Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
59,320
23,301


With the release of iOS 16.1 and iPadOS 16.1, Apple has updated the App Store review guidelines that are provided to developers who create apps for iPhones and iPads.

iOS-App-Store-General-Feature-Clorange.jpg

Apple is now requiring that apps provide the App Review team with full access to an app, with an active demo account or demo mode for apps that include account-based features. The change will make it easier for app reviewers to investigate all of the parameters of an app.

In regard to NFTs, or non-fungible tokens, Apple allows apps to sell NFTs and services related to NFTs, as long as in-app purchases are used. Apps can offer minting, listing, and transferring capabilities, and can use NFTs to unlock in-app content when in-app purchases are used.

Apps can also allow users to view already-owned NFTs, but already-owned NFTs cannot be used to unlock features or functionality within an app as a way to skirt in-app purchases. Apple's full wording is below:
"Apps may use in-app purchase to sell and sell services related to non-fungible tokens (NFTs), such as minting, listing, and transferring. Apps may allow users to view their own NFTs, provided that NFT ownership does not unlock features or functionality within the app. Apps may allow users to browse NFT collections owned by others, provided that the apps may not include buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms other than in-app purchase."
Apple says that apps created for the sole purpose of allowing advertisers to purchase and manage advertising campaigns across media types do not need to use in-app purchases, while also clarifying that digital purchases such as "boosts" within social media apps such as Facebook do indeed need to use the in-app purchase function. From the guidelines:
"Advertising Management Apps: Apps for the sole purpose of allowing advertisers (persons or companies that advertise a product, service, or event) to purchase and manage advertising campaigns across media types (television, outdoor, websites, apps, etc.) do not need to use in-app purchase. These apps are intended for campaign management purposes and do not display the advertisements themselves. Digital purchases for content that is experienced or consumed in an app, including buying advertisements to display in the same app (such as sales of “boosts” for posts in a social media app) must use in-app purchase."

The updated guidelines also ban any concepts that attempt to capitalize or profit from "recent or current events, such as violent conflicts, terrorist attacks, and epidemics." With the Matter smart home standard now integrated into iOS, apps that support Matter must use Apple's support framework for Matter to initiate pairing.

Other guideline changes prevent music from iTunes and Apple Music previews from being used for entertainment value, and allow apps to facilitate cryptocurrency transactions so long as the functionality is only offered in countries where the app has appropriate licensing.

Apple's full App Store guidelines can be found on the Apple Developer website.

Article Link: Apple Updates App Store Review Guidelines Around Social Media 'Boosts,' Matter, NFTs and More [Updated]
 
Last edited:

Spaceboi Scaphandre

macrumors 65816
Jun 8, 2022
1,120
3,007
First the lacklustre iPad Pro, then news of more ads in the app store, and now the NFT news...

Don't forget the subscriptions getting massive price hikes, and price hikes for all of Europe, and the base spec M2 Macbook Air having halved SSD speeds, or the M1 Ultra Mac Studio being bogged down by software issues, or the Studio Display, or the iPhone 14 in the US causing the SIM card slot to go the way of the headphone jack causing numerous issues.

Apple this year has just been on a downward spiral. (At least the Apple Watch Ultra is really awesome.)
 

Dorje Sylas

macrumors 6502a
Jun 8, 2011
517
369
cannot use NFT ownership as a mechanism to unlock features or functionality within an app
The whole illusion of "exclusive digital ownership" right there. A harsh reading of this means no Crypto- Land, e-Cloths, Avatars, Emotes. May as well just ban NFTs (like any reasonable outlet should). But there's still money to be squeeze from this unregulated scam, so Apple will look the other way and profit.
 

Gasu E.

macrumors 601
Mar 20, 2004
4,943
3,006
Not far from Boston, MA.
So all news media apps are now banned? Their business model is entirely capitalizing off of current events, particularly those listed.
"“Harmful concepts which capitalize or seek to profit on recent or current events, such as violent conflicts, terrorist attacks, and epidemics.”" Yes, it's subjective, given that it's up to Apple to decide what a "harmful concept" is. But since it's a corporation, not a court of law, they can resolve that vagueness as they see fit.
 

RumorUser12

macrumors newbie
Apr 17, 2020
9
112
People who bash NFTs don’t truly understand them. If you think apes and jpgs when you hear NFT, you are missing the intended use case for NFTs, which is proving ownership of something digital in your own wallet rather than a place like Apple’s database (or Google’s, or Valve’s, or Ticketmaster’s, etc).

So of course Apple doesn’t want to allow NFTs on their platform because of their walled garden approach. You want to be able to prove digital ownership of something? You’ll have to pay Apple to do so.
 

Spaceboi Scaphandre

macrumors 65816
Jun 8, 2022
1,120
3,007
People who bash NFTs don’t truly understand them. If you think apes and jpgs when you hear NFT, you are missing the intended use case for NFTs, which is proving ownership of something digital in your own wallet rather than a place like Apple’s database (or Google’s, or Valve’s, or Ticketmaster’s, etc).

So of course Apple doesn’t want to allow NFTs on their platform because of their walled garden approach. You want to be able to prove digital ownership of something? You’ll have to pay Apple to do so.

Oh I understand NFTs. They're a buy a star scam, plain and simple. As far as I'm concerned it would be better if they were banned entirely but unfortunately we'll have to settle for just the purchasing and sale of them blocked.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
6,458
5,079
People who bash NFTs don’t truly understand them. If you think apes and jpgs when you hear NFT, you are missing the intended use case for NFTs, which is proving ownership of something digital in your own wallet rather than a place like Apple’s database (or Google’s, or Valve’s, or Ticketmaster’s, etc).

So of course Apple doesn’t want to allow NFTs on their platform because of their walled garden approach. You want to be able to prove digital ownership of something? You’ll have to pay Apple to do so.
That’s what copyright and trademarks are for. The whole idea is I can “own” an image is ridiculous. It’s not an investment. 20 years from now will that be relevant? Buying a house is an investment. It’s not digital and go poof. It’s a physical component in our world.
 

Dorje Sylas

macrumors 6502a
Jun 8, 2011
517
369
People who bash NFTs don’t truly understand them.
No, we understand them just fine. It's one reason why we bash them.

The use of Public/Private keypairs to Read/Write to a distributed public database has had 14 years to prove functional utility. At best it has replicated privately maintained database (aka United States Patent and Trademark Office) systems, with a tiny advantage of a trustless public one. Although the ability of individuals or groups to force "Forking" reduces that "trustless". The energy costs of Proof-of-Work blockchains destroys even that marginal value. While Proof-of-Stake has no grounding, and is more vulnerable to forking from "Bribe Attacks", and eventually takes us back to a state where you're "trusting" a select group of validators. The same way one "trusts" existing private (personal, company/bank, government) databases.

Everything that flows from there, like NFTs, suffers from the underlying flaws.

Again, at best, Blockchains are marginally more trustworthy databases at extreme energy cost.
or
Redundant to more energy/time efficient existing private systems.

The only current advantage over just using the United States Patent and Trademark Office is the ability to immediately do an ownership verification check. Which the USPTO could implemented with their own digital Public/Private key system. The same way digital "Trusted Certificate Authorities" already do. USPTO and other such government bodies could just become digital Trusted Certificate Authorities themselves.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.