9 ms·

Dash developer's response to Apple's response

190 points by guelo 10y ago

timclemans206 10y ago
Always record your calls if the other side is.
- itg 10y ago
  The audio didn't start from the beginning so it is hard to say if they notified that they were recording, but in California, all parties must consent if one wants to record a phone call. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#Uni...
  - fruchtose 10y ago
    Since the dev behind Dash is based in Romania[1], is this law still applicable? [1] https://blog.kapeli.com/about https://blog.kapeli.com/about
    - hydrogen18 10y ago
      Only if you can get a Romanian judge to extradite him to California.
    - 0x0 10y ago
      Also, aren't European ios developer accounts and agreements usually handled by iTunes Luxembourg or iTunes Ireland?
  - charlesdm 10y ago
    He's from Romania..
nihonde 10y ago
Eh? It's very vague in the blog post, but it sounds like the developer paid for an Apple account and the device which were used to create fraudulent reviews. That last looks quite bad and makes Apple's position more understandable. Why isn't the developer explaining what happened with the dev account that they opened and funded? You can't just say "I haven't done anything wrong" under those circumstances without explaining who controls the offending account and why they might be manipulating App Store reviews.
- jbob2000 10y ago
  Did we read the same article? He used his credit card to pay for a friend's developer account and gave her one of his old devices to test on. Though he didn't mention it (sticking to facts) it looks like he was teaching someone how to make an iOS app and provided a bit of charity.
  - foota 10y ago
    The question is why was that account involved in review manipulation
    - jbob2000 10y ago
      Because he skipped the lesson about Apple having automated systems to catch review manipulators. So this newbie developer had some marketer friend whisper in her ear, "hey you can hire these guys to promote your shitty little food app, it's like $200 and I know someone who did it and made a billion dollars"
  - lawnchair_larry 10y ago
    Which sounds like a load of bull to me, but is ultimately irrelevant. As if someone wjo didn't even know how to set up an account and didn't have their own devices is going to engage in fraud. He got caught and didn't realize they would make the connection, so he's blaming someone else.
    - riskable 10y ago
      Don't assume the fraudulent reviews were intentional by either party. Spam systems are well-known to post reviews of completely unrelated products in order to make their intentional fraudulent activity appear more legitimate. It happens on Amazon, Yelp, basically everywhere. It's the same tactic that makes Facebook advertising so useless. You have millions of fake people posting regular fake "updates" complete with fake GPS locations just so that some of them can provide fake traffic for pages when someone pays. I want to see the proof that the reviews were fake in the first place and I want to see all the reviews posted by these supposedly fake users. It probably won't happen but here's to hoping. Maybe some public visibility into these sorts of things will breed sympathy for Apple's position because it's a real problem and it's very difficult to solve.
Mithaldu 10y ago
After listening to the first 2 minutes of the call, i can say with absolute confidence that Apple is straight-up blackmailing him.* I would love to hear opinions on whether this is something that could be taken to court. * They did make a mistake in not verifying whether the second account activity was actually done by Kapeli, yet they want him to claim they made no mistake, otherwise they won't reinstate Dash.
- Reason077 10y ago
  I think Apple's position is reasonable here. A second developer account, which is the account linked to fraudulent reviews, was opened using the same credit card, same bank account, and same test devices as the main Kapeli account. So it's reasonable that they would assume the same person was in control of both accounts. The developer claims this is not the case, however. Apple seems willing to accept that. All they are asking is for him to write a blog post stating these facts.
  - Mithaldu 10y ago
    The unreasonable parts are: - Apple assumed, and let these assumptions stay untested, and particularly failed to reach out to the different contact details on all involved accounts. - Apple admits they terminated his account in error, yet blackmail him in refusing to reinstate unless he makes a blog post. (Actual contents of the post irrelevant to the point at hand.)
    - eridius 10y ago
      Where did they say they terminated his account in error? On the recorded call they made it very clear that the accounts were linked and that Apple believes that to be accurate. The fact that they're willing to provide Kapeli with a way to get his account unlinked and reinstated does not mean they were incorrect in the first place.
      - Mithaldu 10y ago
        Apple representative states there was no wrongdoing on Kapeli's side. Absent any wrongdoing on his side the termination is in error. Additionally they made the error of not contacting the holders of all accounts involved.
sathomasga 10y ago
sounds like the developer got screwed by his relative, not by Apple
- 6nf 10y ago
  I doubt a relative would post literally thousands of fake reviews over the course of many months without the dev's knowledge
  - Mithaldu 10y ago
    Read the post again. Kapeli paid for the dev fee for an account he did not make or control, and gave the person controlling that account hardware he had bought. Apple proceeded to pull a facebook and marked the two accounts as linked and treated them as being the same person. Then the person controlling said account started doing shady stuff, followed by Apple dinging them, but failing to actually follow up with Kapeli's account to see whether that one is actually and in reality controlled by the same person. The relative was acting only on their own and likely not even aware that what they were doing could hurt Kapeli, and vice versa. And Apple knee-jerked without questioning their assumptions.
    - blah-blah-blah 10y ago
      This. Apple should be contacting the App's official developer account link to the App Developer, or all accounts linked to the App's Developer, not just the discovered linked Account. After all, isn;t the official account the one bound by the license and terms of use for the developer's app? If Apple chooses not to notify the App developer's via his official account, but the discovered account. Well, then only the discovered account should be deactivated (and not impact the App). Would apple send a password reset to the discovered linked account or the official account contact? We could insert a few jokes here, but obviously the answer here is the official account email.
    - eridius 10y ago
      > but failing to actually follow up with Kapeli's account to see whether that one is actually and in reality controlled by the same person That doesn't make sense. We're talking about anti-fraud measures here. If they contacted the other account and said "hey are you the same person as this first account?" a fraudster would always say no even if the same person controls both accounts!
rivaldo 10y ago
As a developer, I've been loosing trust on Apple over the past few years.
largehotcoffee 10y ago
Apple is right here and their decision makes sense. Honestly he's lucky they are even letting him rejoin the program.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
pkamb 10y ago
I wonder how many other developers have unknown "linked" accounts with a former coworker or business partner.
mmerickel 10y ago
After listening to the call it does seem like Apple didn't do due diligence and notify all parties involved. They notified the owner of the dev account, but not the owner of each account that was going to be deactivated. Doing this could have prevented the misunderstanding.
- madeofpalk 10y ago
  I'm sure there was much more communication than just that call. Apple, in a previous statement, said "Warning was given in advance of the termination and attempts were made to resolve the issue with the developer but they were unsuccessful"
  - Mithaldu 10y ago
    Listen to the phone call. He asks them why they contacted only the owner of the linked account and not the details on his account before closing his account, and Apple does not deny they failed to contact him and only says "cause they were linked". There was no other communication with Kapeli.
    - IBM 10y ago
      They also told him that, from their perspective, the two accounts belong to the same entity because they have the same payment details and test devices. There was no reason for them to know that this developer purchased an account for someone else and gave them his test devices (which sounds like an excuse anyone accused of anything gives when they're caught).
      - Mithaldu 10y ago
        Apple would also be aware that various sets of contact data are attached to those accounts, but ignored them. The linking is furthermore also only done on their side via metadata, and not communicated to, or done by, the developer.
        10y ago
wvenable 10y ago
This is the first I've ever heard of the concept of "linked" Apple developer accounts. I suspect most people won't come across this particular issue but it's just another fun app store concept.
- eridius 10y ago
  It's a fun concept when dealing with any kind of anti-fraud measures. I highly doubt the App Store is the only place where accounts can be considered linked.
- 0x0 10y ago
  It's particularly interesting to see that they are cross-checking registered test device UDIDs across developer accounts. Suddenly UDIDs need to be kept confidential, or a fraudster might add a high profile developer's UDID to their own developer account and then drive it into the ground. Doing iOS consultancy work for other people's dev accounts could also be more risky than expected now if you use your personal test devices there. Remember also that there are probably thousands of third party databases out there linking millions of UDIDs with real world identities, as it is only in the last few iOS versions that the device uniqueIdentifier API started returning blanks. Earlier, many apps and adtracking libraries almost certainly would include the UDID in server calls during login etc.
  - eridius 10y ago
    > Doing iOS consultancy work for other people's dev accounts could also be more risky than expected now if you use your personal test devices there. I don't think so. The fact that you have your device registered on two different accounts is unlikely to be sufficient to link the two accounts. It's merely one of the ways in which the accounts were linked. Using the same CC and/or bank details is another. And there's probably other links too that Apple didn't disclose (because they're only effective at combating fraud if fraudsters don't know about them).
    - 0x0 10y ago
      I do agree with your points here. Still gives me some pause with how I treat my UDIDs going forward.
rhapsodic 10y ago
After listening to the call recording, I can't see how Apple was being all that unreasonable with the guy. I suspect that his recording and posting audio of that call is going to blow up in his face. Especially if he broke any laws by doing it.
- Spooky23 10y ago
  Undisclosed call recording is a really bad idea.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - riskable 10y ago
    Depends on the state. Most states are "one party" where only one party (i.e. a person making or receiving a call has to know about it). http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-co... Federal law is "one party" as well.
    - pier25 10y ago
      The US law doesn't apply here... he is in Bulgaria I think? Edit: Romania.
dragonwriter 10y ago
So, Apple wanted to secretly pay the developer (via removing a penalty they had imposed) to produce PR material regarding the trustworthiness of their actions in the Developer Program. That's pretty much the same thing they claimed was the basis of the account suspension, if you think about it. Guess it's a "good for me, but not for thee" kind of thing.
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  Generally, if you have to turn the situation inside out like a sock to make a point, it's not going to seem very convincing.
- pier25 10y ago
  Really good point. Apple wants him to make a fake review.
jasonfungsing 10y ago
Wow!!! story changed after listened the call. I don’t think Apple did anything wrong in this.
sams99 10y ago
The flip side of this story is ... How would you feel if someone swiped a copy of your cc, started an apple developer account, did a bunch of review freud and then got you kicked out of the app store. I think there are some serious issues around due process with account termination. If something like this was sent originally this would be a non issue. > We detected freud from account X that is linked using your credit card number to account Y. ... bla bla bla freud is bad ... respond within N hours or have your account terminated.
- eridius 10y ago
  Your hypothetical doesn't match reality. The accounts were linked through more than just the CC, and the CC wasn't stolen anyway (presumably Kapeli didn't change the CC on his account, and the charge for the new account was never contested). And there's probably more than just the CC and test devices anyway, Apple probably used things like detecting that a computer used with one account was used to create the other, or the creator of the second account was currently logged in using the apple ID of the first, or something like that (but they probably don't go into detail about this because they don't want to tell fraudsters how to avoid detection).
pkamb 10y ago
According to his blog post, the developer sent his blog draft to Apple and hadn't yet heard back. He then today refreshes Loop Insight / iMore and reads "According to Apple, all attempts to work with the developer have failed". Was the press release really Apple's answer to the blog draft? Was it meant to torpedo the ongoing "blog negotiation", or independent of it?
- eridius 10y ago
  I'm assuming it was completely independent. And when they said attempts failed, this was before the account was terminated. It's not referring to any communication with the developer post-termination.
  - pkamb 10y ago
    Re-reading today's press releases, Apple's statements perhaps read as if they're delayed responses to the initial story (and are oblivious of the "my cousin did it" angle currently being talked through on the phone). But the Dash developer clearly read the press releases as responses to the ongoing communication, rejections of his draft blog post. In his view they made a new decision and went to the press with it. Account ban final. He has nothing to lose by posting his telling of the events and the audio. > Tonight Apple decided to accuse me of manipulating the App Store in public via a spokesperson. It's really unfortunate for both sides if this drama is the result of bad timing and/or siloed organizational departments.
    - eridius 10y ago
      I think you're correct. I too read Apple's statements today as being something prepared ahead of time (possibly even communicated to the media earlier and embargoed), wholly independently of Apple's ongoing talks with Kapeli about the blog post.
rhapsodic 10y ago
"What I’ve done: 3-4 years ago I helped a relative get started by paying for her Apple’s Developer Program Membership using my credit card. I also handed her test hardware that I no longer needed. From then on those accounts were linked in the eyes of Apple. Once that account was involved with review manipulation, my account was closed." Sounds a little fishy to me. I'm not saying that he was aware of or involved in review manipulation that was coming from his "relative's" Apple Developer account that he happened to pay for. But I wouldn't bet money that he wasn't. And the fact that he feels the need to mention giving said relative "test hardware that I no longer needed" suggests that said hardware might have been involved in the alleged review fraud. I don't think this will end well for this guy.
- trymas 10y ago
  Also, aren't credit cards valid for 4 years? Either he had completely new card at the time or it's a bit fishy.
ChildOfChaos 10y ago
What's the issue here? Seriously..... So this guy has a lot of suspicious activity on accounts linked to him. Apple have done what they believe is the right thing to protect the integrity of the app store, in line with there own terms and conditions which the developer has agreed too. Said developer has published blog posts online that give Apple very bad publicity over this, making them look like the bad guy for trying to protect users and maintain quality (What does apple have to gain by randomly disabling this guys account?) Apple have reached out to him and offered to sort the issue out as long as he posts the facts in a blog post, which is fair after his previous posts have outright caused Apple PR issues for something that is his own fault. Apple have also got top execs dealing with this issue, trying to make things right. Developer doesn't release said blog post, so Apple releases statement with said facts to protect themselves for further incorrect accusations. Developer then gets but hurt and releases the conversation that does nothing to help there situation. What is the developer trying to achieve here exactly? Sounds like the developer is guilty as sin for this fraud and is more interested in accusing apple and covering themselves.
- markbao 10y ago
  > which is fair after his previous posts have outright caused Apple PR issues for something that is his own fault 1. That it's his fault isn't so clear. The developer claims he was not notified that there was a linked account until two days after a ban. If you listen to the recording, he asks why he was not notified, and the representative does not give a good answer. > Developer doesn't release said blog post, so Apple releases statement with said facts to protect themselves for further incorrect accusations. 2. If we are to believe the developer, then he actually sent a draft of the blog post to Apple, then Apple doesn't respond and instead posts a public statement. > What is the developer trying to achieve here exactly? 3. Telling his side of the story and what happened. If we just heard the Apple side of the story and that was it, then we would assume, as many did, that the developer did do review manipulation. If we didn't hear about his side, we would have had no idea that Apple discovered the fraud on a linked account and wanted a blog post explanation to reinstate the account. Apple's statement was incomplete given everything they knew; there was no talk of "linked" accounts or anything of that sort. > Sounds like the developer is guilty as sin for this fraud 4. Again, if we are to believe the developer, there was no intent to defraud anyone, so I think it's a stretch to say that he's "guilty as sin" for it. The only fraud would be his cousin's fraud that his account is connected to, which Apple failed to notify the developer about until two days after closing his account and after the blog post.
slackstation 10y ago
This is dumb. He's risking a significant amount of his livelyhood for a company that doesn't really care all that much about him and he's calling them out in public. Dumb move. Most people will forget about this in a week and his business will be affected for months (in the shortest possible time frame) and probably permanently. This is a dangerous bluff to make.
- pier25 10y ago
  Probably not. Dash is mostly a desktop app and he can keep on selling it outside the MAS.
luketheobscure 10y ago
His summary doesn't at all reflect what was in the phone call that he posted. He says that Apple insisted he admit wrongdoing, but the representative from Apple was very clear about the three points he wanted expressed (his account was "linked to an account with fraudulent activity", he's working with Apple to unlink the accounts, and that he's working with Apple to get back into the program). He even specifically says that he won't admit any wrongdoing, and the Apple representative didn't take issue with that.
- pkamb 10y ago
  There are multiple communications and phone calls in play. It was a previous phone call on Friday that required admitting wrongdoing. > on FRIDAY they told me they’d reactivate my account if I’d make a blog post admitting some wrongdoing. I told them I can’t do that, because I did nothing wrong. > On SATURDAY they told me that they are fine with me writing the truth about what happened. [this is the call that was recorded]
lamontcg 10y ago
Apple and Google and the Walled Gardens they've constructed seriously need some regulation and need to be considered "common carriers" which provide a service to the general public without discrimination. Telephone companies are one such an example. If you paid the bill of your friends phone one month, and later the phone company got into a dispute with them and cut off the phone that you do business on out of your home office -- and then refused to reinstate your phone line unless you publicly apologized to them, I suspect the FCC would not approve of their actions. Apple has way more power in this situation and is much more of a monopoly over many software developers lives, but is operating by rules that it makes up itself.
pier25 10y ago
If Apple is open to admit the dev back to the program means he didn't really commit fraud. And if he didn't commit fraud, why is Apple enforcing him to write a PR blog post in favor of Apple as a condition to get back into the program? Apple wants him to write fake review. Oh the irony.
- interpol_p 10y ago
  The phone call doesn't stipulate terms the way you describe. Apple says his account was linked to the fraudulent account. They define "linked" as sharing test devices, and having been enrolled under the same credit card number. The accounts were linked. They say to the developer that if he explains exactly the above then his account will be re-instated. It's not a "fake review" if it's stating the facts. The part where we can assign blame to Apple is where they failed to notify all "linked accounts" when one of the accounts was engaged in fraudulent activity. They only notified the account engaged in the fraudulent activity, but went on to shut down that account and all linked accounts. If they had notified all linked accounts then the developer claims he could have taken steps to resolve this much sooner. (But to argue for Apple's side here: Apple views all linked accounts as a singular "legal entity," and so assumed notifying one was the same as notifying them all.)
  - davemel37 10y ago
    The gist of this point is the debate around banning guns from people on the terrorist watch list. One side insists that if they are bad enough to watch, we shouldn't let them buy guns (this is Apples stance that since our arbitrary system linked them, that suddenly makes him guilty.) and the people on the other side, insist that since there is no due process to being added to the terrorist watch list, it is a way to bypass a constitutional right (which is a valid point, whats to stop the government from arbitrarily adding people to these lists and stopping them from buying guns. Regardless of which side of the argument you lean towards, they can both legitimately believe they are 100% in the right.
    - interpol_p 10y ago
kyriakos 10y ago
Is it legal in the US to record a phone conversation without both parties being aware they are recorded?
- xuki 10y ago
  He's not in the US
wineisfine 10y ago
Oh so he GAVE is old hardware and GAVE his credit card to this relative. How conveniently coincidental. I think Apple did fine here, actually.
metafunctor 10y ago
Apple should change their process so that they contact all linked accounts if it's possible that they would be closed. End of. Kind of. Seems like Apple is working off the assumption that linked accounts are acutely aware of what each other are doing, and thus are all equally responsible for each others actions. Clearly this assumption is not valid. Having listened to the entire call, I think both parties conducted themselves with respect and good faith. The only question unanswered in the call is “why didn't Apple notify both accounts?”. Apple is in a position of disproportionate power here. They created the platform, they make the rules, everybody either plays by them or doesn't play at all. I really hope Apple will just be honest and admit that they did, in fact, have an inadequate process for dealing with this kind of corner case. They did make a mistake. They closed someone's account when it shouldn't have been closed. If Apple is adamant that they made no mistake, they only reinforce the feeling that Apple has become an inhuman giant, a profit-hunting corporate entity, that doesn't really care about human values — the antithesis of what Apple used to be.
- Twisell 10y ago
  Wether apple is inhuman or the developer is a prick is quite an open question. Both were faulty and they obviously didn't come to an agreement. Apple phone offer would have gave both of them a clean exit and it might always remain shady why this agrement wasn't actually implemented... After carefully listening to the phone call I still don't understand why the developers was arguing at all. He could have been back in buisness in a breeze with no harm at all.
  - metafunctor 10y ago
    Both Apple and the developer made mistakes. That much is clear. Apple, being a big corporation, is inhuman if they do not admit their mistakes. The developer, being a human, is a prick if he doesn't admit his mistakes.
  - pfg 10y ago
    > Both were faulty and they obviously didn't come to an agreement. I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion. The developer offered to publish a blog post saying that the app was removed due to fraudulent activity on a linked account he was not aware of. Apple accepted and then went ahead and published a statement accusing him of engaging in fraudulent behaviour anyway, claiming they gave plenty of warning, but not mentioning that the activity was limited to the non-Dash account, that the developer claims to have been unaware of the connection, and that they did not inform him of the connection or give any warning on this account. That's just dishonest.
andreasley 10y ago
Lessons: - Apple considers Developer Program memberships "linked to the same entity" if they are paid for by the same credit card. - If one of these accounts violates rules, all accounts of this entity are being closed. - As always, it's difficult to get any useful information from Apple. - Apple will listen and try to find a reasonable solution – at least if the public backlash is big enough. In my opinion, Apple should communicate this more clearly and, upon closing an account, provide all relevant information to the membership holders as well as providing a means of appeal. Mistakes do happen. I welcome Apple's crackdown on fradulent activity. However, as an iOS developer, stories like these are the reason why I don't want to bet my livelihood on distributing apps through the App Store. While the risk of having my app rejected or account closed for no particular reason is small, it's still there. Are developer's voices being heard, even if they don't have a blog and a twitter account? My experience with Apple's Bug Reporter says no.
- Mithaldu 10y ago
  Not only credit cards. Hardware can link accounts too, so be very careful whom you gift or sell your old computers to.
Mandatum 10y ago
How to get an app banned from the app store: Spend $5000 at Fiverr or similar on bogus reviews. .. There are no more steps. This also works with SEO. You can spend under $100 at Fiverr for thousands of backlinks, get your website flagged by Google and the website needs to manually remove those backlinks in their console (which takes days, if not weeks to track down the flagged links). Rinse and repeat on your competitor once a month to ruin their online presence.
lardissone 10y ago
Easy. Apple acted prematurely on a Kapeli mistake he doesn't admit.
pasbesoin 10y ago
Sometimes, I miss Steve Jobs. (In case my oblique comment isn't clear enough: Time for someone with real authority to cut through the crap on Apple's end.)

190 points by guelo 10y ago

timclemans206 10y ago

Always record your calls if the other side is.

itg 10y ago
The audio didn't start from the beginning so it is hard to say if they notified that they were recording, but in California, all parties must consent if one wants to record a phone call. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#Uni...
- fruchtose 10y ago
  Since the dev behind Dash is based in Romania[1], is this law still applicable? [1] https://blog.kapeli.com/about https://blog.kapeli.com/about
  - hydrogen18 10y ago
    Only if you can get a Romanian judge to extradite him to California.
  - 0x0 10y ago
    Also, aren't European ios developer accounts and agreements usually handled by iTunes Luxembourg or iTunes Ireland?
- charlesdm 10y ago
  He's from Romania..

nihonde 10y ago

Eh? It's very vague in the blog post, but it sounds like the developer paid for an Apple account and the device which were used to create fraudulent reviews. That last looks quite bad and makes Apple's position more understandable. Why isn't the developer explaining what happened with the dev account that they opened and funded? You can't just say "I haven't done anything wrong" under those circumstances without explaining who controls the offending account and why they might be manipulating App Store reviews.

jbob2000 10y ago
Did we read the same article? He used his credit card to pay for a friend's developer account and gave her one of his old devices to test on. Though he didn't mention it (sticking to facts) it looks like he was teaching someone how to make an iOS app and provided a bit of charity.
- foota 10y ago
  The question is why was that account involved in review manipulation
  - jbob2000 10y ago
    Because he skipped the lesson about Apple having automated systems to catch review manipulators. So this newbie developer had some marketer friend whisper in her ear, "hey you can hire these guys to promote your shitty little food app, it's like $200 and I know someone who did it and made a billion dollars"
- lawnchair_larry 10y ago
  Which sounds like a load of bull to me, but is ultimately irrelevant. As if someone wjo didn't even know how to set up an account and didn't have their own devices is going to engage in fraud. He got caught and didn't realize they would make the connection, so he's blaming someone else.
  - riskable 10y ago
    Don't assume the fraudulent reviews were intentional by either party. Spam systems are well-known to post reviews of completely unrelated products in order to make their intentional fraudulent activity appear more legitimate. It happens on Amazon, Yelp, basically everywhere. It's the same tactic that makes Facebook advertising so useless. You have millions of fake people posting regular fake "updates" complete with fake GPS locations just so that some of them can provide fake traffic for pages when someone pays. I want to see the proof that the reviews were fake in the first place and I want to see all the reviews posted by these supposedly fake users. It probably won't happen but here's to hoping. Maybe some public visibility into these sorts of things will breed sympathy for Apple's position because it's a real problem and it's very difficult to solve.

Mithaldu 10y ago

After listening to the first 2 minutes of the call, i can say with absolute confidence that Apple is straight-up blackmailing him.* I would love to hear opinions on whether this is something that could be taken to court. * They did make a mistake in not verifying whether the second account activity was actually done by Kapeli, yet they want him to claim they made no mistake, otherwise they won't reinstate Dash.

Reason077 10y ago
I think Apple's position is reasonable here. A second developer account, which is the account linked to fraudulent reviews, was opened using the same credit card, same bank account, and same test devices as the main Kapeli account. So it's reasonable that they would assume the same person was in control of both accounts. The developer claims this is not the case, however. Apple seems willing to accept that. All they are asking is for him to write a blog post stating these facts.
- Mithaldu 10y ago
  The unreasonable parts are: - Apple assumed, and let these assumptions stay untested, and particularly failed to reach out to the different contact details on all involved accounts. - Apple admits they terminated his account in error, yet blackmail him in refusing to reinstate unless he makes a blog post. (Actual contents of the post irrelevant to the point at hand.)
  - eridius 10y ago
    Where did they say they terminated his account in error? On the recorded call they made it very clear that the accounts were linked and that Apple believes that to be accurate. The fact that they're willing to provide Kapeli with a way to get his account unlinked and reinstated does not mean they were incorrect in the first place.
    - Mithaldu 10y ago
      Apple representative states there was no wrongdoing on Kapeli's side. Absent any wrongdoing on his side the termination is in error. Additionally they made the error of not contacting the holders of all accounts involved.

sathomasga 10y ago

sounds like the developer got screwed by his relative, not by Apple

6nf 10y ago
I doubt a relative would post literally thousands of fake reviews over the course of many months without the dev's knowledge
- Mithaldu 10y ago
  Read the post again. Kapeli paid for the dev fee for an account he did not make or control, and gave the person controlling that account hardware he had bought. Apple proceeded to pull a facebook and marked the two accounts as linked and treated them as being the same person. Then the person controlling said account started doing shady stuff, followed by Apple dinging them, but failing to actually follow up with Kapeli's account to see whether that one is actually and in reality controlled by the same person. The relative was acting only on their own and likely not even aware that what they were doing could hurt Kapeli, and vice versa. And Apple knee-jerked without questioning their assumptions.
  - blah-blah-blah 10y ago
    This. Apple should be contacting the App's official developer account link to the App Developer, or all accounts linked to the App's Developer, not just the discovered linked Account. After all, isn;t the official account the one bound by the license and terms of use for the developer's app? If Apple chooses not to notify the App developer's via his official account, but the discovered account. Well, then only the discovered account should be deactivated (and not impact the App). Would apple send a password reset to the discovered linked account or the official account contact? We could insert a few jokes here, but obviously the answer here is the official account email.
  - eridius 10y ago
    > but failing to actually follow up with Kapeli's account to see whether that one is actually and in reality controlled by the same person That doesn't make sense. We're talking about anti-fraud measures here. If they contacted the other account and said "hey are you the same person as this first account?" a fraudster would always say no even if the same person controls both accounts!

rivaldo 10y ago

As a developer, I've been loosing trust on Apple over the past few years.

largehotcoffee 10y ago

Apple is right here and their decision makes sense. Honestly he's lucky they are even letting him rejoin the program.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

pkamb 10y ago

I wonder how many other developers have unknown "linked" accounts with a former coworker or business partner.

mmerickel 10y ago

After listening to the call it does seem like Apple didn't do due diligence and notify all parties involved. They notified the owner of the dev account, but not the owner of each account that was going to be deactivated. Doing this could have prevented the misunderstanding.

madeofpalk 10y ago
I'm sure there was much more communication than just that call. Apple, in a previous statement, said "Warning was given in advance of the termination and attempts were made to resolve the issue with the developer but they were unsuccessful"
- Mithaldu 10y ago
  Listen to the phone call. He asks them why they contacted only the owner of the linked account and not the details on his account before closing his account, and Apple does not deny they failed to contact him and only says "cause they were linked". There was no other communication with Kapeli.
  - IBM 10y ago
    They also told him that, from their perspective, the two accounts belong to the same entity because they have the same payment details and test devices. There was no reason for them to know that this developer purchased an account for someone else and gave them his test devices (which sounds like an excuse anyone accused of anything gives when they're caught).
    - Mithaldu 10y ago
      Apple would also be aware that various sets of contact data are attached to those accounts, but ignored them. The linking is furthermore also only done on their side via metadata, and not communicated to, or done by, the developer.
      - 10y ago

wvenable 10y ago

This is the first I've ever heard of the concept of "linked" Apple developer accounts. I suspect most people won't come across this particular issue but it's just another fun app store concept.

eridius 10y ago
It's a fun concept when dealing with any kind of anti-fraud measures. I highly doubt the App Store is the only place where accounts can be considered linked.
0x0 10y ago
It's particularly interesting to see that they are cross-checking registered test device UDIDs across developer accounts. Suddenly UDIDs need to be kept confidential, or a fraudster might add a high profile developer's UDID to their own developer account and then drive it into the ground. Doing iOS consultancy work for other people's dev accounts could also be more risky than expected now if you use your personal test devices there. Remember also that there are probably thousands of third party databases out there linking millions of UDIDs with real world identities, as it is only in the last few iOS versions that the device uniqueIdentifier API started returning blanks. Earlier, many apps and adtracking libraries almost certainly would include the UDID in server calls during login etc.
- eridius 10y ago
  > Doing iOS consultancy work for other people's dev accounts could also be more risky than expected now if you use your personal test devices there. I don't think so. The fact that you have your device registered on two different accounts is unlikely to be sufficient to link the two accounts. It's merely one of the ways in which the accounts were linked. Using the same CC and/or bank details is another. And there's probably other links too that Apple didn't disclose (because they're only effective at combating fraud if fraudsters don't know about them).
  - 0x0 10y ago
    I do agree with your points here. Still gives me some pause with how I treat my UDIDs going forward.

rhapsodic 10y ago

After listening to the call recording, I can't see how Apple was being all that unreasonable with the guy. I suspect that his recording and posting audio of that call is going to blow up in his face. Especially if he broke any laws by doing it.

Spooky23 10y ago
Undisclosed call recording is a really bad idea.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- riskable 10y ago
  Depends on the state. Most states are "one party" where only one party (i.e. a person making or receiving a call has to know about it). http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-co... Federal law is "one party" as well.
  - pier25 10y ago
    The US law doesn't apply here... he is in Bulgaria I think? Edit: Romania.

dragonwriter 10y ago

So, Apple wanted to secretly pay the developer (via removing a penalty they had imposed) to produce PR material regarding the trustworthiness of their actions in the Developer Program. That's pretty much the same thing they claimed was the basis of the account suspension, if you think about it. Guess it's a "good for me, but not for thee" kind of thing.

oldmanjay 10y ago
Generally, if you have to turn the situation inside out like a sock to make a point, it's not going to seem very convincing.
pier25 10y ago
Really good point. Apple wants him to make a fake review.

jasonfungsing 10y ago

Wow!!! story changed after listened the call. I don’t think Apple did anything wrong in this.

sams99 10y ago

The flip side of this story is ... How would you feel if someone swiped a copy of your cc, started an apple developer account, did a bunch of review freud and then got you kicked out of the app store. I think there are some serious issues around due process with account termination. If something like this was sent originally this would be a non issue. > We detected freud from account X that is linked using your credit card number to account Y. ... bla bla bla freud is bad ... respond within N hours or have your account terminated.

eridius 10y ago
Your hypothetical doesn't match reality. The accounts were linked through more than just the CC, and the CC wasn't stolen anyway (presumably Kapeli didn't change the CC on his account, and the charge for the new account was never contested). And there's probably more than just the CC and test devices anyway, Apple probably used things like detecting that a computer used with one account was used to create the other, or the creator of the second account was currently logged in using the apple ID of the first, or something like that (but they probably don't go into detail about this because they don't want to tell fraudsters how to avoid detection).

pkamb 10y ago

According to his blog post, the developer sent his blog draft to Apple and hadn't yet heard back. He then today refreshes Loop Insight / iMore and reads "According to Apple, all attempts to work with the developer have failed". Was the press release really Apple's answer to the blog draft? Was it meant to torpedo the ongoing "blog negotiation", or independent of it?

eridius 10y ago
I'm assuming it was completely independent. And when they said attempts failed, this was before the account was terminated. It's not referring to any communication with the developer post-termination.
- pkamb 10y ago
  Re-reading today's press releases, Apple's statements perhaps read as if they're delayed responses to the initial story (and are oblivious of the "my cousin did it" angle currently being talked through on the phone). But the Dash developer clearly read the press releases as responses to the ongoing communication, rejections of his draft blog post. In his view they made a new decision and went to the press with it. Account ban final. He has nothing to lose by posting his telling of the events and the audio. > Tonight Apple decided to accuse me of manipulating the App Store in public via a spokesperson. It's really unfortunate for both sides if this drama is the result of bad timing and/or siloed organizational departments.
  - eridius 10y ago
    I think you're correct. I too read Apple's statements today as being something prepared ahead of time (possibly even communicated to the media earlier and embargoed), wholly independently of Apple's ongoing talks with Kapeli about the blog post.

rhapsodic 10y ago

"What I’ve done: 3-4 years ago I helped a relative get started by paying for her Apple’s Developer Program Membership using my credit card. I also handed her test hardware that I no longer needed. From then on those accounts were linked in the eyes of Apple. Once that account was involved with review manipulation, my account was closed." Sounds a little fishy to me. I'm not saying that he was aware of or involved in review manipulation that was coming from his "relative's" Apple Developer account that he happened to pay for. But I wouldn't bet money that he wasn't. And the fact that he feels the need to mention giving said relative "test hardware that I no longer needed" suggests that said hardware might have been involved in the alleged review fraud. I don't think this will end well for this guy.

trymas 10y ago
Also, aren't credit cards valid for 4 years? Either he had completely new card at the time or it's a bit fishy.

ChildOfChaos 10y ago

What's the issue here? Seriously..... So this guy has a lot of suspicious activity on accounts linked to him. Apple have done what they believe is the right thing to protect the integrity of the app store, in line with there own terms and conditions which the developer has agreed too. Said developer has published blog posts online that give Apple very bad publicity over this, making them look like the bad guy for trying to protect users and maintain quality (What does apple have to gain by randomly disabling this guys account?) Apple have reached out to him and offered to sort the issue out as long as he posts the facts in a blog post, which is fair after his previous posts have outright caused Apple PR issues for something that is his own fault. Apple have also got top execs dealing with this issue, trying to make things right. Developer doesn't release said blog post, so Apple releases statement with said facts to protect themselves for further incorrect accusations. Developer then gets but hurt and releases the conversation that does nothing to help there situation. What is the developer trying to achieve here exactly? Sounds like the developer is guilty as sin for this fraud and is more interested in accusing apple and covering themselves.

markbao 10y ago
> which is fair after his previous posts have outright caused Apple PR issues for something that is his own fault 1. That it's his fault isn't so clear. The developer claims he was not notified that there was a linked account until two days after a ban. If you listen to the recording, he asks why he was not notified, and the representative does not give a good answer. > Developer doesn't release said blog post, so Apple releases statement with said facts to protect themselves for further incorrect accusations. 2. If we are to believe the developer, then he actually sent a draft of the blog post to Apple, then Apple doesn't respond and instead posts a public statement. > What is the developer trying to achieve here exactly? 3. Telling his side of the story and what happened. If we just heard the Apple side of the story and that was it, then we would assume, as many did, that the developer did do review manipulation. If we didn't hear about his side, we would have had no idea that Apple discovered the fraud on a linked account and wanted a blog post explanation to reinstate the account. Apple's statement was incomplete given everything they knew; there was no talk of "linked" accounts or anything of that sort. > Sounds like the developer is guilty as sin for this fraud 4. Again, if we are to believe the developer, there was no intent to defraud anyone, so I think it's a stretch to say that he's "guilty as sin" for it. The only fraud would be his cousin's fraud that his account is connected to, which Apple failed to notify the developer about until two days after closing his account and after the blog post.

slackstation 10y ago

This is dumb. He's risking a significant amount of his livelyhood for a company that doesn't really care all that much about him and he's calling them out in public. Dumb move. Most people will forget about this in a week and his business will be affected for months (in the shortest possible time frame) and probably permanently. This is a dangerous bluff to make.

pier25 10y ago
Probably not. Dash is mostly a desktop app and he can keep on selling it outside the MAS.

luketheobscure 10y ago

His summary doesn't at all reflect what was in the phone call that he posted. He says that Apple insisted he admit wrongdoing, but the representative from Apple was very clear about the three points he wanted expressed (his account was "linked to an account with fraudulent activity", he's working with Apple to unlink the accounts, and that he's working with Apple to get back into the program). He even specifically says that he won't admit any wrongdoing, and the Apple representative didn't take issue with that.

pkamb 10y ago
There are multiple communications and phone calls in play. It was a previous phone call on Friday that required admitting wrongdoing. > on FRIDAY they told me they’d reactivate my account if I’d make a blog post admitting some wrongdoing. I told them I can’t do that, because I did nothing wrong. > On SATURDAY they told me that they are fine with me writing the truth about what happened. [this is the call that was recorded]

lamontcg 10y ago

Apple and Google and the Walled Gardens they've constructed seriously need some regulation and need to be considered "common carriers" which provide a service to the general public without discrimination. Telephone companies are one such an example. If you paid the bill of your friends phone one month, and later the phone company got into a dispute with them and cut off the phone that you do business on out of your home office -- and then refused to reinstate your phone line unless you publicly apologized to them, I suspect the FCC would not approve of their actions. Apple has way more power in this situation and is much more of a monopoly over many software developers lives, but is operating by rules that it makes up itself.

pier25 10y ago

If Apple is open to admit the dev back to the program means he didn't really commit fraud. And if he didn't commit fraud, why is Apple enforcing him to write a PR blog post in favor of Apple as a condition to get back into the program? Apple wants him to write fake review. Oh the irony.

interpol_p 10y ago
The phone call doesn't stipulate terms the way you describe. Apple says his account was linked to the fraudulent account. They define "linked" as sharing test devices, and having been enrolled under the same credit card number. The accounts were linked. They say to the developer that if he explains exactly the above then his account will be re-instated. It's not a "fake review" if it's stating the facts. The part where we can assign blame to Apple is where they failed to notify all "linked accounts" when one of the accounts was engaged in fraudulent activity. They only notified the account engaged in the fraudulent activity, but went on to shut down that account and all linked accounts. If they had notified all linked accounts then the developer claims he could have taken steps to resolve this much sooner. (But to argue for Apple's side here: Apple views all linked accounts as a singular "legal entity," and so assumed notifying one was the same as notifying them all.)
- davemel37 10y ago
  The gist of this point is the debate around banning guns from people on the terrorist watch list. One side insists that if they are bad enough to watch, we shouldn't let them buy guns (this is Apples stance that since our arbitrary system linked them, that suddenly makes him guilty.) and the people on the other side, insist that since there is no due process to being added to the terrorist watch list, it is a way to bypass a constitutional right (which is a valid point, whats to stop the government from arbitrarily adding people to these lists and stopping them from buying guns. Regardless of which side of the argument you lean towards, they can both legitimately believe they are 100% in the right.
  - interpol_p 10y ago

kyriakos 10y ago

Is it legal in the US to record a phone conversation without both parties being aware they are recorded?

xuki 10y ago
He's not in the US

wineisfine 10y ago

Oh so he GAVE is old hardware and GAVE his credit card to this relative. How conveniently coincidental. I think Apple did fine here, actually.

metafunctor 10y ago

Apple should change their process so that they contact all linked accounts if it's possible that they would be closed. End of. Kind of. Seems like Apple is working off the assumption that linked accounts are acutely aware of what each other are doing, and thus are all equally responsible for each others actions. Clearly this assumption is not valid. Having listened to the entire call, I think both parties conducted themselves with respect and good faith. The only question unanswered in the call is “why didn't Apple notify both accounts?”. Apple is in a position of disproportionate power here. They created the platform, they make the rules, everybody either plays by them or doesn't play at all. I really hope Apple will just be honest and admit that they did, in fact, have an inadequate process for dealing with this kind of corner case. They did make a mistake. They closed someone's account when it shouldn't have been closed. If Apple is adamant that they made no mistake, they only reinforce the feeling that Apple has become an inhuman giant, a profit-hunting corporate entity, that doesn't really care about human values — the antithesis of what Apple used to be.

Twisell 10y ago
Wether apple is inhuman or the developer is a prick is quite an open question. Both were faulty and they obviously didn't come to an agreement. Apple phone offer would have gave both of them a clean exit and it might always remain shady why this agrement wasn't actually implemented... After carefully listening to the phone call I still don't understand why the developers was arguing at all. He could have been back in buisness in a breeze with no harm at all.
- metafunctor 10y ago
  Both Apple and the developer made mistakes. That much is clear. Apple, being a big corporation, is inhuman if they do not admit their mistakes. The developer, being a human, is a prick if he doesn't admit his mistakes.
- pfg 10y ago
  > Both were faulty and they obviously didn't come to an agreement. I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion. The developer offered to publish a blog post saying that the app was removed due to fraudulent activity on a linked account he was not aware of. Apple accepted and then went ahead and published a statement accusing him of engaging in fraudulent behaviour anyway, claiming they gave plenty of warning, but not mentioning that the activity was limited to the non-Dash account, that the developer claims to have been unaware of the connection, and that they did not inform him of the connection or give any warning on this account. That's just dishonest.

andreasley 10y ago

Lessons: - Apple considers Developer Program memberships "linked to the same entity" if they are paid for by the same credit card. - If one of these accounts violates rules, all accounts of this entity are being closed. - As always, it's difficult to get any useful information from Apple. - Apple will listen and try to find a reasonable solution – at least if the public backlash is big enough. In my opinion, Apple should communicate this more clearly and, upon closing an account, provide all relevant information to the membership holders as well as providing a means of appeal. Mistakes do happen. I welcome Apple's crackdown on fradulent activity. However, as an iOS developer, stories like these are the reason why I don't want to bet my livelihood on distributing apps through the App Store. While the risk of having my app rejected or account closed for no particular reason is small, it's still there. Are developer's voices being heard, even if they don't have a blog and a twitter account? My experience with Apple's Bug Reporter says no.

Mithaldu 10y ago
Not only credit cards. Hardware can link accounts too, so be very careful whom you gift or sell your old computers to.

Mandatum 10y ago

How to get an app banned from the app store: Spend $5000 at Fiverr or similar on bogus reviews. .. There are no more steps. This also works with SEO. You can spend under $100 at Fiverr for thousands of backlinks, get your website flagged by Google and the website needs to manually remove those backlinks in their console (which takes days, if not weeks to track down the flagged links). Rinse and repeat on your competitor once a month to ruin their online presence.

lardissone 10y ago

Easy. Apple acted prematurely on a Kapeli mistake he doesn't admit.

pasbesoin 10y ago

Sometimes, I miss Steve Jobs. (In case my oblique comment isn't clear enough: Time for someone with real authority to cut through the crap on Apple's end.)