Astrology suite — legal documents
One controller, one set of documents, cited by all three astrology apps: Pocketstone, Vaara and Sunsign Daily. They were drafted under the working titles Crystal & Energy, Indian (Vedic) Horoscope and European (Western) Horoscope, which is how the source documents still refer to them.
Privacy Policy
What the three apps collect, why, who processes it, and how long it is kept. Written against what the code does, not what a plan intended. Carries four unresolved counsel questions.
Terms of Service
Free tier, 7-day trial, one-tap cancellation, refunds, and the German consumer-law duties that attach. Flags one clause (the EU ODR link) as probably out of date.
Impressum
§ 5 DDG and § 18 Abs. 2 MStV provider identification. Every registration value is a marked placeholder — and it lists three things wrong with the Impressum already live on this site.
Article 13 Notice
The information given at the point of collection — age gate, birth-data screen, quiz consent card. A separate obligation from the privacy policy, and the one most often missed.
Data Deletion Policy
What deletion removes, what is retained and why, how long it takes — and the anonymous-session gap, where there is nobody to authenticate a rights request from.
Support Policy
Named inbox, response-time targets, and the routes for refunds, trial disputes and data-rights requests. The inbox it names does not exist yet.
Why these are published as drafts rather than held back
A store submission asks for a public privacy-policy URL and a public data-deletion route before it will accept the app, and Google Play's review reads both. That creates pressure to publish something that looks finished. These documents resist it: each one states what it does not know, and the questions it cannot answer are left visible instead of being written around.
The alternative — publishing polished text with invented registration numbers, invented retention periods and a support address nobody reads — would produce pages that look authoritative and are false in specifics a regulator, a competitor or a store reviewer can check. An unreviewed privacy policy presented as the operative one is a real exposure. A clearly-labelled draft is not.
What has to happen before any of this is in force
- Counsel review of all six, with the four carried-forward questions answered rather than deferred.
- A named, monitored support inbox. Five of the six documents end with a placeholder pointing at it. They close together or not at all.
- Registration values from the Handelsregister extract — and the same source used to correct the Impressum already live on this site, which the draft identifies three problems with.
- A provisioned backend. Retention and deletion timelines are promises about a system, and no database project exists yet.
- Removal of these banners, deliberately, document by document — never as a batch.
Other legal pages on this site
These are in force and are unaffected by anything above: the Impressum, the website privacy notice, the Laser Sharp privacy policy, and contact details.