Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Hit With Lawsuit From App Store Developer Over Copycat Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You can patent something that the app does, if that thing is novel and non-obvious, and if the subject matter is something more than an abstract process. Few apps are going to meet all those requirements.
Well that’s what I was saying. I suggested that the developers should patent their apps but a member here said you can’t patent apps. If that’s true then suing the copycat may not go far in court.
I’m wondering is Google being sued as well? I’m sure there are many copycat apps in the Android store that are overshadowing the original app. I’m asking this because it always seems here that every other company that offers what Apple does gets a pass for the crap they do and Apple is constantly getting the finger pointed at them.
😁 I’m sure you knew what I meant. I wasn’t referring to this guy in the article. I’m talking about a general situation.
There is a confusion between Apple protecting Users and Apple protecting Developers. My impression, and that's all it is, is that the purpose of the walled garden is to prevent malware and information/identity theft. It is not there *primarily* to protect the business interests of the developers. Apple's argument would be that users' trust in the environment helps all developers.
I remember reading an article or watching a video about App creators and they had 3 categories. one was just put out a bunch of crappy app to see how it attracts, then find out the category and put out another app to widdle down the field. Then create your main app! But I think that is how everything works, Oh it is working for someone else lets just make a copy of it and get in while we can. If the app maker thought this was happening then sue the app makers. If you drive drunk and hit something you can't blame the car manufacturer because it didn't stop you, if you had the keys and knew where you parked it how is that the car makers fault?
Actually you don't need much "proof" in an initial complaint. In federal court, the complaint must allege "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." This suit was filed in CA state court so the standard might be different, but I doubt it's much different.
But I think the point of the lawsuit is to raise awareness that Apple is falling flat on its face with App Store review, and to force them to make the argument that you just made—"Apple doesn't have the resources to effectively police the App Store." First of all, it's laughable...Apple has more resources than literally any other company on the planet. And second, it's pretty embarrassing. Apple constantly touts how "safe" the App Store is and how high-quality the apps are, but it's littered with complete trash and outright scams that this developer has been revealing on his Twitter feed. That argument also seriously weakens their biggest defense against allowing alternative app stores on iOS.
I hope Eleftheriou has a large "raise awareness" budget, then.
Nobody said anything about Apple giving up monopoly powers. Dev just thinks Apple is targeting him.
I don't see how he has a case, though. Even if Apple were doing this, it'd be hard to prove.
Last edited:
Strongly agree with this.
Apple has really dropped the ball badly on this front; one would think that Apple has an incentive to keep the App Store as clean, safe, and trustworthy as possible for consumers and as lucrative as possible for developers.
I'm worried Apple is too focused on growing their service revenue rather than on doing things right in the App Store.
At least the lawsuit is actually probably where the dev lives instead of in west Texas like usual.
You are mistaking the pleading burden with the ethical burden.
In federal court, you still have to abide by FRCP 11(b):
(b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
Also, the PLEADING standards are completely different. The federal courts have notice pleading, which is a very easy standard to meet. That’s not true of california, where you are required to plead “ultimate facts.”
Yeah, I wasn't inferring that Apple was behind the copycat folks - just perhaps didn't really jump at giving them the boot perhaps.
This ain't how it works. Tell me how I can get my taxes refunded from California and Mountain View then.
No evidence for that, either. Twitter is inundated with discussion by developers of copycat apps that linger. And, of course, you are allowed to copy an app so long as you don’t infringe any trademarks, copyright, or other intellectual property rights, and as long as the app doesn’t do anything that itself is a problem (e.g. scams).
Which "tax" and what is the SLA?
Can you point me to the service level agreement, where Apple agrees to clean the app store in x minutes, days, hours?
Can you point me to the sla when I report a pothole, the pothole is guaranteed to be fixed, as good as new?
His legal team should file for disclosure re: the revenues Apple has received from fraudulent subscription apps that essentially trick users into clicking a button that starts a $500/month sub. Yeah completely fraudulent, but enough folks get tricked to enable some of these apps to be significant revenue generators. Last time I saw an estimate (from a unhappy dev I believe) it was very substantial. I would love to have Apple forced to disclose figures related to this, and any documentation of steps that Apple takes to make whole those consumers who were tricked. (I think the answer is zero.) Note that these apps do not even attempt to provide a real service. They are just designed to use a dark pattern to fool a small percentage of users to click. The fix is so simple: a trial of the sub prior to it getting billed/paid, but as we all know, Apple prohibits this as it likely provides "too much protection vis-a-vis top-live services revenues."
