Existing Website-Accounts with a monthly fee, attached to a (free)iphone app? Rejection?

Question

An already running Website which has a medium number of paying users (the customers pay 10$ per month for the account) asked me if I am willing to program an iphone app which helps extending the functionality of the website. They most probably want to give the application away for free - they think, that the iphone app will be a strong argument to get more customers willing to pay the monthly fee for the web-account.

In the Android-Marketplace it is quite clear pointed out, that you are not allowed to earn money other then the price for the app.

android developer distribution agreement:

"4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Product whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of Products outside of the Market."

In the Microsoft App Store there are quite similar terms. But you cannot find a license agreement for the iphone app store where it is not allowed to give away free apps which are able to connect to paid websites.

There are some blogs out there where you can find rejection criterias for the iphone:

http://10base-t.com/unofficial-appstore-rejection-criteria/

I also read the 'iphone developer program license agreement', but still it is not clear to me.

The kindle for iphone is a quite similar example to the above mentioned situation, this app is approved, but I think that amazon is paying a not disclosed amount of money to apple. I'm not convinced that our application will get approved.

Are there any terms and conditions which I didn't read.

Thanks in advance, Tom

Answer 1

The Wall Street Journal app is free, but you have to pay them for most content. As far as I know, it's not an in-App purchase, either.

Answer 2

There are lots of examples of free apps that only work with external paid-for services. The prime example on my iPhone is the Spotify player.

My impression is that you will be OK if the app is a free download. What they are likely to object to is a paid-for app that requires additional payment through a non-appstore mechanism to be used. Apple are concerned about the ripped-off feeling people get if they pay for something that they then can't use without additional payment. If the app is free then the user can just delete it (although they'll probably leave you a shitty review if the Spotify app is any measure).

Bear in mind that you will have to provide Apple with an account on your external system set up for testing during the approval process.

Answer 3

The "non-compete" clause means that you cannot post an "android market" to the market, thus distributing apps and competing with Google directly.

On top of the agreement it says that "Products" (capital P) refers to "Software, content and digital materials created for Devices in accordance with the Android SDK and distributed via the Market.".

In other words, Android apps.

Translation: "4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Android Application whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of Android Applications outside of the Market."

This means that "yes", you are able to use a paid service outside of the Android Market with your Android app distributed through the Android Market. Otherwise, I couldn't use my paid Skype account with my copy of the free Skype app on the iPhone - nor on Android (does it even exist?)