I emailed my city bus service asking whether they would allow me to use their bus route data in an iPhone app with ads, and got no response. If I did create the app, and profited from the ads, would they be able to, or likely to, sue me or demand that I pull the app?
I know this isn't strictly programming-related but I don't know who to ask, and it isn't a big enough deal that I would go talk to a lawyer.
i would say that bus times and routes fall under public information and lye within the public domain in terms of intellectual property.
In the UK where i live, i would highly doubt you'd be sued for it. If you live in america, i don't know, people seem to want to sue each other for everything and anything.
So long as you don't mention company names, have any images of buses with logos on or anything like that, numbers, times and routes aren't information that can be copywrited i don't think?
Plagiarism (mildly on topic) seems to go completely unpoliced on the app store, for every good app there are 6 or 7 directly stealing ideas or ripping it off. I personally think you'd be safe with this, and if anything did come of it, you approached them asking for permission, they chose to ignore you.
Related
I am building an app for a client that will have 30 days of content for free, thereafter you are required to buy a subscription via in app store purchases.
However, I have read that you will get rejected if you have trials.
Don’t set time limits on any of the functionality of your app, either
for run times or life times. Applications that only run for a set
number of minutes per session, or that expire altogether after some
period of time, don’t recruit customers so much as leave a bad taste
in their mouths.
Finally, they also say "your app will be returned to you by the App Review Team for modification if it is found to have time limits".
This seems odd because I know the Guardian and all major newspaper apps have limited functionality.
The Guardian app is free but you get limited functionality?
The Daily app is free, but you have to pay for daily subscriptions
and has limited functionality for the period of your subscription.
The Times app is free, but is a free trial (of sorts) (plenty of
complaints about it)
There are other examples which seem to differ from Apple's policies.
Lets say you have an app that is free, but then you have to pay for subscriptions to gain access; however according to the rules this is considered limited functionality -- yet there are lots of newspaper apps that do exactly that.
I'm confused.
Can someone clarify the situation? Can apps have trials?
Thanks
It is difficult to clarify the situation because unfortunately the guidelines are not necessarily set in stone. They can and do vary on an app and publisher basis.
In the case of The Times and The Daily, both apps are produced by News Corp. It is perhaps safe to say that News Corp has a good deal more influence with Apple than a one-man development shop producing an iPhone game. Apple would be loath to admit it, but there are clear cases of popular apps on the store that don't conform to the guidelines, where they have tacitly made an exception.
So what I would say to you is this: be sensible. Don't have an app that quits automatically when your trial runs out. Think about what would be acceptable to users. It's very much a case of nothing ventured, nothing gained. Take a risk, submit your app with your limited trial, and see what happens.
With the Guardian app, we had to deliver an app where you always got at least some fresh content if you were using the free version. Subscribing opens up more content to the user.
I think, you are mixing up "content" and "functionality".
You can deliver content items (i.e. an magazine issue) for free or user has to pay for it — so the first n issues, or all issues in a certain timeframe, can be free, while the others need to be paid. But if an user purchased an content item before, you have to re-deliver it for free.
You can sell functionalities (i.e a search in the magazine's archive) as-well. But you cannot give it to the user for free for a certain time and them make him pay.
So the general rule is: What ever the user got from you — you cannot take it back from them and make them purchase it again.
There are plenty of free apps which provide limited functionality. They don't provide time limits though (or at least they shouldn't). I'm guessing it won't be as clear cut as accept or reject for Apple, because I did encounter an app which closes itself after 10 minutes, opening a web page to purchase it (closing an app is also against the Apple Human Interface Guidelines, as an app should never terminate itself).
The guidelines mention this is only allowed for specific types of content:
11.9 Apps containing content or services that expire after a limited time will be rejected, except for specific approved content (e.g. films, television programs, music, books)
11.15 Apps may only use auto-renewing subscriptions for periodicals (newspapers, magazines), business Apps (enterprise, productivity, professional creative, cloud storage), and media Apps (video, audio, voice), or the App will be rejected
I am a member of a gliding club with 150 members, and we want to have our own iPhone app. Requiring a member login, the app would be usable only by members of the club, and it would be used by an estimated 20-30 people.
Is it even possible to disribute such an app to non-jailbroken iPhones? According to my research:
It wouldn't be accepted on the App Store due to "limited audience".
Even if we were able and willing to pay $300 for the enterprise distribution model, Apple would likely not accept us as a company.
Ad hoc distribution would be fine for us except for the expiration time associated with apps distributed in the manner.
Are we at a dead end?
Thanks.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering why I didn't just ask Apple directly: I did, and their answer was, "We are unable to advise you with respect to the Apple Developer Program that best fits your needs."
I'm not 100% on your question.
But depending on your requirement, pretty much everything you need can be achieved as a web app, with the correct coding behind it i.e. CACHE MANIFEST you could make the app function similar to the a native app, available offline and can be saved to any iOS device through the browser.
Give me a shout if you need more information.
Hope it helps
Gary
You could always try to make the app a little more "global"? Perhaps offer some free stuff for Joe Bloggs to use, but tucked away you have your real motive... that way you can get it released legitimately.
I've seen some real disasters in the app store that shouldn't have made it, and I'm sure Apples screening isn't as intense as we might think. (example: that flash light application, when pressing a sequence of buttons it would enable free tethering).
Best of luck!
Yup. You seem to have all the options laid out pretty clearly, and there's no other way to do it. Except developing for android, and just distributing the application freely and without arbitrary restrictions.
Sorry.
Ad-hoc distribution would give you about 90 days expiration time, i think, whereas enterprise would give you a year. Though gaining enterprise status in the eyes of apple is easier said than done.
Even if we were able and willing to pay $300 for the enterprise distribution model, Apple would likely not accept us as a company.
You don't have to be a company to apply for the enterprise account, you just need to be an organisation with a DUNS number.
I'll soon have to implement the StoreKit functionality and I was wondering...
is there a way to also offer a product for free to a user once, like as a gift for using the app for the first time ?
In my special scenario I'll offer several products in my educational app, which the user will need to buy time by time, if he is interested in continuing to learn with the app.
But the first product I want the user to have for free and it should be his choice which one he takes. So generally all products should have a price, but the first download shall be free.
And I want this to get logged on my server so I can reidentify him, so (A) he can't delete the app, reinstall and download yet another free product and (B) so he will also get the products on any other of his devices.
I'm also open to workarounds, like maybe get something similar to the apple id or so, to be able to store it on the server. I know that I could also use the [[UIDevice currentDevice] uniqueIdentifier], but I want the user to have this first free product on all his devices, and ONLY ONE.
Is there a way to get (A) and (B)?
Apple's In-App Purchase infrastructure (and by extension, StoreKit) does not support free content.
But there's nothing stopping you from providing free content via your own mechanisms, as you surmise. You would have to do all the tracking yourself in terms of remembering device IDs on a server somewhere, and noting that device != user, so would miss some edge cases.
You don't get access to (iTunes) user data at all, so you probably can't guarantee the "only once" across multiple devices, unless your app has an associated backend service account that is already unique per user.
(Before building infrastructure for this, you should double-check the developer agreement/contracts on this stuff. You're not circumventing Apple's revenue stream here, which is good, but what you're talking about may be unusual enough to raise a flag with them in terms of experience consistency if nothing else.)
Does anyone know if there are rules against rating your own app in the app store? I would assume that most people would give their own app a 5 star rating if there were no rules - but maybe I'm wrong. Does anyone know for sure?
Sure you are a developer, but because Apple does not allow you to purchase free copies of your app and review, you are also a paying customer. And in Apple's customer user agreement, you are entitled to review anything you purchase.
It's probably not the most ethical thing, but just be aware that if you actually write a review, people can see what other reviews you have written and put two-and-two together to figure out that it's the developer writing reviews.
Most of the crApps out there do this using 50 different iTunes accounts and it's rather deceitful IMHO, at least on that scale.
Something like that would be covered in the User Agreement which is under NDA so it might be hard to get a definite answer.
I did read of a case where an App developer was banned for making fraudulent reviews and ratings which meant his 1600+ Apps were removed. Throughout the forums there were many accusations of other developers doing the exact same thing in a smaller scale that were never banned. So in a nut shell you can get banned for it, but it could be common practice amongst some App developers, just don't get caught.
Look at it this way: Either there's a lot of ratings, and a single rating by yourself won't make a big impact, or you're the only rating, and people will look at only a single rating and not think it's representative enough.
I don't think there's any advantages that outweigh the fact that it's bad form.
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/news/archives/2010/february/#corelocation
Can anyone tell me what is the exact description of an ad and just a hint for a user?
We are developing a library that shows small banners depending on user's location. E.g. we are passing a cafe - we have a banner about this cafe, we are passing a church - we have a banner about this church. The library is to be re-used in other apps.
So from one point of view we are advertising a cafe, but from another point of view we are giving the user an advice about places to eat around him. So what is the border between an ad and advice to a user?
I think the problem is that such an app tracks the location of the user and location specific ads will constantly remind the user that their physical location is being tracked.
This is an obvious privacy and security issue but I also think Apple wants to prevent users from experiencing that creepy feeling that comes from knowing somebody is tracking you against your will.
In order to feed the iPhone location based adds, you have to upload the location of the iPhone to a server, process the appropriate adds for the location and push them back. That means that an external 3rd party, that neither Apple nor the user can control, is constantly tracking the location of the phone while the app is active. Since an app can capture info identifying individual phones, that turns the app into spy program.
Even if you actually did all the processing inside the app on a single phone e.g. looking up an internal local database, the user would still most likely assume they were being tracked remotely.
There is no way Apple will risk the damage to the iPhone's brand that would come from news stories screaming, "iPhone App Secretly Tracks User's Locations Anywhere in the World!"
The library you have in mind is clearly verboten. You could might get way with it if had a mechanism for constantly asking the user if they wanted to load location specific ads.
(BEGIN RANT: As an aside, I would say this sounds like something the explicative-deleteds in marketing came up with. They think "Hey, we can push location targeted ads at users and force them see those ads when they use any of the apps with the library! Think how great that will be for advertisers!"
Marketing driven design is almost always a disaster. If they started the design with the idea, "Hey, I think I as a user would like to have the option of seeing ads relevant to my location with a mechanism I control and which protects my privacy and security," then they would come up with a much better library.
In the long run, you make money by giving end users more power and control over their work and lives. You don't make it by strapping them down and force feeding them what you want.
If you personally wouldn't want the functionality and no users have asked you for the functionality, then its probably a bad idea. END RANT)
Edit01:
Let me address this:
So from one point of view we are
advertising a cafe, but from another
point of view we are giving the user
an advice about places to eat around
him. So what is the border between an
ad and advice to a user?
I used to work at Apple in several capacities so I understand a bit how they think.
An ad is something pushed onto the user with any prior action of the user's part. The user doesn't request the ads, doesn't select the ads may not even want the ad but they just appear anyway.
Advice is something the user ask for explicitly. An app with a button that says "Show adds for businesses in your immediate vicinity" would fall under the heading of advice. Even an app whose stated function was to show adds for businesses in the vicinity would be fine. In both cases, the user request specific information. It is not pushed onto them. More importantly, the user can control if they send their location or not.
I got caught in the nutcracker back when Apple thought it was a good idea to have dialogs popping up telling people how to upgrade to Quicktime pro. It caused no ends of problems for end users especially those in institutions because it took control out of the hands of end users and administrators. I got to stand between irate customers and the genius that thought of the idea, which turned out to the actual genius Steve Jobs. Eventually, he saw the light and the desktop ad experiment was terminated.
Jobs and Apple learned their lesson. Don't force ads on end users. Especially don't tie ads to the functioning of the software (in this case, the location manager.)
The big thing in Apple's announcement is the part that says: "If your app uses location-based information primarily to enable mobile advertisers to deliver targeted ads based on a user's location, your app will be returned to you by the App Store Review Team for modification before it can be posted to the App Store."
Is the major function of your app to advertise to users -- regardless of the fact that they may ask for the ads or not? If the major function is to advertise to users based on their location or the greater portion of Location Services usage is for the purpose of advertising to the user then Apple will reject the app. Period.