The corpos:

"This is outrageous! This is unfair!"

as long as they pay

To who?

To the IP licensors? Nah. Pass. Prefer piracy.

To the creators? Arguably much better.

How to control intermediaries in those cases?

Also payment processor information usually requires KYC crap and puts people in lots of danger of fire from trigger-happy companies (or governments).

I am not married to any particular language's syntax choices but sure if we want to play "make it feel like C++":

std::cpp26::string a : std::cpp26::make_unique( std::cpp26::string{} );

I could try and pass it through a number of iostreams or a to_array conversion to see if I can push a to_string() in somewhere...

String a: new String()

That's the part we have to combat. The idea that being a fan of something means any contribution you do to the fandom has to be treated as essentially unpaid workforce for the franchise. In truth, it's nothing in the fact that you are a fan, but rather the fact that the thing you are a fan of is defended by some of the vilest scume of the earth (lawyers) that is a problem.

Down with copyright law!

In this year of 2025? No. But it still is basically setting oneself for failure from the perspective of Graphene, IMO. Like, the strongest protection in the world (assuming Graphene even is, which is quite a tall order statement) is useless if it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on. Everyone else is, like, living in the real world, and the uniqueness of your scenario is going to go down the drain once your users get presented with a $5 wrench, or even cheaper: a waterboard. Because cops, let alone ICE, are not going to stop to ask you if they can make you more comfortable with your privacy being violated.

I was gonna make a pun, but I'm not in any hurry for it to come out.

That still sounds like choosing to me. Like, if your project requirements are so strict that it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on (all pre-existing things you have no vote on), maybe you should re-evaluate if you actually want your proyect to have a viable audience.

We can only wait and see how other phone manufacturers react to this.

Honestly, it's obvious how they will react. After all, they'd have to pass a certification process if they want to be able to ship Google stuff.

Nothing in any of those three words precludes payment (it's work after all) but it's still notoriously scummy. A donation jar would make far more sense.

or a brand whose phones support their requirements other than google.

Wasn't Graphene's "selling point" for long being that nothing but Pixels can match their reqs? I don't see why any current band would want to make it easier for them, and I also don't see new brand significantly entering the market.

Graphene boiled themselves in their own frogpan.

To be fair, it’s entirely reasonable to be able to expect that paying money for something should get you the thing you paid for.

Fam, it's 2025, the last time what you say was entirely reasonable was, what, 1986?

GOS has lots of time to - even before their very own conception - to see the writing on the wall.