7 ms·

Apple Expects Google Voice App Developers To Pay Refunds Out Of Pocket

82 points by vaksel 17y ago

quoderat 17y ago
If Apple gets any more evil, they will become kind of parody found in a Mike Myers movie. Makes me regret buying my Cinema Display from them
- 9oliYQjP 17y ago
  I went to a free iPhone Developer Tech Talk where they specifically addressed this policy. Not too many developers in the audience seemed thrilled about it, but it was laid out in front of them. If a customer comes to you for whatever reason asking for a refund, Apple's official policy is that it is your problem to deal with. I specifically made a note about it because I caught the Apple representative's very lawyer-esque response which was to minimize what he said at all about the issue, except to really say "it's your problem". I might add that I don't think this policy is due to maliciousness on Apple's part. The reality is that trying to handle refunds has a number of logistical nightmares associated with it, namely: 1. Refund standards and laws within contiguous regions that the store serves are inconsistent. For instance, just because you have Apple Store USA, doesn't mean that there can be one consistent refund policy. Now multiply this problem by the number of countries that the store is present in. 2. A great number of customers would use refunds as a way to "try before you buy". The numbers would be significantly high enough to cause a problem. Now, there's that old saying that you should never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to ignorance. I strongly suspect Apple's approach to this specific case is a simple case of bureaucratic ignorance. I bet that you have a middle-management type implementing a policy that was designed for him/her based upon very specific legal advice. The situation has probably been flagged for attention by the legal department and upper management, but until a policy is designed, they have to address the current situation using known protocols. If you were at the Tech Talk that I was, Apple apologized for a lot of the iTunes Store stupidity that developers were complaining about online. They also explained why things were the way they were and it wasn't due to Apple being malicious.
  - locopati 17y ago
    I don't think developers have a problem with paying a full refund for user-returned apps so much as a problem with paying a full refund for Apple-returned apps (the capriciousness is just the icing on the cake).
  - pyre 17y ago
    You're missing the two main points: 1. The developer is on the hook for refunding 100% of the sale price... but Apple takes a 30% cut of the sale price. So the developer is actually _losing_ money to make a refund to the customer. 2. Apple is the cause of the refunds. Apple is in a win-win situation here (for them) because they are making their own decisions and shrugging off any responsibility or consequences for their actions on to the developers. Wouldn't it be nice to have someone else take the fall and/or answer for the consequences of any actions that you take?
    - cubicle67 17y ago
      NO! this is wrong and I'm sick of seeing it repeated over and over again. The developer IS NOT on the hook for 100%. They ARE NOT losing money.
      - pyre 17y ago
        In any case, even if the developer is only on the hook for the 70% of the sale price, Apple is the cause of people asking for refunds. As such, Apple should refund them their money. Afterall, it was Apple's approval process that failed if it allowed some of these products into the AppStore where they were sold for months before Apple 'realized' that they were in violation. (At least according to Apple's official word on the subject)
  - anigbrowl 17y ago
    You raise reasonable points, but consider in turn that Apple's whole brand is built around providing a friendly experience. They're certainly aware of app store trends at the upper management level, as evidenced by discussions with stock analysts on conference calls about whether the trend towards $0.99 apps means a race to the bottom that could lower the perceived value of the platform. I agree that it's not as simple as Steve Jobs rolling around in a swimming pool of money cackling at the misfortune of penniless developers, but I find it hard to believe nobody has mentioned to him that the peasants are revolting.
luigi 17y ago
Wow, when it rains it certainly pours. Here's a poll asking whether or not our development plans have actually changed due to recent events: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=737511 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=737511
martythemaniak 17y ago
At the risk of sounding like an asshole, it's nice to see one's views validated. Some of us have been getting downmodded for bad-mouthing Apple's App Store and warning against this kind of stuff since its launch. It's important to note that none of Apple's written or implicit policies have changed - it is only people's perceptions that are now changing. The good part is of this debacle is that, either they will change their horrible attitude and policies, or people will abandon them for greener pastures.
- chaosprophet 17y ago
  What I would like to see is a widespread developer boycott of the iPhone platform. This would bring Apple back to the days where they used to cajole developers into writing software for the Mac.
  - TomOfTTB 17y ago
    As long as there is money to be made there will always be developers so a boycott is pointless. If every developer currently in the app store decided to abandon it tomorrow it would only serve to create an irresistible target for developers who had been turned off by the heavy competition. Until we live in a world where every developer has all the money they could ever want there will always be developers for a platform with over 30 million potential customers.
  - Gormo 17y ago
    The analogy with the Mac doesn't really work, because the Mac has never been anything but a computing platform. But the iPhone is a phone first and a platform second. Remember that the iPhone was a huge success when it was introduced in 2007, despite a higher price point and no third-party apps at all. As long as the iPhone is subsidized by phone carriers, Apple's cash cow will be hardware sales. It won't be until the smartphone market reaches a certain level of saturation that Apple will have an incentive to focus on the App Store as a revenue generator. And when that happens, I bet they will be a lot less mercurial with their developers.
    - 17y ago
jws 17y ago
Of course they have to pay the customer refunds. The developers accepted a contract agreeing to refund money in certain circumstances, the circumstance have occurred, it is time for them to uphold their end of the contract. The sales have been rolled back, the customers' money is in the developers account (as sympathetic as "pocket" sounds, if they can carry the money in their pocket then this is about very little money at all), the customers get their money back. I think perhaps everyone that learns this lesson does it the hard way. Understand the contracts you enter into. (I learned mine at the hands of Digital Equipment Corporation. For "good will" reasons I agreed to supply a specific key person for a specific nearly completed project until it was finished for a specific sum. All good, until it became in Digital's best interests to not complete the project on time and get more money from the customer for another year's work. I'm sure the Digital managers had many a good laugh that year.)
- invisible 17y ago
  I agree, contracts are legally binding. However, there are judgments against contracts in civil court cases merely because the contract is ludicrous. E.g. Apple approved the application, then breached the values of the contract (despite it not being written in the contract) by rejecting the application although the application did not drastically change during it's life-cycle. (The argument may fall better under lacking competency to manage the App Store.) With this FCC ruling, I think an application developer would be insane not to sue for breach of contract by Apple.
  - fatdog789 17y ago
    Or to put it more succinctly: Apple cannot retain the 30% if it was the cause of removal for an otherwise rules-abiding application. It's known as the doctrine of unclean hands (or possibly may even just be a plain ol' breach of contract).
    - pyre 17y ago
      If anyone takes this one to court, I'm sure Apple's legal team will try to paint that 30% they take as just a 'fee' to cover the infrastructure costs and that the infrastructure was still used to make the sale even when the customer is asking for a refund. (Not that I agree with what they are doing)
sammcd 17y ago
Why is this only newsworthy when Google has to pay the price. Developers have had to pay this price since the inception of the app store. This is one part of the agreement that I think is very unfair, and I am glad it is getting press. Sure we signed a legal agreement, but still it is a bad deal for us, and we have no alternative.
- pyre 17y ago
  It should have been newsworthy a long time ago. It's only really hitting the fan now because: 1. They rejected Google who seemed to be on good standing with Apple. (i.e. If they'll reject Google over something obtuse, they'll reject anyone) 2. The FCC has even decided to get involved. If this had not happened, there would have been a large uproar in the 'geek community,' but it might have actually died down. A government body conducting an investigation into this gives the story more legs. 3. It was a number of Apps rejected all at once and all related to the same technology (Google Voice). This gives it more attention due to scale (vs. single apps here and there). 4. The number of stories of stupid AppStore approval decisions has been steadily growing. There is a sort of cumulative affect.
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  Because Google has the financial and social capital to publicly humiliate Apple if they feel like it. In other words, they are big enough to take revenge without putting their bottom line or brand at serious risk. You know, flip off your neighbor and only a few people care. Flip off the president and you'll have people demanding you be brought up on treason charges.
quizbiz 17y ago
I have no intention of asking for a refund. I have no intention of deleting my GV Mobile app.
credo 17y ago
I realize that this is a contrarian view, but (in its aim at being sensational), the headline is incorrect. Apple has not said that it expects developers to pay any refunds out of pocket. On the contrary, the app-store/itunes agreement tells consumers/users that they are not entitled to any refunds for the apps they purchase. Again, I realize that this is a contrarian view and every comment on this item (more than 50 comments?) seems to assume that the headline is correct. However, can any of you point to any evidence that Apple wants developers to refund users for any GV related app.
- credo 17y ago
  so this has been downvoted for pointing out that the headline is incorrect and that people should look at the facts ? anyway, I'll say it again. Apple has not said that it expects devs to pay refunds out of pocket. The headline is incorrect. If you disagree, please make the case for your argument instead of anonymous downvoting.
- cubicle67 17y ago
  Yes, the headline is sensationalist and incorrect. What's worse is that I've had to trawl through several hundred comments (I had the misfortune to venture into Reddit territory) before I found someone who noticed. The actual story is that if any customer who has already purchased one of these apps decided to claim a refund, and that claim is accepted by Apple, then the developer loses the money they made from that sale (70% of the purchase price). That's it. The only difference between this and any other app, is that these developers are unable to update their apps to fix any existing bugs.
stalf 17y ago
And they dig deeper on their stupidity hole...

82 points by vaksel 17y ago

If Apple gets any more evil, they will become kind of parody found in a Mike Myers movie. Makes me regret buying my Cinema Display from them

9oliYQjP 17y ago
I went to a free iPhone Developer Tech Talk where they specifically addressed this policy. Not too many developers in the audience seemed thrilled about it, but it was laid out in front of them. If a customer comes to you for whatever reason asking for a refund, Apple's official policy is that it is your problem to deal with. I specifically made a note about it because I caught the Apple representative's very lawyer-esque response which was to minimize what he said at all about the issue, except to really say "it's your problem". I might add that I don't think this policy is due to maliciousness on Apple's part. The reality is that trying to handle refunds has a number of logistical nightmares associated with it, namely: 1. Refund standards and laws within contiguous regions that the store serves are inconsistent. For instance, just because you have Apple Store USA, doesn't mean that there can be one consistent refund policy. Now multiply this problem by the number of countries that the store is present in. 2. A great number of customers would use refunds as a way to "try before you buy". The numbers would be significantly high enough to cause a problem. Now, there's that old saying that you should never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to ignorance. I strongly suspect Apple's approach to this specific case is a simple case of bureaucratic ignorance. I bet that you have a middle-management type implementing a policy that was designed for him/her based upon very specific legal advice. The situation has probably been flagged for attention by the legal department and upper management, but until a policy is designed, they have to address the current situation using known protocols. If you were at the Tech Talk that I was, Apple apologized for a lot of the iTunes Store stupidity that developers were complaining about online. They also explained why things were the way they were and it wasn't due to Apple being malicious.
- locopati 17y ago
  I don't think developers have a problem with paying a full refund for user-returned apps so much as a problem with paying a full refund for Apple-returned apps (the capriciousness is just the icing on the cake).
- pyre 17y ago
  You're missing the two main points: 1. The developer is on the hook for refunding 100% of the sale price... but Apple takes a 30% cut of the sale price. So the developer is actually _losing_ money to make a refund to the customer. 2. Apple is the cause of the refunds. Apple is in a win-win situation here (for them) because they are making their own decisions and shrugging off any responsibility or consequences for their actions on to the developers. Wouldn't it be nice to have someone else take the fall and/or answer for the consequences of any actions that you take?
  - cubicle67 17y ago
    NO! this is wrong and I'm sick of seeing it repeated over and over again. The developer IS NOT on the hook for 100%. They ARE NOT losing money.
    - pyre 17y ago
      In any case, even if the developer is only on the hook for the 70% of the sale price, Apple is the cause of people asking for refunds. As such, Apple should refund them their money. Afterall, it was Apple's approval process that failed if it allowed some of these products into the AppStore where they were sold for months before Apple 'realized' that they were in violation. (At least according to Apple's official word on the subject)
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  You raise reasonable points, but consider in turn that Apple's whole brand is built around providing a friendly experience. They're certainly aware of app store trends at the upper management level, as evidenced by discussions with stock analysts on conference calls about whether the trend towards $0.99 apps means a race to the bottom that could lower the perceived value of the platform. I agree that it's not as simple as Steve Jobs rolling around in a swimming pool of money cackling at the misfortune of penniless developers, but I find it hard to believe nobody has mentioned to him that the peasants are revolting.

luigi 17y ago

Wow, when it rains it certainly pours. Here's a poll asking whether or not our development plans have actually changed due to recent events: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=737511 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=737511

martythemaniak 17y ago

At the risk of sounding like an asshole, it's nice to see one's views validated. Some of us have been getting downmodded for bad-mouthing Apple's App Store and warning against this kind of stuff since its launch. It's important to note that none of Apple's written or implicit policies have changed - it is only people's perceptions that are now changing. The good part is of this debacle is that, either they will change their horrible attitude and policies, or people will abandon them for greener pastures.

chaosprophet 17y ago
What I would like to see is a widespread developer boycott of the iPhone platform. This would bring Apple back to the days where they used to cajole developers into writing software for the Mac.
- TomOfTTB 17y ago
  As long as there is money to be made there will always be developers so a boycott is pointless. If every developer currently in the app store decided to abandon it tomorrow it would only serve to create an irresistible target for developers who had been turned off by the heavy competition. Until we live in a world where every developer has all the money they could ever want there will always be developers for a platform with over 30 million potential customers.
- Gormo 17y ago
  The analogy with the Mac doesn't really work, because the Mac has never been anything but a computing platform. But the iPhone is a phone first and a platform second. Remember that the iPhone was a huge success when it was introduced in 2007, despite a higher price point and no third-party apps at all. As long as the iPhone is subsidized by phone carriers, Apple's cash cow will be hardware sales. It won't be until the smartphone market reaches a certain level of saturation that Apple will have an incentive to focus on the App Store as a revenue generator. And when that happens, I bet they will be a lot less mercurial with their developers.
  - 17y ago

jws 17y ago

Of course they have to pay the customer refunds. The developers accepted a contract agreeing to refund money in certain circumstances, the circumstance have occurred, it is time for them to uphold their end of the contract. The sales have been rolled back, the customers' money is in the developers account (as sympathetic as "pocket" sounds, if they can carry the money in their pocket then this is about very little money at all), the customers get their money back. I think perhaps everyone that learns this lesson does it the hard way. Understand the contracts you enter into. (I learned mine at the hands of Digital Equipment Corporation. For "good will" reasons I agreed to supply a specific key person for a specific nearly completed project until it was finished for a specific sum. All good, until it became in Digital's best interests to not complete the project on time and get more money from the customer for another year's work. I'm sure the Digital managers had many a good laugh that year.)

invisible 17y ago
I agree, contracts are legally binding. However, there are judgments against contracts in civil court cases merely because the contract is ludicrous. E.g. Apple approved the application, then breached the values of the contract (despite it not being written in the contract) by rejecting the application although the application did not drastically change during it's life-cycle. (The argument may fall better under lacking competency to manage the App Store.) With this FCC ruling, I think an application developer would be insane not to sue for breach of contract by Apple.
- fatdog789 17y ago
  Or to put it more succinctly: Apple cannot retain the 30% if it was the cause of removal for an otherwise rules-abiding application. It's known as the doctrine of unclean hands (or possibly may even just be a plain ol' breach of contract).
  - pyre 17y ago
    If anyone takes this one to court, I'm sure Apple's legal team will try to paint that 30% they take as just a 'fee' to cover the infrastructure costs and that the infrastructure was still used to make the sale even when the customer is asking for a refund. (Not that I agree with what they are doing)

sammcd 17y ago

Why is this only newsworthy when Google has to pay the price. Developers have had to pay this price since the inception of the app store. This is one part of the agreement that I think is very unfair, and I am glad it is getting press. Sure we signed a legal agreement, but still it is a bad deal for us, and we have no alternative.

pyre 17y ago
It should have been newsworthy a long time ago. It's only really hitting the fan now because: 1. They rejected Google who seemed to be on good standing with Apple. (i.e. If they'll reject Google over something obtuse, they'll reject anyone) 2. The FCC has even decided to get involved. If this had not happened, there would have been a large uproar in the 'geek community,' but it might have actually died down. A government body conducting an investigation into this gives the story more legs. 3. It was a number of Apps rejected all at once and all related to the same technology (Google Voice). This gives it more attention due to scale (vs. single apps here and there). 4. The number of stories of stupid AppStore approval decisions has been steadily growing. There is a sort of cumulative affect.
anigbrowl 17y ago
Because Google has the financial and social capital to publicly humiliate Apple if they feel like it. In other words, they are big enough to take revenge without putting their bottom line or brand at serious risk. You know, flip off your neighbor and only a few people care. Flip off the president and you'll have people demanding you be brought up on treason charges.

quizbiz 17y ago

I have no intention of asking for a refund. I have no intention of deleting my GV Mobile app.

credo 17y ago

I realize that this is a contrarian view, but (in its aim at being sensational), the headline is incorrect. Apple has not said that it expects developers to pay any refunds out of pocket. On the contrary, the app-store/itunes agreement tells consumers/users that they are not entitled to any refunds for the apps they purchase. Again, I realize that this is a contrarian view and every comment on this item (more than 50 comments?) seems to assume that the headline is correct. However, can any of you point to any evidence that Apple wants developers to refund users for any GV related app.

credo 17y ago
so this has been downvoted for pointing out that the headline is incorrect and that people should look at the facts ? anyway, I'll say it again. Apple has not said that it expects devs to pay refunds out of pocket. The headline is incorrect. If you disagree, please make the case for your argument instead of anonymous downvoting.
cubicle67 17y ago
Yes, the headline is sensationalist and incorrect. What's worse is that I've had to trawl through several hundred comments (I had the misfortune to venture into Reddit territory) before I found someone who noticed. The actual story is that if any customer who has already purchased one of these apps decided to claim a refund, and that claim is accepted by Apple, then the developer loses the money they made from that sale (70% of the purchase price). That's it. The only difference between this and any other app, is that these developers are unable to update their apps to fix any existing bugs.

stalf 17y ago

And they dig deeper on their stupidity hole...