Apple Says 1,000 Fraudulent Reviews Were Detected Across Two Accounts Owned by 'Dash' Developer [Update: Developer Responds]

[charlituna]

Oh things are becoming saucy! Prepare the popcorn

Developer seems to have known about this for 2 years now, can't play that innocence game. Though I still think there should always be an appeal option

He claims he didn't. but I would imagine that Apple keeps copies of all such messages in case a developer tries to sue and use 'you didn't tell me' as part of their defense.

And this is a lesson to be learned. If you give someone your developer password or pay for an account for them, you are on the hook if they do something nasty. It's likely even in the terms and conditions. Including that the fallback can hit every account associated with you
[doublepost=1476637845][/doublepost]

Oh things are becoming saucy! Prepare the popcorn

Developer seems to have known about this for 2 years now, can't play that innocence game. Though I still think there should always be an appeal option

Actually if you listen to the possibly illegally made recording that the developer posts on his blog, he totally tries to play the innocence game. He says that its not his account as if to say that he's not to blame for anything from that account. The Apple guy points out that the two have the same bank account and test devices so they are linked.

As for an appeal option, that's basically what Apple is offering this guy. If he's willing to publicly admit that an account that wasn't his main account but was run by someone else was up to nonsense and he's working with Apple to remove THAT account, they will consider restoring the main one. The caller in the recording even offers to take a draft of the blog post to Phil to see help create something sufficient. That's essentially an appeal.
[doublepost=1476638013][/doublepost]

If the developer did nothing wrong and was being honest then explain to Apple and get the app reinstated. Those would have been the proper steps.

the catch is the terms. When you set up an account and you take financial responsibility for it, you take all responsibility for it. It doesn't matter that I gave you the password etc so you could do your thing, its still my account in terms of legal responsibility cause I'm paying for it. So if you get up to mischief, that's on me. I should be paying attention to what I'm paying for.
[doublepost=1476638075][/doublepost]

I am not a lawyer - but can this become a first amendment case?

Nope. First Amendment is about the government, not private companies. And fraud has been proven time and time to not be covered under 1st Amendment.

 

[firewood]

There's one thing Apple definitely needs to address:

Even if the developer account is terminated, if a user has paid to purchase an app (such as Dash) and the app itself is not malicious (which Dash is not), the app should never be removed from the user's "Purchased" tab.

Without a valid developer agreement, Apple may no longer have the legal right to distribute an app copyrighted by the developer. Keeping it in your purchasing tab could be false advertisement or copyright infringement.

 

[iPhonagain]

Like Apple, Chinese communist party also says they never make mistakes.

Since when has Apple ever said it never makes mistakes?
I recall Tim Cook saying they make mistakes from time to time because they are humans just like everyone else.
Sounds to me like you are a hater by your statement.

 

[Floris]

I have no doubt all those 'crappy' apps that look terrible, are littered with ripped game concepts and app concepts and in-app purchases for obvious 'should have been included' features, and top/bottom and 'click here for free credit' advertisements have 'fake reviews' as a business model checkbox for launching their app.
[ ] down rate competition
[ ] fake review our partners, except ourselves
.. I hope apple does a clean up of this sort of stuff as well.

I miss innovating apps and games like the ones they were proud to show off 10 years ago that were just fun to explore, play with and figure out, and make you think 'wish everybody made it like this'.

 

[iPhonagain]

IIRC, most places require only single-party consent, specifically so that you can defend yourself against libelous statements about what was said in a phone conversation. Two-party consent makes phone calls a really unsafe way to communicate. It destroys a critical aspect of consumer protection under the guise of protecting you from evil companies who tape your phone calls....

Here in Indiana it's single-party consent but the law differs state to state, not a federal law AFAIK.
[doublepost=1476678444][/doublepost]

First off, it wasn't an excuse, it was a question. Do you understand the difference between the two? Second, so, then, you think that people doing bad things go out of their way to give evidence that they're doing bad things to relatives? In your world, criminals just naturally go to family reunions and say, "hey everybody, I rob banks! Oh, and I cook a little meth on the side."

Obviously you've never been to one MY family reunions!