“4.3”

I'm looking to distribute multiple versions of an iOS app, each customized with different branding for various clients. I understand that for public App Store submissions, guideline 4.3(a) prohibits multiple Bundle IDs of the same app to prevent spam. My question: Do these same restrictions apply to Custom App Distribution (unlisted apps)? Is it permissible to submit multiple white-labeled versions of the same core app through Custom App Distribution? I've reviewed the Custom Apps documentation but couldn't find clear guidance on this specific scenario. Any insights from developers who have experience with similar situations would be appreciated. Thank you in advance for your help!

Hi everyone, I’ve been reading Apple’s App Store Review Guidelines, especially the part about avoiding similar or duplicate apps (Section 4.3 on Spam). I noticed that the apps 航旅纵横 and 航旅纵横 Pro are both on the App Store. From what I can see, the two apps have some overlapping features, but the Pro version adds a few extra ones. I’m wondering how Apple approves apps like these. Are there specific rules or justifications developers need to follow to get similar apps approved? Thank you for any advice or insights!

Hello everyone, I am seeking advice regarding a recurring issue with our app, YouMi UM, which was rejected due to alleged spam under App Review Guideline 4.3(a). The review team stated that our app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept with apps previously submitted by a terminated Apple Developer Program account. Our app, YouMi UM, has been successfully launched on the Android platform, and we have invested significant effort into its UI design and features. However, when submitting to Apple, the review team pointed out similarities between our app and others submitted by different developers, particularly in terms of binary files, metadata, and concept, which led them to believe it might violate Guideline 4.3. Our app is independently developed, with all code and design being original. We have also added several unique features, such as real-time news widgets, branded dynamic toast notifications, and exclusive scene transition animations, which are not commonly found in similar

Have downloaded playgrounds 4.3 to my iPad Air running ipados 16.5. Trying to use playground “Get started with Apps” but receiving message “Unsupported file format Get Started with Apps.swiftpm cannot be opened in Swift Playgrounds”. I do not have Mac or windows PC so am stuck! Help ??

I got this below rejection. I was asking why and which aspects of mine was a spam/similarity to which app, but they told me that they can't give a review for my app. I don't know how to resolve this, because I think I did this app done by myself and copying nothing from outside. Can anyone help me? Thank you so much. Hello, The issues we previously identified still need your attention. Review Environment Submission ID: cb12182d-504f-4c1f-851b-1595820da7ec Review date: January 03, 2025 Version reviewed: 1.0.2 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We continued to notice your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality.

I recently submitted my app, Ai voice changer - Video effects (Build version 1.0.0 (2)), for beta testing and received feedback indicating that my app was rejected due to a violation of Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. The rejection email states that my app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept to apps already submitted to the App Store, with only minor differences, leading to the classification of my app as spam. I would like to respectfully request clarification regarding the specific aspects of my app that led to this rejection. I have ensured that the app I submitted offers unique functionalities and has been carefully designed to stand out from other apps in the same category. The features of my app, including apply voice changer effects on videos, were developed with originality and are intended to offer a new experience to users. To provide additional context, my app was created using a unique approach and has distinct features compared to other voice changers available on the App

Hi all, My app was rejected because of Guideline 4.3(a). Below is the response: We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality. Resources Some factors that contribute to a spam rejection may include: Submitting an app with the same source code or assets as other apps already submitted to the App Store Creating and submitting multiple similar apps using a repackaged app template Purchasing an app template with problematic code from a third-party Submitting several similar apps across multiple accounts Is due to another Beta Build of the same app that is also under App Review currently? Because the a

We recently received feedback under Guideline 4.3(b) suggesting our app duplicates functionality found in other apps in this category. However, our app is fundamentally not a dating app. It is a conversation facilitator designed to foster meaningful connections for friendships, networking, and shared interests. While romantic connections may occur naturally, they are not the primary focus. Thus, we are seeking insights on this key question: How do developers effectively demonstrate feature differentiation to reviewers? We want to clearly show how our app’s functionality uniquely addresses user needs and provides value beyond existing solutions. Our Core Features: Our app introduces distinct features that differentiate it from traditional apps in this space: Paths: Psychology-based prompts embedded in chats encourage users to explore meaningful topics like values and aspirations. These prompts are dynamically triggered to keep conversations engaging and productive. Aura: A rewards system that incentiv

I’m looking for advice and clarification regarding an issue I’ve encountered during the review process. My app was recently rejected under Guideline 4.3(a) for allegedly duplicating content or functionality of other apps. The feedback stated that my app appears to be identical to apps already on the App Store, but I’m confident this is a misunderstanding. The app is entirely unique, both in its functionality and its independently developed codebase. This rejection is puzzling, as I’ve thoroughly reviewed the guidelines and ensured that my app adheres to them. Has anyone else encountered similar issues? How did you address them? To the Apple team: Could you provide additional context or examples of the similarities identified? I’d be happy to address any concerns or make adjustments if necessary to align with the App Store standards. Submission ID: a6e96157-a543-45c6-b05d-8c50766ea4bf I’m grateful for any insights or advice from the community and the Apple team. Thanks in advance for your help! Best r

My app is completely unique and i dont know why apple is giving me spam error. There is no similar app to mine and i am 100% sure of it. I brainstormed this idea myself for over a week to create such a game. And every code i have done is my own and i have not used any templates. Please help guys i am very confused why my app is getting spam rejection.

We are reaching out for guidance after encountering 2nd repeated Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam rejections for our WeNote app. Here’s a brief timeline of our journey: 2018: We launched the WeNote Android app on Google Play Store. 2019: We started promoting WeNote on YouTube and began development of the WeNote iOS app. Our progress was publicly visible on our Trello board and discussed on the Apple Developer forum. August 17, 2021: We filed an official complaint with Apple regarding a *** company infringing on our app logo, title, and description. The issue was resolved when *** agreed to update their app’s branding. 2022 Year: *** company is terminated from App Store. June 2022: WeNote for iOS was officially released on the Apple App Store. June 17, 2024: We received a rejection from the Apple Review team citing Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam: “We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps previously submitted by a terminated Apple Developer Program accoun

Why is the application we developed from scratch directly judged as Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam?

Seeking developer insights regarding a 4.3(a) review response citing similar binary, metadata, and/or concept. Our app implements distinct community-focused features that fundamentally differentiate it from existing applications in this category. Feature Implementation: Our app introduces new technological approaches to faith-based applications: Community System: Custom-built group participation with progress visualization Engagement Features: Peer support system with achievement tracking Progress Metrics: Proprietary points system for progress tracking Group Progress Features: Shared accomplishment tracking Achievement Architecture: Progress continuity tracking Performance metrics accumulation Custom recognition system for personal and group milestones Synchronized goal-setting framework Market Analysis: Our research indicates: No existing apps with group-based progress features No solutions combining community features with scheduling No applications with similar group achievement systems No platfo