I have a client who wants a mobile app that requires the user to enter a code to start using the application.
This is basically a promotional campaign for a new product: each product bought gives the user a code that he can put in the app to "advance" to the next level. The "game" consists of six levels. All users that finish the game will participate in a draw to win some prizes.
Is this allowed? I am concerned that the user cannot use the app without buying the product first.
All I could find, here and on Google, refers to selling stuff in app but nothing about this particular case.
Final thought: if this is not the right place to ask this question then I apologize...
11.1
Apps that unlock or enable additional features or functionality with
mechanisms other than the App Store will be rejected
11.16
Apps may enable additional approved features or functionality when
used in combination with specific approved physical products (such as
a toy) as long as the additional features and functionality are either
completely dependent on such hardware (for example an App that is used
to control a telescope) or also available through the App without the
physical products, such as by way of reward for achievement or by use
of IAP.
They just don't want you using any trick to avoid giving Apple their share. If your app is strictly promotional, you may get a pass for 11.1.
11.16 is for things like Skylanders. You can also follow the above clause or also available through the App without the physical products, such as by way of reward for achievement.
They do allow apps for sweepstakes/raffles, as long as you don't buy the raffle in the app, so it might fall into that category:
Contests, sweepstakes, lotteries, and raffles
20.1
Sweepstakes and contests must be sponsored by the developer/company of the App
20.2
Official rules for sweepstakes and contests, must be presented in the App and make it clear that Apple is not a sponsor or involved in
the activity in any manner
20.3
It must be permissible by law for the developer to run a lottery App, and a lottery App must have all of the following characteristics:
consideration, chance, and a prize
20.4
Apps that allow a user to directly purchase a lottery or raffle ticket in the App will be rejected
If you're worried about 11.1, I think one trick here is to make it not usable at all until you enter a code. "Additional" being the key word in "additional features". Then, it's the NetFlix model.
You'll need to provide codes for Apple to test the app.
Related
Many companies rely on white labeled apps to provide their services in a more personal way to their customers.
With a few adjustments we can set a logo and a splash screen and even pre-configure our app to our customer needs which has a great impact in their end user experience. Without this my users would need to use the app skipping a lot of configuration steps that in a generic app wouldn't be possible to skip.
According to apple: "Apps created from a commercialized template or app generation service will be rejected"
Now what can we do to to work around this?
Today I saw 4 apps being rejected and others are waiting for revision and I can anticipate that they will have the same ending.
Here's the revision result:
"4. 3 Design: Spam"
Guideline 4.3 - Design
We noticed that your app provides the same feature set as many of the
other apps you've submitted to the App Store; it simply varies in
content or language, which is considered a form of spam.
The next submission of this app may require a longer review time.
Next Steps
When creating multiple apps where content is the only varying element,
you should offer a single app to deliver differing content to
customers. Alternatively, you may consider creating a web app, which
looks and behaves similar to a native app when the customer adds it to
their Home screen. Refer to the Configuring Web Applications section
of the Safari Web Content Guide for more information.
Review the Design section of the App Store Review Guidelines.
Ensure your app is compliant with all sections of the App Store Review Guidelines and the Terms & Conditions of the Apple Developer
Program.
Once your app is fully compliant, resubmit your app for review.
Submitting apps designed to mislead or harm customers or evade the
review process may result in the termination of your Apple Developer
Program account. Review the Terms & Conditions of the Apple Developer
Program to learn more about our policies regarding termination.
If you believe your app is compliant with the App Store Review
Guidelines, you may submit an appeal. Alternatively, you may provide
additional details about your app by replying directly to this
message.
For app design information, check out the following videos: "Best
Practices for Great iOS UI Design" and "Designing Intuitive User
Experiences," available on the Apple Developer website.
You may also want to review the iOS Human Interface Guidelines for
more information on how to create a great user experience in your app.
Of course we can develop web apps, but apple can't forget that many features are only available in native or hybrid apps.
What should we do?
References:
https://blog.summitsync.com/did-apple-just-crush-white-label-apps-4aee14d00b78
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
The current answer is out of date. Apple revised their guidelines in which the customer must have their own Apple account now, paying the $99 a year. You can then submit a white labeled app under that account. We have been doing that the past three months with no problem. They wouldnt allow this approach before but now they do.
The Apple developer account can not be an individual account, but a company, educational or government type.
If you have a few apps under the same company account you can submit the apps if they can be proven to belong to the current company. We have three apps submitted under the same company account because the apps shared similar names to the company however I wouldn't do this for different companies.
We where having the same issue. We have talked to Apple, which where very kind and understanding.
Our app is one used mainly bij employees of a company and there for Apple suggested to use B2B app distribution via Volume Purchase Program.
If your app is just white labeled app that business can use for their customers then you are out of luck. Apple will not allow any white label apps in the app store any more.
Your option is to make one app which can switch between the different customers.
If you app is like web store this can be difficult, but as per Apple's example of the fan app of a football club switch per club should be in one app.
4.3 is a complete mess. With its active enforcement, Apple has indeed opened a Pandora's box. The biggest problem is that this policy is applied randomly.
My experience suggests that there are very few App Store reviewers who are paying attention to it during the review process. However, if you stumble upon such a reviewer, they will put some flag on your file, and all other reviewers will start to evaluate your apps for spam going forward. It seems like nothing is wrong with this approach, but it can lead to a distorted market.
In our case, we are waiting for years now to see Apple apply the same rules to our competition as it did to us. And the most ironic part is that throughout these years we've been ringing all the possible bells. Emails to Apple representatives, release notes, responses in resolution centre – nothing works.
For more details about our story check my Medium post. I have also written a second part which contains the timeline of my discussions with Apple representatives in which I highlighted competitors who violate 4.3, and Apple did nothing :(
So, the first problem with 4.3 is that it distorts the competition given how selective Apple is at implementing it.
The second problem is that the policy itself is too vague. Take our company, Theory Test Revolution, as an example. We build apps which help people pass their UK Driving Test.
Although we focus on theory tests, the reality is that our apps could be used as a platform to prepare for any multiple-choice test. Imagine if we wanted to release a couple of other MCQs apps. For example, to prepare for PADI diving exam and also to prepare for some pilot's licence exam.
How would 4.3 apply in this case? Would Apple demand that we bundle all of them in one app? How would we call it? :) "Any test you can imagine"? :)
There must be some limits. There are cases when marketing needs justify releasing separate apps even if their foundation is the same, as doing otherwise would simply confuse the users. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't care about fair competition enough. I guess their goal is to reduce the number of apps using this policy, with little regard to how fair this process is.
We are waiting for almost three years now to see our competitors being treated in the same way. And who knows – how much longer do we need to wait?
Had a call with Apple on July 13, 2020, 5 PM (GMT)
I had a conversation with the app review team regarding this matter today and I have concluded the following.
You can have the same codebase, same color, and same design for multiple apps but, a big BUT, is that you need to have some unique functionality in the app which provides a different experience to users.
They clearly said it's a difficult thing to do for developers and should take a longer time.
Only a way to know if some unique feature will work out is to send it for a review. It doesn't matter how long you have spent on developing that new feature. They also said they cannot help and is not permitted to insight anything beforehand.
They cleared that this is not a technical or logical issue to be resolved. For example, they are not going to check if the app icon or color is going to match with other app and decide it a spam or not spam but they care how users will be experiencing this app with the "WOW" factor or the app usefulness.
In short, the app must give another perspective to the user and the app should insist the user to use it because it has something new to give.
According to section 4.2.6 of: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#design
Apps created from a commercialized template or app generation service will be rejected unless they are submitted directly by the provider of the app’s content. These services should not submit apps on behalf of their clients and should offer tools that let their clients create customized, innovative apps that provide unique customer experiences. Another acceptable option for template providers is to create a single binary to host all client content in an aggregated or “picker” model, for example as a restaurant finder app with separate customized entries or pages for each client restaurant, or as an event app with separate entries for each client event.
So, rejoice! your apps can in fact be white labeled! they just must be:
submitted directly by the provider of the app’s content
There is nothing you can do to make Apple approve a copy of your app with only images and labels changed, it was their politics since iOS 3.
The only sure way you can do it is by creating a new developer account for the company you are selling the personalized version.
And B2B is also a viable option that also saves your client the 99$ yearly Apple bill.
I know, that this question is not directly related to any coding but there are several other question on SO about the App Store and its Guidelines. So I assume, this question is OK.
There are other questions about (more or less) the same issue. However they where asked / answered several years ago and the Guidelines have been updated since then. Additionally the circumstances are always a little bit different.
I am well aware, that nobody can give me any kind of guarantee on which interpretation of the Guidelines is correct. Not even Apple could do this, since everything depends on the review staff an its current mood. However It would help a lot get to know your opinion on what is allowed and what is not. Maybe you already encountered the same problem and have some useful recommendations.
The set of facts:
A Shopping List app is offered in iOS App Store. The app offers functions to create and manage any kind of shopping list. These functions do NOT depend on any external purchase. The fee version limits the number of lists. This limit can be unlocked using an In App Purchase.
There is also a WebApp version that offers the same functions (and a little more) as the iOS version. The WebApp has a one month free trial and can then be extended using a subscription model. Subscriptions can only be ordered within the WepApp, not from within the iOS app.
Both version can be used completely independent from each other.
Additionally the apps can be connected (REST API) to sync lists between them.
Obviously there are pages/controls within the iOS App, that allows to setup the connection (enter username, password, etc.).
Obviously the WebApp has to be described in some way to the user within the iOS App.
Once the free trial ended or a subscription has expired, the sync will no longer work. In this case the user needs some kind of hint why sync is no longer available ==> There has to be information about the subscription model of the WebApp and a discription on how to renew the subscription.
The "Problem":
The current App Store Guidelines are pretty vague on wether this kind of business model is allowed or not:
3.1.1 In-App Purchase: If you want to unlock features or functionality within your app, (by way of example: subscriptions,
in-game currencies, game levels, access to premium content, or
unlocking a full version), you must use in-app purchase. Apps may not
include buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct
customers to purchasing mechanisms other than IAP.
This paragraph is not as clear as it my appear on first sight. Unlocking functionality within your app is only allowed by using IAP. Fine, so unlocking a app feature (e.g. creation of more than 2 shopping lists) would be not allowed. But is the sync functionality I described before also covered by this? Of course there has to be functionality within the app to connect to the WebApp, but the complete sync logic is implemented on the server, not in the iOS app.
The functionality the iOS app offers is "Establish a connection to the WebApp". This functionality works independently from wether the WebApp subscription is active or not. Only the functionality of the WebApp changes depending on the subscription status (accept or deny sync requests).
So: Is it allowed to add some text like "There is a WebApp, too. Use this link to got to the WebApp. Follow this link to renew your subscription" to the WebApp or not?
Or is the part "Follow this link to renew your subscription" forbidden?
What makes the whole thing even more confusing is the following paragraph form the Guidelines:
3.1.5 Physical Goods and Services Outside of the App: If your app enables people to purchase goods or services that will be consumed
outside of the app, you must use purchase methods other than IAP to
collect those payments, such as Apple Pay or traditional credit card
entry. Apps may facilitate transmission of approved virtual currencies
(e.g. Bitcoin, DogeCoin) provided that they do so in compliance with
all state and federal laws for the territories in which the app
functions.
Does this read as "Physical Goods and physical Services" (e.g. postal delivery in contrast to digital Services) or this include all Services?
So, is the "WebApp Sync Service" covered by this paragraph and thus the usage of external payments not only allowed but necessary?
Of course I could ask these question directly to Apple. But I would never get an answer. Even if I would, this would still be no guarantee, that the review stuff shares the same interpretation of the rules. So your experience and opinion will be the best "guarantee" I will ever get.
Thank you very much!
Recently, I finished developing an app in which users unlock resources using codes. These codes are free but users need an authorization from a contact to get them.
I had uploaded the app in iTunes-connect but now Apple said I must remove this feature from my app because it goes against 3.1.1 guidelines (In-app-purchase).
Reading this guideline, I found that:
Apps may not include buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms other than IAP.
but, as I said (and I told it to Apple), I don't use any kind of purchase in my app nor out of it.
Is there anything I can do, as this feature is 100% of my app?
Edit:
I found this in the guidelines (this is my case, if we asume "purchased=free"):
3.1.3 Content-based “Reader” Apps: Apps may allow a user to access previously purchased content or subscriptions (specifically: magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, video, access to professional databases, VoIP, cloud storage, and approved services such as educational apps that manage student grades and schedules), provided the app does not direct users to a purchasing mechanism other than IAP.
so, can I use this to pass the review?
3.1.4 Content Codes: Apps may not use their own mechanisms to unlock content or functionality, such as license keys, augmented reality markers, QR codes, etc. In limited circumstances, such as when features are dependent upon specific hardware to function, the app may unlock that functionality without using in-app purchase (e.g. an astronomy app that adds features when synced with a telescope). App features that work in combination with an approved physical product (such as a toy) on an optional basis may unlock functionality without using IAP, provided that an IAP option is available as well. You may not, however, require users to purchase unrelated products or engage in advertising or marketing activities to unlock app functionality.
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
I assume that the resource in question is something used by your app. If so, you probably have to use another approach to unlock resources other than using codes. As the guideline said, anything used by the app must be brought within the app (IAP). Codes can come from anywhere such as your app, your website and social network. The latter two are obviously not in your app.
But after all, if you let the user to unlock some part of your app, you have to use IAP, otherwise apple would reject it.
We have a print magazine and we're going to release an app with subscription model, sort of kiosk app but with extended functionality.
Well, what we want is to solve the following cases:
Case 1 (complex)
User buys a print issue and discovers a promo code in it. This code should allow user to download free digital copy of this issue from our app.
User launches the app, opens a dialog box where he can enter the promo code.
Voila! User gets his free digital copy of purchased print issue.
Digital issue always remains in his list of purchased issues and is a valid purchased issue with all App Store options available for them (restore, etc.)
Case 2 (simple)
User does not have a print issue. He launches the app and buys the same digital issue using IAP.
So, both issues are the same (i.e. "blablabla magazine", November, 2014) but 1st was downloaded using a promo code, and 2nd was purchased with IAP, and they both should have the same properties and "weight" for App Store.
Problem is I don't know if this model will be approved by Apple. Or, if they do, how do I develop this? AFAIK, list of purchased and non-purchased items is provided by App Store and there's no way to intervene this process.
I didn't find any samples of using 3d party promo codes in iOS apps. Can anyone provide a solution for this, please?
Thanks
To keep a record of the promo code usage, I think the simpliest way to do it is to require an account. Once the user is logged with his account, you can tell a server that the promo code have been used with that account. If the user delete/reinstall your app, you will be able to restore all his promo codes from his account.
For your issue with IAP and promo codes, here is the App Store Review Guidelines
See the 11.16 section:
Apps may enable additional approved features or functionality when
used in combination with specific approved physical products (such as
a toy) as long as the additional features and functionality are either
completely dependent on such hardware (for example an App that is used
to control a telescope) or also available through the App without the
physical products, such as by way of reward for achievement or by use
of IAP
So basically, what you want to do shouldn't be rejected.
But by experience when you do something that borderline with Apple's money (possibility to "undercut" IAP), you should expect a review failure, whatever the guidelines review says.
Keep in mind that the guidelines can be interpreted in your advantage, or in you disadvantage.
for a client, I have been developing an app which has been tailored to make their employees every day lives easier. Think of it as a calendar designed to fit the needs of their special business.
Now it turns out that other companies in the business are interested in the very same solution too. My client suggested we could sell the app on the appstore.
Since the app is equally useful for companies with hundreds of employees as it is for a team of five, I wonder what would be the best way to sell it.
It is my understanding that a company, once they purchased one copy of the app, may install it on as many devices as they want, as long as they use the devices with the same iTunes account. This is especially true if the company would equip their employees with new devices for the purpose, like my client did. Right?
This is obviously not what I want, I'd rather like to charge a small price per device. Usually, this would cry for a volume license, which is not part of the appstore concept, except for educational institutions.
Now I am looking for a convenient way to achieve something with the same effect.
I was thinking about checking the UDID of the device against a whitelist on my server to allow each purchased license to run on just one device, while allowing migration of course.
To enable a company to purchase a "volume license", I would offer packs of additional licenses via In-App-Purchases, as well as individual licenses. The app itself would be free while featuring only demo capabilities, full functionality would be available after assigning the device to one of the purchased licenses. Means to manage licenses would be included within the app.
What do you guys think? Any technical reasons why this concept could fail?
Do you know of examples that actually implement something similar?
Any other ideas how to sell apps in volume? Maybe there are even some examples on how to implement something like this?
Do you think apple would approve this kind of use of in-app-purchases? (I know this last question is not of a kind that can be answered here without uncertainty, but let me hear what your gut feeling tells you..)
This question has been flagged as being off-topic twice, so I think I should back up the fact that I am mainly interested in a technical solution (and emphasized the important sub-questions accordingly). Of course I am interested in whether apple allows the proposed use of their appstore, however before I contemplate that further I need to know if there are technical caveats to my approach. I would love to offer code snippets to support the technical nature of my inquiry, however I'm just planning things so there is no code yet...
While the core question is still business-related here, and thus off topic, I'll bite.
The standard App Store end user license agreement has this wording:
a. Scope of License: This license
granted to You for the Licensed
Application by Application Provider is
limited to a non-transferable license
to use the Licensed Application on any
iPhone or iPod touch that You own or
control and as permitted by the Usage
Rules set forth in Section 9.b. of the
App Store Terms and Conditions (the
“Usage Rules”). This license does not
allow You to use the Licensed
Application on any iPod touch or
iPhone that You do not own or control,
and You may not distribute or make the
Licensed Application available over a
network where it could be used by
multiple devices at the same time. You
may not rent, lease, lend, sell,
redistribute or sublicense the
Licensed Application.
Therefore, if you consult the "App Store Product Usage Rules" section of the iTunes Store Terms and Conditions, you see this wording:
(i) You may download and sync an App
Store Product for personal,
noncommercial use on any iOS Device
you own or control.
(ii) If you are a commercial
enterprise or educational institution,
you may download and sync an App Store
Product for use by either (a) a single
individual on one or more iOS Devices
you own or control or (b) multiple
individuals, on a single shared iOS
Device you own or control. For
example, a single employee may use the
Product on both the employee's iPhone
and iPad, or multiple students may
serially use the Product on a single
iPad located at a resource center or
library.
(iii) You shall be able to store App
Store Products from up to five
different Accounts at a time on
compatible iOS Devices.
(iv) You shall be able to manually
sync App Store Products from at least
one iTunes-authorized device to iOS
Devices that have manual sync mode,
provided that the App Store Product is
associated with an Account on the
primary iTunes-authorized device,
where the primary iTunes-authorized
device is the one that was first
synced with the iOS Device or the one
that you subsequently designate as
primary using the iTunes application.
The rules are quite explicit about commercial enterprises not being allowed to just purchase one copy and install it on all devices at that company.
It is for this reason that Apple offers volume discounts for applications purchased in bulk (where the developer has checked the box in iTunes Connect allowing for this). I can't find the business equivalent, but here's Apple's page on the educational bulk discount program.
While I could see how you could use in-app purchase to activate functionality in an application and make sure that it was properly licensed, I've heard complaints about the practical difficulties of deploying applications using this in educational and business settings. Many applications use this approach for free Lite versions that upsell into the full paid application, so Apple has no problem with this.
One thing I do recommend is that you not abuse the ad hoc distribution system to do any licensing workarounds. The last time some geniuses did this caused Apple to clamp down on everyone's ad hoc licenses and make our lives more difficult.
The correct answer here is for the companies you sell to to purchase an Enterprise program from Apple, then for you to license the application to them. You can use over-the-air distribution to get the application onto their devices, and charge them a per-user or per-device fee.
Let anyone download the app for free in the app store, but charge for licenses/subscriptions outside of the app store. You can then require them to register each device they want to use and you charge accordingly.
Can I bypass Apple's in app purchase mechanism by outside billing?
Thq question was asked long before, but still I feel that the answer might help someone having the issue. All you need is Apple's Volume Purchase Program. It provides the option for custom B2B apps developed by third-party developers, that too can be seen and downloaded only by the authorized client. Cool, isnt it? :-)
For clarifications, see the FAQ
The client can do a bulk purchase, on which they will receive a bunch of URLs. By opening the URL in iOS device is enough to install the app. Of course, you need a Apple Developer account for download and install, I think.