Guideline 4.3 -- made from template... but they are not.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review

Created Apr ’18

Replies 22

Boosts 0

Views 8.7k

Participants 8

I have an app called "AB Player", which is a music player that can play back user's iTunes library with speed control and A-B repeat.

■　AB Player ... View on App Store

This app was rejected becasue it violates Guideline 4.3 (Spam).

I have appealed to the review board. They decided to maintaint the rejection and they told me that AB-Player app is made on the same template as many of other my apps like "eLaws"

■　eLaws ... View on App Store

eLaws is a (sort of) law dictionary app. Users can download Japanese laws from the government website and browse locally.

AB Player and eLaws are completely different apps.

They are not made from a same template. They may be made from Xcode's "Single view app template" but that's all.

I explained to them but they didn't change mind. And they didn't disclose the exact reason why they think they are made on the same template.

AB Player and eLaws both use Realm Swift database frameworks and Google Mobile Ads framework, as well as UIKit, CoreText etc, but I don't think that's an issue.

I will obey Apple's decision anyway, but I don't understand why they made this decision.

AB Player and eLaws both use UITableView and UINavigationController... That makes them visually similar, but of course that does not deserve rejection.

Does anyone get rejected because of Realm or Google framework?

Boost

Masatoshi OP

Apr ’18

Any new apps must not release free and paid apps separately. Someone from Apple clearly said so on the phone.

For existing apps, it is allowed, but I think it will give the reviewer bad impression that you may be a spammer.

Masatoshi OP

Apr ’18

On 19 April

Apple finally approved AB Player.

It's been quite exhausting and depressing. I have been making iOS apps for nearly 10 years and have made a few hundreds of thousands dollars for Apple, if not a few millions, but they call me a spammer. (Also I paid lots of tax in this country where I live but no one in this country wants to employ me. Well I failed to be a star developer. I don't deserve App Store as Apple say.)

Masatoshi OP

May ’18

I got another Guideline 4.3 rejeciton today.

This time it is a keyboard extension that enables Japanese and English handwriting (handwriting recogniton) system wide.

View on App Store

I immediately appealed to the review board, but even the appeal was rejected just in an hour. They said they gave us all the reasons (yes, made from a template as usual) and my request for detailed explanation was denied.

-----

We got a phone call on June 6. Finally they decided that the app is unique enough to be appoved. It took several weeks to get attention from the review board this time again. The resolution centre was purly waste of time. It did not resolve anything.

Yuta43 OP

May ’18

The reason your app is rejected is that you release similiar app.

Seemingly I found similiar three app (app icon, function) on your developer acount.

The App Store Guideline prohibits developers from releaseing similiar app on App Store.

Masatoshi OP

May ’18

If you are talking about FastFinga 3, I already got approved from Hasegawa san from Apple Review Board. He clearly said that Handwriting Keyboard is not similar to FastFinga 3 because Handwriting Keyboard is a keyboard extension, although he ordered me to remove FastFinga version 2 because keeping multiple versions is against Guideline 4.3 and not allowed on App Store.

Even he said that I still doubt Handwriting Keyboard was rejected because of FastFinga 3. I think the review team is very confused and not operating well. FastFinga is more like a drawing app. Handwriting Keyboard is a keyboard extension, which contains handwriting recognition engine. It is like Apple's built-in Simplified Chinese Handwriting Keyboard.

Yuta43 OP

May ’18

Thanks for your app explanation.

Maybe your developer account is flaged as spam account.

Masatoshi OP

May ’18

Here is the list of our apps that got Guideline 4.3 rejection so far...

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id926102392?ls=1&mt=8 (approved after one month)

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1272669652?ls=1&mt=8 (approved after giving up the obsolete version and IP commentary book reader (id1217317638))

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id978926628?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id325361059?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id560440657?ls=1&mt=8 (approved after several phone calls)

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1020070997?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)

• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1217317638?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)

• https://app-liv.jp/320090110/(told to remove on the phone because it violates Guideline 4.3)