is this okay to implement payment system on ios apps? I would like to make an app that can browse products on my e-commerce website then let people buy products on my app. I'm asking this question because i've heard it is violating apple's policy.
It apparently depends on the what is being sold. The definitive answer can only be gotten from your lawyer's reading of the Apple agreement, of course, but I can speak from a little experience.
Apple themselves say that: if a product is sold in-app, it must use Apple's IAP (which gives Apple their 30% cut), and not be offered for less through other channels. However, there is an extensive list of things that are not eligible for purchase with IAP at all. Chief among these are: physical products; and services performed outside the application.
I have worked on two apps, both free, that are clients for fee-based web services (continuing education classes in one case, an employee scheduling service in the other). Neither used IAP, just linked to a purchasing web page. Both were accepted by Apple without comment. It seems that since the products were (arguably) not eligible for IAP, using an alternative purchase method was permitted. I'm sure it helps that Apple itself does not compete with either of these services.
Bear in mind Apple has also rejected apps that are just "wrappers" for web sites and offer no real app functionality; or for any of a long list of sillier reasons. (e.g.: I had one app rejected for using the word "Sample" in the name; but a change to "Free", with identical functionality, made it OK.) So consult a lawyer before taking any risk predicated on the developer agreement.
[edited to add:]
For dev program members, the relevant legalese is to be found here (login required), "iOS Developer Program License Agreement", attachment 2 (about 2/3 through the document.) A few relevant phrases from the Jun 12 2012 version, emphases mine:
You may not use the In-App Purchase API to offer goods or services to be used outside of Your Application.
You may not enable end-users to purchase Currency of any kind through the In-App Purchase API, including but not limited to any Currency for exchange, gifting, redemption,
transfer, trading or use in purchasing or obtaining anything within or outside of Your Application.
Rentals of content, services or functionality through the In-App Purchase API are not allowed
You may not use the In-App Purchase API to send any software updates to Your Application or otherwise add any additional executable code to Your Application. (not that this is even physically possible. --R.)
[except] as permitted under Section 3.3.23 (In-App Purchase API), an Application may not provide, unlock or enable additional features or functionality through distribution mechanisms other than the App Store or VPP/B2B Program Site.
By my reading, this means that anything besides unlocking functionality within an app is fair game for an alternative purchase mechanism, and forbidden categories of items require such. But ask a real lawyer.
[edited to add, much later:]
After a fun update fiasco with one of the above mentioned apps, these anecdotes are not entirely true anymore. Apple booted one of them because of a tenuous link to a signup web page for some paid services. So be careful, and be prepared for Apple to yank things arbitrarily if you wander anywhere close to the line.
You must use In-App Purchase via StoreKit or your app will be rejected. Implementing your own payment system violates a couple of the review guidelines, most directly:
Apps utilizing a system other than the
In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase
content, functionality, or services in
an app will be rejected
This of course only applies to content, functionality, or services within the app, as long a the purchase is only relevant to things outside of the app they have no stake in the purchase.
Pretty sure Apple won't allow that, especially if the App is free. They are putting up the money to distribute your app, provide the development tools, etc, so they'd like to take their cut off everything you make as a result of that.
Here is App Store Review Guidelines.
Read 3.1.1.
Related
I'm changing one of my Mac apps from a paid model to a subscription model, by using auto-renewable subscriptions (IAP).
However, as the app is B2B, some users need to reimburse costs via their employer. While this is acceptable with payments only occurring once, with recurring payments this is simply annoying and sometimes even impossible.
Apple has a B2B Volume Purchase Program that supports companies to purchase a number of licenses and distribute this to their employees. However, IAPs (including auto-renewable subscriptions) are not supported.
I see this as a big limitation (especially knowing they take a 30% cut of sales) and the only way to solve this is to offer an additional mechanism to offer subscriptions next to IAPs, specifically for business needs.
My biggest concern is whether my app would be rejected because of this. I have been going through the (updated) guidelines and found some related items:
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 will be the case, but not exclusively because of the above mentioned limitation. I won't include a "Buy" link to the alternative method. However, I will include a text indicating that if a company wants to purchase multiple license for its employees, it can do this via our website (using a payment processor such as Stripe). Via this website codes will be made available that can be entered in the app to activate the license.
Apps distributed via the Mac App Store may host plug-ins or extensions that are enabled with mechanisms other than the App Store.
The app is distributed via the Mac App Store and it seems that they are more flexible here. However, it's a vague guideline and I'm not even sure if it's related to the problem I'm facing. What does it mean?
Hoping to read your opinions and experiences here. Thanks.
I have been emailing Apple about this but they have never replied. Also asked this question on the Apple Developer Forums but didn't got any help there too.
Decided to simply implement it and submit it to the App Store. They have accepted it without asking questions so apparently it is allowed. Important to mention is that I have not included the payment mechanism in the app. It asks for a license code that will be validated using my own service. This service also handles the payment via a web page.
Hope it helps others.
We currently have an app in the itunnes Appstore which features in-app-purchase for Apple users as well as login for paying users through our own system. Now this app has existed for a while so apparently Apple is OK with it. Maybe because those who have paid through our system are public schools and municipalities... I frankly don't know since their guidelines state:
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.
And this worries me because:
If you attempt to cheat the system (for example, by trying to trick the review process, steal user data, copy another developer's work, or manipulate ratings) your apps will be removed from the store and you will be expelled from the Developer Program.
Now recently we updated the app with a new feature which was unavailable for the in-app-purchase customers but enabled for our personal customers*. Again Apple is fine with it but I worry that is only because they don't know... I don't dare ask Apple directly as I might end up getting our app pulled etc. so that is why I ask my question here:
If Apple are fine with the old setup that had all features available for in-app-purchase customers could this new added feature which only works for our customers and not Apple in-app-purchase users be a major issue? How flexible is Apple on this area in everyone else experience?
'* (This is a dumb setup I know, but the problem is our services is locked to only be used for our personal customers and this new feature requires our services.)
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!
For these 2 rules:
11.1 Apps that unlock or enable additional features or functionality with mechanisms other than the App Store will be rejected
11.2 Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected.
Is the applicability of these rules reduced/removed if the enablement/disablement of the features/functionality (11.1) or the content purchase (11.2) does not actually occur within the app on the device.
For example, you write an app that requires free registration but if you visit a website outside of the app (and not linked to from the app) to "upgrade" your registration (by paying money) the app gains some more functionality or content next time you use it.
Thoughts?
My thoughts: you'd be violating the guidelines, but your app could get approved, of course. The payment does indeed not occur inside the app, but the application "utilizes" such a system (which is very broad) thus is in violation.
This reminds me of the Newsstand/subscriptions discussions going on before. Basically, if you offer something outside an app, you have to make the same (or better) offer inside the app (via IAP subscriptions). Perhaps this is applicable in your case, too. Although, according to 11.3, you may not offer services outside your app if purchased via IAP (so you may not unlock features on e.g. a website too.)
You'd also try and offer a free app. Once users (somewhere, somehow) upgrade their account, they can access the members only app, a new, separate app. But approval is still questionable, which brings me to my last part:
"We will reject Apps for any content or behavior that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, "I'll know it when I see it". And we think that you will also know it when you cross it."
— https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
In short: submit, pray and find out.
What you describe sounds similar to the situation that resulted in apps that used Dropbox being rejected (Link). Apple determined that since the apps that used Dropbox functionality required the user to visit the Dropbox site to sign up those apps were in violation of those rules and were thus rejected.
Apple says,
11.2 Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected.
For example my IOS app will be used to make consultations with a web service and will be given free to users by my customer, since the web service is ours and flexible, it can offer different and hunderds of types of consultations (e.g first-aid guide, TV troubleshooting, Internet Connection trouble shooting..etc) and this can all be updated in web service by user. But this does not mean that users can use the app to buy some new guides. It will be offered to the users for free with a specific description of "This app includes this 10 guides" but we are charging the customer for license of using out web service and iPhone is one of the many ways we are offering client to access the web service and get that knowledge.
Is this possible? and what are the Apple restrictions?
Can I sell this app to CompanyX which offers 10 different troubleshooting guides?
Then sell CompnayQ another build with supports 50 different guides?
Apple have made it clear in their terms for the App Store that you must not offer anything for sale - neither products nor services - from inside an app unless it uses their purchasing APIs. This is why e. g. Amazon had to remove the buy-a-book feature from their Kindle app for iOS. You must not even have a link to a website in your app that would take the user to your website for purchase in Safari. AFAIK even a text hint on some screen inside your app telling people to go to your website for purchase of further services might be problematic in the review process.
In my opinion (which is just that, an opinion) you will probably be good with different apps for CustomerX and CustomerY, each offering free access to a specific subset of your web services. You will even be good if existing users of any of the apps can buy access to additional services on your website and then use them in their respective apps, as long as you do not link to that page from your app. You will, of course, still have to implement some kind of user-id system to recognize which users have access to the additional services, and which don't.
I suggest you take a look at how Amazon does it, because their Kindle app has certainly had a lot of scrutiny from the reviewers. Follow their lead and you should be good.
If you sell guides in the app you probably have to use in app purchases, where apple will remain 30% of the money. otherwise your app will probably get rejected.
if you have an developer account you can check the app store review guidelines.. point 11.2:
11.2 Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected
11.13 Apps that link to external mechanisms for purchases or subscriptions to be used in the app, such as a “buy" button that goes to a web site to purchase a digital book, will be rejected