Developer Verification is unreasonable and intrusive

Maybe it's intentional. Looking at the monitization changes now look like they're trying to drive away even more developers. Maybe they want to have much less developers to deal with.

The rules are defined by the EEA, and not Garmin, and impact other companies like Apple and Google.

I was grandfathered in for some period (I uploaded by first app in 2015), but went ahead and went through the process.  They needed my name, address, and I sent in a scan of my Driver's License.  The email address that's seen by users is the same one I have set for "Contact developer" for apps.  Not my personal one - I've always had an email address I just use for CIQ.. When you submit an app, the form says

"This email address will be displayed publicly as a contact for your app. We recommend not using your personal email address."

As far as scanning my DL?  They also scab that in some places when I buy beer.  Not a big deal to me.

If you don't want to do this, it means there are places your apps won't be available.  Again, defined by EEA, not Garmin

What others can see is my "contact developer" email address, and my city and state, though is seems my zip code is also shown on the mobile app.

yes, EU needs to track and spy on all "potential" terrorists and other criminals who dare to forget to pay 1$ tax.

Companies like Garmin who run business in EU need to get all information from related parties (you).

I read up on this a little.

The DSA requires platforms to gather information of "traders", i.e. those offering goods for sale or products/services that are ad-supported. As such, people who make free things on a platform, e.g. watch faces, don't qualify as "traders" and aren't subjects to the DSA provisions. So it looks like Garmin just decided to take an easy path and treat every developer as a trader => the developer verification circus.

flocsy🤠 said:

Looking at the monitization changes now look like they're trying to drive away even more developers. Maybe they want to have much less developers to deal with.

Ever since Connect IQ was launched, the number one complaint I've seen (in places outside of these forums) is that the store was filled with nothing but hobbyist apps when what users really want is slick corporate apps like they can get on iphone and android.

Maybe users are finally getting their wish.

Look at how Garmin released a Forerunner 965 watchface clone (for $5 USD). I wonder if they will crack down on 3rd party devs who have been doing this kind of thing for years. I wouldn't blame em. Things are changing, whether we like it or not.

Has had your own lawyer talk to the EEA and Garmin lawyers? Until then you are just guessing.

You don't want to be verified?  That's your right.  And understand there will be limits as to who can get your app

It looks like you invested more into researching this than Garmin. Since this thing happened in February it's clear that they were rushed to do this, weren't prepared, were late (everything happened after the date, and was announced after the fact) They clearly don't understand the spirit of the EU laws and just do some things to be on the safe side from their point if view, while overreacting it, just as you pointed out.

jim_m_58 said:

Has had your own lawyer talk to the EEA and Garmin lawyers? Until then you are just guessing.

Does this constitute legal advice???

jim_m_58 said:

What others can see is my "contact developer" email address, and my city and state, though is seems my zip code is also shown on the mobile app.

Hey remember when devs (individuals, not businesses) complained about exposing their zip/postal code to the whole world, and someone very condescendlingly told em don't worry bro, Garmin already clarified that they're not gonna expose zip codes for individuals, just listen to what Garmin says, ok?

Pepperidge Farm remembers

That's a way to look at it. When I saw that fr965 WF being sold for $5 I was like: WTF? I paid $600 for the watch, and thanks g-d I'm not using these WF-es, but it looks like some greedy manager decided that they can squeeze some more cash out if the user's by not improving the built-in WF-es, but rather adding the customization only to the paid version. And they ask for a ridiculous $5 for something that 3rd party developers do better for free, and even those that have some paid features ask for much less. Thanks, not for me.

I was also thinking: why they want apps that have 100000 downloads and 499999 downloads to look the same for users. Maybe this is the first step before they'll activate some kind of VIP flag where some apps they prefer will be listed before others?