iOS Question What wording works to pass approval of a free app that works with a paid website?

[JohnC]

I wrote a simple webview wrapper around a client's website, so it's easier for the client's customers to user their website.

The client charges a monthly fee (to it's customers) for the services that the website provides.

However, the app is suppose to be free for customers of the website to use.

But, apple rejected the app with this response (I feel they want to know if they should be getting part of the website's subscription income):

We have started our review, but we need additional information to continue. Specifically, it appears your app may access or include paid digital content or services, and we want to understand your business model before completing our review.

Next Steps

Please review the following questions and provide as much detailed information about your business model as you can.

1. Who are the users that will use the paid content and features in the app?
2. Where can users purchase the content and features that can be accessed in the app?
3. What specific types of previously purchased content and features can a user access in the app?
4. What paid content, subscriptions, or features are unlocked within your app that do not use in-app purchase?
5. Are the enterprise services in your app sold to single users, consumers, or for family use?

So, has anyone run into this issue and what response did you provide that allowed your app to be available for free in the App Store?

 

[hatzisn]

If you can convince them somehow that the goods are not digital so you cannot restore them you can walk free from the Apple Pocket Police...

 

[JohnC]

The website offers a service that helps company's manage their business, would that be considered digital?

 

[hatzisn]

Is it "company's" or "companies" ? It is a bit confusing. If it is the second then APP (not app but Apple Pocket Police ) can argue that it is a software as a service and thus a digital good. Try to obfuscate this appropriately...

 

[JohnC]

I wonder how spotify got away with it because you can pay spotify directly (not through the app) and then download the app from the app store for free and then use it with your spotify account.

 

[mcqueccu]

Study the appstore guideline 3 very well before you answer. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#business

Because after this answer, that is what they will quote for you.

 

[mcqueccu]

I wonder how spotify got away with it because you can pay spotify directly (not through the app) and then download the app from the app store for free and then use it with your spotify account.

I am sure they fall under 3.1.3 Other Purchase Methods: The following apps may use purchase methods other than in-app purchase.

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#other-purchase-methods

 

[tchart]

Is this any different from a banking app? My banks mobile app is free but I have to log in with my bank credentials and the bank happens to charge me a monthly fee?

 

[hatzisn]

I wonder how spotify got away with it because you can pay spotify directly (not through the app) and then download the app from the app store for free and then use it with your spotify account.

Maybe 3.1.3f of what @mcqueccu mentions before, is your answer for what you are trying to do (just obfuscate and improvise)... Spotify obviously argued that they do not unlock extra functionality in the app since you can hear the same songs also without subscription but with ads. The question is about this last word of previous sentence. How on earth did apple allow spoken ads and music ads in an appstore hosted application that does not take a share of (apparently at least)?

 

[Daestrum]

As you stated it makes using the website easier, that implies the users could, if they wanted, just use a browser to reach the site, you could argue it's an accessabilty option available to registered user. (Assumiing the app doesn't allow new sign ups)

 

[Andrew (Digitwell)]

Your need to be careful with Webview Wrapper apps. Even if you get around the paid part Apple may hit you with 4.2 Minimum Functionality.

I added the bold

Your app should include features, content, and UI that elevate it beyond a repackaged website. If your app is not particularly useful, unique, or “app-like,” it doesn’t belong on the App Store. If your App doesn’t provide some sort of lasting entertainment value or adequate utility, it may not be accepted. Apps that are simply a song or movie should be submitted to the iTunes Store. Apps that are simply a book or game guide should be submitted to the Apple Books Store.

 

[JohnC]

OK, I used ChatGPT and had it stress these points when answering those questions:

- The app offers no in-app purchases and there is no way to sign up to the subscription of the website through the app.
- The app displays a more mobile friendly version of the website than using a regular browser
- The app can not be used until after the user subscribes to the website using a regular browser.

Submited ChatGPT's response with some minor edits ... and the app was approved!

 

[hatzisn]

OK, I used ChatGPT and had it stress these points when answering those questions:

- The app offers no in-app purchases and there is no way to sign up to the subscription of the website through the app.
- The app displays a more mobile friendly version of the website than using a regular browser
- The app can not be used until after the user subscribes to the website using a regular browser.

Submited ChatGPT's response with some minor edits ... and the app was approved!

You should light a candle in the church for Elon. In the beggining at least he was backing this project.