If you are a business user or an organization, then to the extent that applicable law allows it: I know I`m late, but I have to say that Matt played pretty well in this article. He touched on the subject and explained the situation in depth. At the same time, many people posted in these comments have already taken their opinion when it comes to Google. To say what Matt says, they are firmly convinced that Google has a little grudge against them and that it wants to secretly steal their data, save their location and hit puppies. Dave (Original), I know this is something that many users have enjoyed. IE8 independently offers a similar browser mode, so it is obviously a popular request. Matt, Google has other problems open than the TOS-Gaffe (which would never pass the exam of the law if push comes to push). The first two are: 3.6 New facilities. Users are allowed to reinstall unlimited application distributed on the Web Store, provided that if you remove a product from the Web Store in accordance with the terms (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv) of Section 7.1, these products are removed from all parts of the Web Store and users no longer have the right or ability to reinstall the affected products. If you calculate a fee for your product without using the payment processor, you are solely responsible for keeping records of users who have already paid for your products, and Google is not responsible for determining whether users who attempt to reinstall your products have previously paid for such products. To calculate a fee for your products that use the Web Store`s payment services, you must have a valid payment account as part of a separate agreement with a liquidator. If you already have a payment account with a liquidator before you sign up for the Web Store, the terms and conditions of this agreement will be replaced by your payment account terms and conditions for products sold through the Web Store. It will take more than the excision of paragraph 11 to deal with the problems related to the conditions of use.