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

[dcbogdan]

If you listen to the phone call in his post, Apple doesn't deny that they have only notified the other account and considered that enough because for them the accounts were linked.
I've read the Apple statement several times and they never say there were fake reviews for the Dash app. During the phone call the Apple representative never says that Kapeli's account had any fraudulent activity, but that it was linked to an account with fraudulent activity.
If the guy is guilty, why wouldn't he take the deal he was made on the phone? Write the post, get the account reinstated?
Why would he insist that he's innocent and he didn't get any warnings from Apple?

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

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

No. Not a chance.

How is Apple preventing this guy from his right to free speech?

You have the right to speak all you like but Apple has zero duty to allow him to do so on THEIR platform. They can kick out anyone for any reason they choose just as any business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

 

[4a6d65]

Because it's not their place to share that private information. It would have been a violation of the developer program TOS and privacy policy.

Can't share the information ... but can use the information to ban him? What?

 

[firewood]

Most people don't give out enough details to allow someone else to use their credit card unless they have some sort of financial relationship. I mean, I might buy a big gift for a friend, but I wouldn't just leave my credit card over at their residence afterwards.

And depending on the exact financial (or family) relationship, for some types of relationships/partnerships in some jurisdictions, it might be possible for one partner to be legally liable for some or all the (misdeeds, debts, fines, tax penalties, etc.) of the other partner. (Parents may have to pay for the window that the kid broke, etc.) I wonder if Apple's developer agreement says anything about this?

 

[appleguru1]

If a developer volunteers to test apps of another developer, either to help out or as a paid consulting gig, does that cause the two developer accounts to be somehow linked in Apple's mind? That's going to cause a lot of iOS developers and app test consultants to refuse to test anyone else's apps unless they know the developer of that app *really* well.

Not testing apps. If I understand correctly, he gave his sister (?) devices that he no longer needed (think old iPhones) for her to test her apps with on her developer account (which was, initially anyways, paid for with his credit card, as a gift to help get her started).

Apple's logic is that since the same credit card and physical devices were used on two separate accounts, that those accounts belong to the same person, and thus both accounts are liable for the actions of the other.

Personally, I don't agree with this logic, though I certainly understand it. But Apple should have notified both account holders of their planned action, if such action would affect both accounts. This is where Apple screwed up. And TBH, unless there was other evidence that the two accounts were in fact owned by the same person, I would have just banned the problematic account, and removed its apps and reviews, leaving the other account untouched.

While it does suck for this Dev, as his apps do seem pretty good, perhaps this will serve as a warning to anyone else who might consider similar behavior. (Though, honestly, it just tells them one more thing they can avoid doing so they don't get caught :-/)

Personally, I believe the Dash dev's side of the story... and think his sister is the one that sucks for behaving so poorly.

 

[Feenician]

Can't share the information ... but can use the information to ban him? What?

In what way would a requirement to keep information between the parties private preclude Apple from ascertaining fraud and banning a dev as a result?

 

[TheLarson]

And why they didn't remove Readdle apps from the App Store, they have been doing that for years, including posting bad reviews to GoodReader.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

Can't share the information ... but can use the information to ban him? What?

Seems you don't understand privacy policies do you?

 

[BigPrince]

Some of the posts I'm reading here (after the new blog post) are just awful.

Apple half arsely did the right thing, but the dev never knew about this. There's no reason for the dev to think his account would be considered 'linked' because of the same credit card. Dash never received fake app reviews and Apple aren't saying he did ... in fact, Apple has changed it stance quite a bit from the start of this to that phone call.

That phone call is obviously reminding him who is boss here, whilst working along with for PR and trying to make Apple look good. Now, Apple are doing the right thing by making sure the App Store is fair, but they somehow messed this up.

Some of the posts I'm seeing though: Just to be clear, he did nothing wrong.

I'm leaning toward your interpretation. Particularly these linked accounts based on credit card purchase.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

And why they didn't remove Readdle apps from the App Store, they have been doing that for years, including posting bad reviews to GoodReader.

Some do it through use of proxies and other methods which don't connect the reviewers. Others are idiots and post multiple reviews from the same IP and make it obvious they're gaming the system.

No one is saying that others aren't posting fake reviews. But much like speeding, there are those that get caught and those that live to do it another day. If you believe someone is gaming the system, report them. Complaining about it on some random internet forum does nothing, but if enough people bring the issue to light with Apple they're far more likely to act on it.

 

[craig1410]

I'm leaning toward your interpretation. Particularly these linked accounts based on credit card purchase.

It wasn't just based on the credit card purchase, even some of the physical test devices were the same because the developer gave them to his relative.

 

[4a6d65]

Seems you don't understand privacy policies do you?

Seems you're quick to jump to conclusions. Just because something is written down in a legally binding document doesn't mean that it's fair. Same applies here, they couldn't contact him because of its someone else data? (Data Protection Act here in the UK) but can use that same information without contact, without discussion to ban him.

Don't you understand the flaw in that?

 

[Feenician]

Just to be clear, he did nothing wrong.

Apart from the whole "1000 fraudulent reviews thing". But lets not worry about that. Detail, detail

 

[BigPrince]

It wasn't just based on the credit card purchase, even some of the physical test devices were the same because the developer gave them to his relative.

It doesn't sound outrageous to me.

The question I need clarity about is if all linked accounts were notified of the fraud or only the account engaged in the fraud and there happened to be a linked account to it that was swept up after the fact.

 

[Feenician]

but can use that same information without contact, without discussion to ban him.

No discussion, except for the two years of discussion

 

[4a6d65]

Apart from the whole "1000 fraudulent reviews thing". But lets not worry about that. Detail, detail

Which wasn't done on his account or his apps?
[doublepost=1476146018][/doublepost]

No discussion, except for the two years of discussion

Sure you guys didn't actually listen or read the blog posts. They spoke to his sister, NOT HIM. So, nope. In fact, Apple spent a good amount of time on the phone defending that.

 

[Feenician]

Which wasn't done on his account or his apps?

Not done on his account. Just the linked account of his relative who reviewed his competitors apps 1000 times. Nothing remotely suspicious about this. Damn you, Crapple!

 

[4a6d65]

Not done on his account. Just the linked account of his relative who reviewed his competitors apps 1000 times. Nothing remotely suspicious about this. Damn you, Crapple!

Well, seems Apple are happy enough to give his developer account back. So ... I'm saying what Apple is and what the dev is saying.

 

[Feenician]

They spoke to his sister, NOT HIM

His sister, with her free Developer Account and Mac(s) and account linked to his and purchased with his credit card didn't think to mention to it him. "Whoopsy! I forgot to mention this for two years. Silly me! "
[doublepost=1476146190][/doublepost]

Well, seems Apple are happy enough to give his developer account back. So ... I'm saying what Apple is and what the dev is saying.

So are you him, or his sister?

 

[4a6d65]

His sister, with her free Developer Account and Mac(s) and account linked to his and purchased with his credit card didn't think to mention to it him. "Whoopsy! I forgot to mention this for two years. Silly me! "

My brother stole money from me and we've not spoke in 2 years. He could have given her the world, you'll probably find that Apple only ever went after her and didn't even mention his account at all, or she might not even told him about it. Again ... Apple are in agreement that they understand this, and that he didn't know, they fully support that.
[doublepost=1476146347][/doublepost]

His sister, with her free Developer Account and Mac(s) and account linked to his and purchased with his credit card didn't think to mention to it him. "Whoopsy! I forgot to mention this for two years. Silly me! "
[doublepost=1476146190][/doublepost]

So are you him, or his sister?

What is your problem?

 

[danranda]

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

No but this certainly could be a California wiretapping case.
Not sure of the location of the developer, but it's quite possible that phone call he recorded of the Apple representative offering to reinstate the app if the developer posts a particular blog post involved an Apple rep in California. CA requires both parties to consent to phone call recordings prior to recording them.

 

[SteveJobs2.0]

Seems that the developer was caught and is now using every excuse in the book to weasel his way out of trouble.

 

[yanksfan114]

Having just listened to the recording of his phone call with Apple I have come to 3 conclusions:

1. Apple have bent over backwards to give this guy a chance to reinstate his developer account. The guy on the call was extremely professional and fair.

2. The developer's tone during that call was a bit offhand and far from appreciative that the SVP of Marketing of the largest company in the world actually cared enough to make this call happen!

3. Recording the call with Apple and making it public was the final nail in the coffin. He can probably expect a demand from Apple to take down that recording immediately and in my opinion has little to no chance of ever doing business with Apple again. Phil Schiller will be furious and rightly so.

THE END

I agree completely. This guy royally screwed himself by putting Apple on blast.

 

[Feenician]

What is your problem?

Come on now. He "accidentally" gave a linked account to his sister and she "accidentally" left 1000 reviews for apps that compete with his own. For some reason you (who are totally not him!) are here vehemently defending an open and shut case. If you're not him then your reasoning and motivations are, shall we say, "interesting".

All of this is leaving aside the wiretapping which, in itself, will make sure he never gets back to the App Store. I'm sure he can make a great living on Google Play lol

 

[Gypsy36]

If you listen to the phone call in his post, Apple doesn't deny that they have only notified the other account and considered that enough because for them the accounts were linked.
I've read the Apple statement several times and they never say there were fake reviews for the Dash app. During the phone call the Apple representative never says that Kapeli's account had any fraudulent activity, but that it was linked to an account with fraudulent activity.
If the guy is guilty, why wouldn't he take the deal he was made on the phone? Write the post, get the account reinstated?
Why would he insist that he's innocent and he didn't get any warnings from Apple?

Perhaps because he knew he was recording the call?