Spyware is typically unknown to the user, hence the word "spy". In this case, the developer is 100% transparent and users are paying for these features.
Tracking and accountability are accurate descriptions here.
Tracking and accountability are accurate descriptions here.
You ignore this possibility, but let's not pretend: The app can be installed by a suspicious family member who knows the password (as many family members do, in the real off-HN world), and then hidden from the user of the device.
This is absolutely the definition of spyware, even if the author either A) sincerely believes there is a legitimate purpose here, or B) contrived a clever cover story for it.
I don't know which is true, A or B, but it's quite remarkable that people would supposedly sign their real names to reviews of such an app.
Just because something can be used maliciously doesn't make it malicious. When people take that idea to the next level, we get abuse like Microsoft shutting down no-ip.
This deliberately violated that policy, and promoted the feature (disabling the notification) that violates the policy.
It clearly was spyware as defined by the Google policy.
Incidentally, pretty much every page of the Ever Accountable website also contains violations of the Android Brand Guidelines [1] with regard to the use of the Android and Google Play trademarks.
[1] http://developer.android.com/distribute/tools/promote/brand....