loyal than
the king. <br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxi+nzmC7n1YNawafujH1EFsaq_hyo+ZkVX1xVbUfmvd+g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
-- <br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
McTim<br>
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is.
A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>