The App Store rule reads more like the platform itself needs the ability to block users, not the users on the platform. Which X has but they barely use it. I wonder when the german court system will punish X because they have ceased to follow the NetzDG (oversimplified: Ban users who violate the law) and there is no one on the platform to enforce NetzDG.
It’s very vaguely worded. Maybe that’s on purpose. It seems like it might satisfy the requirement if the app / service can block a user, but users don’t have an option. But, if the context is that Apple has refused to allow the store to carry any app that didn’t allow its users to block other users, then the precedent is clear.
The Google one is also unclear. It talks about an in-app system for blocking UGC and users. That seems like it’s talking about preventing UGC from leaving the device, which makes it seem like the “blocking users” part might be more like being able to ban a user from using the app / service.
The App Store rule reads more like the platform itself needs the ability to block users, not the users on the platform. Which X has but they barely use it. I wonder when the german court system will punish X because they have ceased to follow the NetzDG (oversimplified: Ban users who violate the law) and there is no one on the platform to enforce NetzDG.
The Google Play Store rule seems like it’s about users though…
It’s very vaguely worded. Maybe that’s on purpose. It seems like it might satisfy the requirement if the app / service can block a user, but users don’t have an option. But, if the context is that Apple has refused to allow the store to carry any app that didn’t allow its users to block other users, then the precedent is clear.
The Google one is also unclear. It talks about an in-app system for blocking UGC and users. That seems like it’s talking about preventing UGC from leaving the device, which makes it seem like the “blocking users” part might be more like being able to ban a user from using the app / service.