This app or its metadata appears to be misrepresenting itself as another popular app or game already available on the App Store, from a developer's website or distribution source, or from a third-party platform. Apps should be unique and should not attempt to deceive users into thinking they are downloading something they are not.... For the past four years, my app has been live on the Play Store and is also accessible on several other platforms. Despite this, my attempts to publish it on the App Store have been consistently rejected citing Guideline 4.1 - Design - Copycats. Apple has not specified the exact proof of rights they are looking for. To address this, I have recorded my personal Google Play Developer Console account to showcase that I possess all the required rights to manage the app on Google Play. I am seeking advice on the best course of action to resolve this issue.

I'm extremely frustrated with Apple's unfair app review process. To make a long story short, for every app I've ever submitted, Apple has made false accusations about problems with my apps. Some of their feedback has absolutely been legitimate and correct, which I appreciate, but I would say about 50% of all "feedback" I've ever received has turned out to be objectively wrong. In some cases, the App Review team's gaslighting has been so strong that I have had to submit screenshots of code as proof that their accusations were completely wrong, after which they have had to accept the app. In one instance, they have claimed that one of my apps would not be allowed on the App Store at all, and when I link to multiple other apps that works EXACTLY the same way, the App Review team love to point out that you are not allowed to compare yourself to other apps. To be clear, I'm an indie developer and I'm not even comparing myself to apps from large corporations or any popular apps at all (since it's well known they get the VIP treatment), all apps I have compared myself to are from small, unknown indie developers such as myself - so I'm only comparing myself to developers in the same category as me. Telling developers that they are not allowed to compare themselves to other developers is VERY ethically problematic, imagine doing that to minorities in real life. I'm a minority in multiple ways, and I'm very worried about the ethics and moral at the App Review team. When I ask why they reject my app, but approve many apps that were recently released that works EXACTLY the same way as my app, I either get no reply at all or they tell me that I can't compare myself to others. Submitting appeals to the App Review Board doesn't help either. To be completely transparent with you, it has been very hard and draining on my mental health to have this invisible wall consisting of gaslighting that the App Review team has set up for me. It just doesn't make sense... The app review process is unfair, inconsistent and problematic, and it should be a serious eyebrow-raiser when Apple's App Review team can't explain why some small indie developers get approved easily while others get rejected. Especially since it seems like the pattern is that those who get rejected are humans in various kinds of minorities, as evidences by some other threads on this topic.

I have a customer who wants to protect the REST API of their app with a private certificate. They would then distribute the client certificate to the authorized users. Their app would not work unless the client certificate is already installed on the user's phone before they run the app. I have never done this before. Is it possible to install a client certificate on an iPhone without running an app, for example if it were sent in an email message? And if it is possible, is App Review going to let such an app into the app store? Thanks, Frank

Hey, I have an application for professionals in the medical field and their patients, and I have a question about AppStore Guideline - 1.2 User-Generated Content. In the application there is a one-to-one connection between a professional and a patient. I want to add comments and chat features but I don't know if I need to do something regarding to 1.2. I don't expect to have any abusive content from any user due to professional service so the question is do I need to implement all those mechanizm to filter the content? If I need to implement them - can I only add a "Report" button in settings to report?

Hello! In our applications we consume several 3rd party libraries that use one or more API from this list - https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/privacy_manifest_files/describing_use_of_required_reason_api?language=objc. These XCFrameworks contain static frameworks (a framework with a statically linked binary inside), so after linking, the machine code inside these frameworks becomes either a part of the app's executable or a part of a dynamic library. We integrate these libraries using Swift Package Manager's ".binaryTarget" feature and have been having trouble understanding where should the privacy manifest be located in the final app, so that we can pass the App Store review process. It seems that with SPM the privacy manifest (PrivacyInfo.xcprivacy file) is lost - https://github.com/apple/swift-package-manager/issues/7317 If the static framework is linked as a part of the app's executable, does that mean we have to manually merge the app's privacy manifest with that of a 3rd party static library? If the static framework is linked as a part of a dynamic library within the app, where should the privacy manifest be located? And what should happen if there are multiple static frameworks each with a privacy manifest being linked into this dynamic library? Thank you very much!

I'm trying to submit an app that we have successfully tested in TestFlight. After completing all the distribution steps and submitting for review, the review is failing with the response: "Your app version was rejected and no other items submitted can be accepted or approved. You can make edits to your app version below." I haven't received an details in app or via email to provide further information. The version in TestFlight that I have uploaded is: v1.0.23(23). When entering the distribution details, and from the rejection response., it looks like the version number I'm entering on the main distribution page is the issue - maybe? I have tried entering 1.0.23, 1.0.23(23), even just 1.0 - but it constantly keeps getting rejected. Is it really the version no. that is wrong, or potentially something else? How can I get more information on why the submission was rejected?

I work for a company that provides services implementing, maintaining, and publishing systems for municipalities. We have now developed an app for a municipality, but when trying to publish it, Apple is rejecting it, stating that we cannot publish on behalf of another company. On the first submission, they rejected it with: Guideline 4.1 - Design - Copycats The app or its metadata appears to contain potentially misleading content. Specifically, the app includes content that resembles Sistema da Prefeitura without the necessary authorization. Next Steps Please demonstrate your relationship with any third-party brand owners represented in the app. We obtained a digitally signed document from the municipality stating that we are responsible for their systems, authorizing everything, etc... We made a new submission for review. However, it was now rejected with: Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage The app must be published under a seller and company name that is associated with the organization or company providing the services. In this case, the app must be published under a seller name and company name that reflects the MUNICÍPIO DE *** name. The guideline 5.1.1(ix) requirements give users confidence that apps operating in highly regulated fields or that require sensitive user information are qualified to provide these services and will responsibly manage their data. Next Steps To resolve this issue, it would be appropriate to take the following steps: The app must be published under a seller name and company name that reflects the MUNICÍPIO DE *** name. If you have developed this app on behalf of a client, you may resubmit the app through their account, if they have one. You may also request an update to the company name on your account by having the Account Holder edit the account information. Please note that you cannot resolve this issue with documentation showing permission to publish this app on behalf of the content owner or institution. In other words, they are now rejecting it in contradiction to what they previously requested. The municipality does not have a developer account with Apple. There is no way for them to publish this. Has anyone been through this? Any idea what we can do? Thank you in advance.

I sent my application for review, but the application status appears to be waiting for review for a month. Apple does not provide any feedback. I sent an e-mail and requested support 4 times and they never responded. What do I need to do to publish my application or are Apple officials not working for a month?

New versions of AppKit/Mac Catalyst apps that use Google's Sign In framework are being rejected by App Store Review for the past two weeks. Reason shared was: The user is taken to the default web browser to sign in or register for an account, which provides a poor user experience. And also citing: Data Collection & Storage guidelines -> https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#data-collection-and-storage Opening macOS' default web browser has been a native behavior of Mac apps when using SFSafariViewController with ASWebAuthenticationSession, which is required, since iOS 13, for securely/privately logging in users. As far as I could investigate, there hasn't been any updates to the guidelines that would indicate any required changes to developers in regards to how login works for macOS apps. Are there any steps developers need to take to get updates approved while still providing users with Google's Sign in? As reference, there is an on-going discussion on GoogleSignIn repo about this issue affecting multiple developers and apps: https://github.com/google/GoogleSignIn-iOS/issues/388

In my iOS app, I'm planning to use CryptoKit to decrypt a data file downloaded remotely from my backend servers. I'm only using standard cryptography provided by iOS itself (Swift CryptoKit framework). According to App Store Connect documentation: "You're required to provide documentation if your app contains any of the following: Encryption algorithms that are proprietary or not accepted as standard by international standard bodies (IEEE, IETF, ITU, etc.) Standard encryption algorithms instead of, or in addition to, using or accessing the encryption within Apple's operating system" I assume that since I am only using cryptography provided by the underlying OS itself, I can safely set ITSAppUsesNonExemptEncryption to NO. Can someone provide me with some guidance or opinion? Thank you!

I have a new app that needs to be submitted for review this week. When I tried to submit it, I was told I could not do so because "Under the Digital Services Act, you must provide and verify information regarding your account". I am working on behalf of a large corporate customer. They are telling me that they cannot do anything without consulting their legal team, which is going to take time. In the meantime, they asked me if I could omit the European region from the app's distribution list. I tried this, but it did not work. I manage about 20 apps for different customers and I have never seen this requirement appear on any other account. Is it new? Does it only apply to certain kinds of accounts, or to new apps, or new accounts publishing their first app? If this is a European Union requirement, why is it needed if I don't distribute to EU countries? Thanks, Frank

Hi, Our organization has an app that serves as the remote control for an IoT device. The app is free, with no in-app purchases. Any person who purchases the IoT device can use the app for free to set up the device. Can I opt for non-trader status for the app?

I'm working with a business who is now offering to white label their service. This will greatly benefit me and the other clients they have. Currently, they have an app that allows us to communicate with their AI directly from our phones. Now that they are offering to us to white label their services to clients of our own, we would like to white label their app as well. The developer said that he doesn't want to fight with the Apple App Review Dept. because they reject apps that are too similar. Here is my suggestion: Since there will only need to be one more app added (we will all use the same "gray-label" nondescript app), there will only be two similar apps on the App store. That's hardly spamming. We don't need to create branded apps for each of us. We all simply want to be able to use the same gray-labeled, nondescript app instead of our partner's branded app. For example: His app is App_A. We want him to create an App_B that is not branded to his or our stores, but is generic enough that we can use it with our own clients. I've read the documentation (https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#minimum-functionality) and many of the forums. But to be honest, it seems that the Apple App Review team arbitrarily chooses apps to approve and others to reject. Sometimes a simple icon change and the Review Team accepts. Other times, it's rejected. It doesn't seem like there is a clear distinction between who gets accepted or rejected. Still the solution which is offered by Apple App Review is to put all the apps into a container. This is not a solution as we need to direct our customers to our app, and our partner will not want to put his app into a container to share with other apps. I would like to work with someone to help push this gray-label app through. We only need one similar, gray-labeled app so that we don't have to use our partner's branded app. That will add much functionality to our offers. Plus, it will not be spam or clutter because our partner will continue to direct their clientele to their branded app, App_A, and we will all direct our clientele to the gray-label app, App_B. So there will be no confusion. I've heard of other solutions such as obfuscating the code or opening up a new developer account, as well. If there is anyway to work with a single person to help this project get pushed through, that would be very appreciated.

Hello community, This is my first application that I try to publish, however my app has been rejected several times due to issues with the "purpose strings". I have already made several modifications to the texts but even so the app continues to be rejected, add the permissions in the infoPlist and texts, but they keep rejecting me, could someone advise me to comply with this requirement and publish my app. Apple sends me these comments Issue Description One or more purpose strings in the app do not sufficiently explain the use of protected resources. Purpose strings must clearly and completely describe the app's use of data and, in most cases, provide an example of how the data will be used. Examples of unclear purpose strings: "App would like to access your Contacts" "App needs microphone access" Next Steps Update the location and AppTrackingTransparency framework purpose string to explain how the app will use the requested information and provide an example of how the data will be used. See the attached screenshot. Thanks !!!

Hello, We have two chat applications that are based on the same source code but are owned by different individuals. These apps have distinct names, color themes, and user bases, although they share the same underlying source code. Both apps were uploaded to the App Store over three years ago. However, when we attempted to update one of the apps recently, it was rejected for violating Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. The rejection message stated: "We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps." We are seeking guidance on how to obtain approval for this update. Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Hello, I'm unsure what option to select when it comes up to specify what type of encryption my app is using and if en export compliance is required to distribute my app in France. The app is using SSL certificates to communicate with a connected device, such as https works. I have to select one of the following options: Encryption algorithms that are proprietary or not accepted as standard by international standard bodies (IEEE, IETF, ITU, etc.) Standard encryption algorithms instead of, or in addition to, using or accessing the encryption within Apple's operating system Both algorithms mentioned above None of the algorithms mentioned above Does SSL (RSA, SHA-1, etc.) falls under A) "standard encryption algorithms" or is that something that is provided by default on the OS and falls under B) "accessing the encryption within Apple's operating system" ?? If B) I would need to check the "None of the algorithms"-option because I do not use standard encryption "instead of, or in addtion to", only OS provided encryption. Am I right? Or does SSL is not used as standard in the OS and falls under A) ??

I was submit my application on 7 Mar 2024. After that I got rejected on 8 Mar 2024. I fixed and and ask for review again. But until now I still not see any response from Apple. I was contact support via email but they say "need more time for review". I was cancel the submission and submit again on 8 April but still got nothing. The app still "In Review". Does anyone has any idea? :(

Team, We are trying to publish new app (Under new brand label) for newly acquired company. app update is rejected for the reason: Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage The app must be published under a seller and company name that is associated with the organization or company providing the services. In this case, the app must be published under a seller name and company name that reflects the institution name. Any suggestions??

Is it normal to have an app in Review for 6 days?

Hello, I need to be sure we are doing correct. Can we clarify we can present list of available subscriptions and current subscription to the user in the iOS app where we don't use any payments inside. We have payments only on the web page. Basically our subscriptions allow users to extent hardware devices our consumers buy at us. It's clear for us that we are not able to call for actions for payments and we are not able to user other payment methods in the app. But it's not clear for me if we are allowed to show subscriptions without any action for payments. Here is Description of Business Model In one of the first submissions of our app to the app store about 5 years ago we clarified our business model in detail during the review and it was confirmed that it is fine for this model to collect a fee outside of the app. The main reason was that the value creation happens fully outside of the app. The model did not change since. We are happy to describe here our business model in more detail. The Solar Manager System comprises a hardware https://www.solarmanager.ch/produkt/gateways/,, a backend, a web application and an app (the one under review). The hardware gateway is optimizing the own consumption of solar systems in residential homes. This hardware gateway is locally installed in the home of the user and communicating to many home appliances (battery, PV inverter, car charger, …). The main value creation to the end user is that his home appliances are controlled such to optimize for highest solar consumption and in some cases dynamic electricity tariffs. This means our hardware is starting / stopping / controlling theses devices locally directly via different interfaces. Different algorithms are running directly on the hardware to perform such optimizations. Our backend and web front-end are used to configure the devices and prioritize devices according to the user need. For the first year in 2018 our system was running without any app. It was only hardware, backend and front-end. Also we have a support team answering questions and phone calls from users that have a problem with the system. For this system we have a one time fee to buy the hardware device that is then installed locally in the home of the user. Additional we have a yearly fee to cover cost for data storage, development costs of backend and front-end, and to cover our support. This fee is collected through a payment system in our backend. It can be accessed from the front-end. Depending on the amount of data stored, number of external devices connected to our hardware and the amount of support given to the user there are different levels for the fee. The fee is directly related to the data storage cost, the backend needs, and the support effort. The fee is not collected for digital content consumed through the app. Thanks.