Misleading apps?

[Ramon Harud]

Am I right to report a number of apps from this developer as misleading?

The apps probably do what they say, but to me it seems that the developer is hoping that people will buy the apps thinking that they are actually WP8 versions of Adobe programs. I doubt many people will buy them. Still, I don't think they should be in the store. Any thoughts? Maybe I should just leave it to Adobe's legal department .

 

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

Yep. I would say you're right to report him. He is after all using trademarks etc. Hopefully Adobe will step in too, let them know about those apps too.

 

[stmav]

I'm not familiar with any of those apps. Just what is misleading? Is it the titles?

 

[crash1989]

Reporting a concern to Microsoft is the way, but even I am not sure how it works. Maybe if many concerns are raised only then Microsoft notices it.
You cannot create apps like adobe creative suite since it is licensed by Adobe. The way to go is to check the license, which I did and it is obviously not Creative Commons or GPL. (we see many apps named facebook removed due to this violation and confusion)
Unless the source company gives you access to the name you cannot use it. I had the same choice to make for xkcd, thank god it was a creative commons (meaning I can use their comics in any way with attribution) and use their name appropriately with permission.

This dev has really weird apps .. haha .. whack a pig, whack a ram both have been rated (I think by himself) with 5 stars. I can only imagine these apps passing through the store test kit and certification so easily coz their minimal functionality must not have failed any tests.

Maybe not all are useless, some might be useful if people want then (not the whack apps)
Those apps which are just there to increase the app count in Windows Phone. I hope they are serving their purpose if any.