“4.3”

My iOS app is getting repeatedly rejected under Guideline 4.3(b) Spam. Apple says the app is astrology / horoscope category, but the app is actually a B2B partner dashboard for verified consultants and contains no horoscope content. We already: Removed astrology keywords Renamed the app Changed metadata Restricted login Removed China region Explained multiple times to App Review Still getting same rejection again and again. Has anyone successfully resolved 4.3(b) spam rejection for astrology / consultation / marketplace apps? What exact change finally worked? Should we appeal? Request call? Change bundle? New app? Different category? Need expert advice urgently.

Hello everyone, I am looking for some advice or shared experiences regarding a prolonged App Review Board appeal process. I submitted my app earlier this month. On March 3rd, it was rejected under guideline 4.3(b) Spam. On the exact same day (March 3rd), I submitted a detailed appeal to the App Review Board. In my appeal, I provided clear documentation and explanations to prove that the app is not a generic template. I specifically highlighted our proprietary algorithm that calculates a unique total daily energy percentage for users, which distinctly separates it from standard, saturated apps in the market. The issue: It has now been 23 days since I submitted the appeal, and I have not received any response from the Board. My main concern is the lack of visibility. Since appeals to the Board do not appear in the Resolution Center UI, I have no way of knowing if my ticket is actually actively open, in a queue, or if it has been lost due to a system glitch. I recently tried reaching out to general supp

If anyone had a similar app rejection reason, please comment and share your experience.. Guideline 4.3(b) - Design - Spam Issue Description The app primarily features astrology, horoscopes, palm reading, fortune telling or zodiac reports that duplicate the content and functionality of similar apps in a saturated category. These app features may be useful, informative or entertaining, and the app may include features or characteristics that distinguish it. However, there are already enough of these apps on the App Store. Next Steps We encourage you to reconsider the app concept and submit a new app that provides a unique experience not already found on the App Store. Resources You may consider creating a web app, which looks and behaves like a native app when the user adds it to their Home screen. See Configuring Web Applications for more information. To learn more about our policies for saturated app categories, see guideline 4.3.

Hello, I am facing a rejection under Guideline 4.3(a) - Spam for duplicate apps. However, this submission is an update of an existing app (same bundle identifier), not a new app. The update only includes a company rebranding (name, icon, and screenshots). At the moment, we only have one app with this functionality available on the App Store, and we are not intentionally distributing multiple apps targeting the same users or storefronts. The review team mentioned that the app duplicates another app we submitted, but we are unable to identify which app they are referring to. Has anyone experienced a similar issue where Apple flagged a duplicate app even though only one app is live? How did you resolve it? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Hello, I have a policy-related question regarding App Store Review for dating apps. As a development agency, we build apps based on client requirements. Recently, we received feedback from App Review stating that the dating app category is saturated and that the app should demonstrate unique features to avoid being considered spam or a duplicate of existing apps. In such cases, what is the recommended approach for developers working on client projects? If a client requests a standard dating app with common features (profiles, matching, chat, etc.), is it likely to be rejected under the spam/duplicate guideline (4.3)? Should developers proactively advise clients to include clearly differentiated features before submission, even if the app is functionally complete and complies with technical guidelines? Any clarification on how App Review evaluates dating apps for uniqueness under Guideline 4.3 would be very helpful. Thank you.

Hi all Our App was rejected for being suspected Spam, copied from another entiy's App witht he following narrative: 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. We explained this on the form, but the case is not being progressed, jsut ignored. Is there a good way forward to resolve this that is good for Apple as well. Here is our response in the Form: Dear App Review, Thank you for flagging this point and we fully understand and appreciate your concern for protection of our App from being put to unauthorised use. This App and has been developed solely for us and on our instruction and under our direction. As you have noticed, our developer submitted our App to your App Store years ago and it was available for several years from this account. Then some months ago we decided with the developer to move it to our own account. And as you also noticed, some small changes to simplify the flow were made inte

I've been rejected by Apple many times for design spam. I'm confused whether this is because I'm reusing codebase or because my app is similar to other apps on the store. However, very few other apps on the App Store are similar to mine, so I don't think I'm spamming. Could you please tell me how to fix this? Should I refect the codebase or completely redesign the app's features? Thank you for reading!

Hello everyone, I’m looking for some advice or shared experiences regarding an app rejection under App Store Review Guideline 4.3(b) – Design – Spam. Our app was rejected and, after an appeal to the App Review Board, Apple maintained that the app “duplicates the content and functionality of similar apps in a saturated category.” We strongly disagree with this classification and are struggling to understand how Guideline 4.3(b) has been applied in our case. The app was developed as an original product: Custom-designed content (including original cards and interactions) A unique visual style and UI A distinct interaction flow focused on encouraging social interaction between users This was not a template-based or reskinned app, nor is it part of a series of similar submissions. We fully respect the App Store Review Guidelines and are open to making adjustments to better align with them. However, what we find difficult is the lack of specific, actionable feedback. We have not received clear gui

I am in the middle of trying to get an app approved for beta release and the back and forth with the App Store reviewers has been incredibly frustrating and concerning. On Tuesday, I created an app record for my app but quickly realized I made it under the wrong account- I'm working for a company that has a few brands under it's umbrella, and I was under the wrong account when I created the app record. Rather than wait several days to get Apple's approval to transfer app ownership, I decided to delete that app record and create a new one under the proper account. Worst mistake of my life. Now, Apple is insisting that the new app record is spam despite my clarification that I own the other app record and that it was deleted before the new one was created. I have no choice but to believe that somebody else is using our branding and asset somewhere in the App Store that I can't see. Does anybody know how I can resolve this? It should have never taken me the whole week to make an app available on test flight and

Hello everyone, When I submit the game I developed with Unity, it's constantly being rejected due to Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. Unfortunately, I haven't received any detailed information. I've changed almost all the assets in the code. I'm not using any code other than my own. But I can't overcome this problem. How can I find out where this problem occurs? Thank you very much in advance for your support.

I am seeking guidance after experiencing what appears to be an inconsistent and unresponsive review process. My app was rejected under Guideline 4.3(b) (Spam - saturated category) and Guideline 2.1 (App Completeness - IAP not found in binary). I would like to highlight several concerns: Regarding 2.1 - IAP Issue: The rejection states that In-App Purchase products could not be found in the submitted binary. However, a previous reviewer successfully accessed and screenshotted the exact purchase screen in an earlier review cycle. The IAP is clearly implemented and functional. This inconsistency suggests the current reviewer may not have thoroughly tested the app. Regarding 4.3(b) - Spam: I have submitted detailed appeal notes explaining the unique, differentiating features of my app that are not found in any competing applications in this category. These include: Integration with real-time external data sources (not static content) Cultural and regional elements unique to my market AI-powered c