Hello!
As some of you might be aware, copyright law and precendence in the EU show a bit of a difference in the FOSS license landscape compared to for example the US. Particularly, I am talking about linking in the context of derivative work. I tried to do some research here, but I didn't manage to find any conclusive articles or discussions on the matter.
As both dynamic and static linking in the EU is generally considered as a question of interoperability rather than derivative work, linking-wise virality of licenses like GPL are basically void over here. The EUPL license (my license of choice) as per my understanding even explicitly claims that "derivative work" is a definition out of scope of the license text due to this. I today read about additional possible AGPL violations uncovered from BambuLab regarding not opensourcing a .so library that the software uses. This made me wonder: what stops someone from taking a copyleft project in the EU, and adding all their heavy modifications basically as callouts to a proprietary dynamic library? Do I only have to publish the modified source full of single line callouts, without the library source?
It might be not this simple in case of notification providers, the notifications are somehow sent in the name of the app I guess. And don't forget: in general, this principle is true for most of your apps that send notifications. I.e. if you are getting Signal or Facebook notifications, it uses the same principle.
Btw, google is not the only notification service for android. Check up on Unified Push, there are many alternatives to do this, and there are some apps that support these alternatives in their non-play-store builds.