is this Android build unauthorised?

[blue_dragon]

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.palemoon.browsermoon_browsersecu&hl=ko

i recently found this existing, but having ads and collecting various data smells fishy but it uses the official name and (old) logo. is this an approved build or is it stolen branding?

i know the official build was discontinued since 2016 & ive never seen anyone making an unofficial Pale Moon build since

[Night Wing]

Does not look authorized to me. But Moonchild will have the definitive answer when he sees this topic.

[andyprough]

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.palemoon.browsermoon_browsersecu&hl=ko

i recently found this existing, but having ads and collecting various data smells fishy but it uses the official name and (old) logo. is this an approved build or is it stolen branding?

Probably isn't even Pale Moon at all but instead the Android webview browser with stolen branding from Pale Moon.

[Moonchild]

No the build is NOT authorized, and the publisher is using deceptive practices to market an unrelated, ad-monetized application under our project's name and very similar graphics, impersonating us.
I filed a legal complaint to Google about this, but I'm not sure if they take action on trademark claims that aren't regionally registered and using common trademark law... so maybe it needs to be reported through other means as well. I dunno.

[andyprough]

I filed a legal complaint to Google about this, but I'm not sure if they take action on trademark claims that aren't regionally registered and using common trademark law... so maybe it needs to be reported through other means as well. I dunno.

I believe you could file a DMCA takedown notice against Google if you haven't already as part of your complaint. I've helped file those in the past to very good effect when some websites were using my friend's copyrighted works without authorization.

[athenian200]

Yeah, this is definitely illegal and would cause reputational damage or harm.

I'm usually not in favor of confrontation, but I'd say this is the kind of thing where it's worth doing everything possible to get this delisted. This is about as simple as it gets in terms of a bad actor doing something clearly against our interests.

[Moonchild]

I believe you could file a DMCA takedown notice against Google if you haven't already as part of your complaint.

I don't think that's the correct path. They aren't verbatim copying anything we do. It's impersonation and deceptive practices, and it's trademark infringement, but it's not copyright infringement, so the DMCA would not apply.

[blue_dragon]

the publisher of that scam browser seems to have uploaded various browsers with just colors/skin changed

[andyprough]

I don't think that's the correct path. They aren't verbatim copying anything we do. It's impersonation and deceptive practices, and it's trademark infringement, but it's not copyright infringement, so the DMCA would not apply.

You are right, did you file this Google trademark infringement form - https://reportcontent.google.com/forms/ ... 71468&rd=1

This is the form that Google themselves recommend for this situation.

[Moonchild]

I used the trademark infringement form that the Google support rep pointed me to when I asked them.

[UCyborg]

Off-topic:
Browsers using WebView can be very small. Take a look at Via. But it's a rarity. And even this one grew somewhat over time with added features.

This "Pale Moon" thing has libflutter.so inside.

[Gemmaugr]

Off-topic:

This "Pale Moon" thing has libflutter.so inside.

Flutter, WebView, CEF, Electron, and even QTWebEngine are all google chromium browsers. Well, it is a google android app we're talking about..

[UCyborg]

You could probably do proper Pale Moon for Android if there was an interest.

There used to be Android version, but it's been a long time.

I wonder if APK is still around somewhere. Kinda curious to try it, though if I'm not mistaken, it predates even Firefox 52, so it might be good only for retro web.

Although with way things are going, regular version is getting there too...

[moonbat]

Kinda curious to try it

Don't bother unless you're going to try it on an Android version from around that era (itself highly unadvisable) because it is definitely deprecated. It was shuttered due to lack of resources for maintaining separate codebases and AFAIK nobody offered to take over.

[blue_dragon]

Kinda curious to try it

Don't bother unless you're going to try it on an Android version from around that era (itself highly unadvisable) because it is definitely deprecated. It was shuttered due to lack of resources for maintaining separate codebases and AFAIK nobody offered to take over.

i wish i would like to make an unofficial but 'real' Pale Moon fork under New Moon name on the current codebase with Android 4.4 support because i want a modern & reliable browser on old mobile devices which still works just fine, but i have very few app development experience because i normally only use PCs & use phones mostly for calling and messaging only

[moonbat]

Android 4.4 support

From Wikipedia:

Android KitKat is the codename for the eleventh version of the Android mobile operating system, representing release version 4.4. Unveiled on September 3, 2013, KitKat focused primarily on optimizing the operating system (running on as little as 512 MB of RAM; Project Svelte) for improved performance on entry-level devices with limited resources. It is the last version of Android to use the "Holo" interface. On July 24, 2023, Google announced that Google Play Services would no longer support KitKat in August of that year.[4][5][6] The first phone with Android KitKat was the Nexus 5.

As of March 2026, 0.06% of Android devices run KitKat.[7]

3 years since Google play services won't run on it; at this point even 3rd party FOSS apps are unlikely to run it even if you 100% moved to F-Droid. And as for the usable battery life of a 13 year old, likely sealed device, well..
So what's the motivation? I can still understand Windows XP users running New Moon or whatever (there is even a Chromium fork that runs on it) but Android is the worst at backwards compatibility. The modern mobile web would itself be a resource hog for a 2013 era Android even if it could run.

[blue_dragon]

as for the usable battery life of a 13 year old

it surprisingly lasts very long, maybe because i tweaked some build.prop after rooting

So what's the motivation?

i have a tablet for handwriting, and it's old but i like its design and i also like the UI inside it. i dont like modern Android for various reasons not limited to its UI but because of some other various things too. and including the battery life it just works fine in a usable performance but not being able to use the internet properly is kinda not good

[moonbat]

Amazing, is it a popular brand?

[blue_dragon]

Amazing, is it a popular brand?

it's called Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 i like the hardware keys on the right when rotated horizontally & i like its TouchWiz user interface

[andyprough]

i have a tablet for handwriting, and it's old but i like its design and i also like the UI inside it. i dont like modern Android for various reasons not limited to its UI but because of some other various things too. and including the battery life it just works fine in a usable performance but not being able to use the internet properly is kinda not good

Seems fair enough. Buy yourself a Claude AI Pro subscription and prompt it to go to town on creating an Android 4.4 compatible build of Pale Moon! And share your build with us so we can poke around at it! Could be fun.