Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dash developer's response to Apple's response

blog.kapeli.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 134 posts

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#121

Post by Twisell »

pfg wrote: post #118
Twisell wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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…

Well it's more like Apple asked him to post an explanation on his blog. As far as I know this asked blog post was never published and then Apple realease it's response.

So again this might well remain unsolved because probably no one appart from the arguing parties can't tell why the agreement on the blog post in exchange for dev program re-enrollment wasn't fulfilled by either parties...

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#122

Post by pfg »

Twisell wrote: post #121
pfg wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Well it's more like Apple asked him to post an explanation on his blog. As far as I know this asked blog post was never published and then Apple realease it's response. So again this might well remain unsolved because probably no one appart from the arguing parties can't tell why the agreement on the blog post in exchange for dev program re-enrollment wasn't fulfilled by either parties...

> As far as I know this asked blog post was never published and then Apple realease it's response.

From the blog post:

> Update: Just to make it clear, I have complied with Apple’s request and have sent a blog post draft approximately 30 minutes after this phone call ended. I have since not received any contact from Apple in any way, and they did not respond to my calls. Their recent statements come as a shock as I thought we were working together to resolve this issue.

Given that Apple's statement left out several important facts (arguably, to paint a rosy picture of their behavior), I'm inclined to believe the developer here.

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#123

Post by Twisell »

pfg wrote: post #122
Twisell wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's more like Apple asked him to post an explanation on his blog. As far as I know this asked blog post was never published and then Apple realease it's response. So again this might well remain unsolved because probably no one appart from the arguing parties can't tell why the agreement on the blog post in exchange for dev program re-enrollment wasn't fulfilled by either parties...

> As far as I know this asked blog post was never published and then Apple realease it's response. From the blog post: > Update: Just to make it clear, I have complied with Apple’s request and have sent a blog post draft approximately 30 minutes after this phone call ended. I have since not received any contact from Apple in any way, and they did not respond to my calls. Their recent statements come as a shock as I t…

So maybe we can agree it relate to faith, not facts.

I choose to focus more on the actual phone recording than to the dev post because at least you can hear both positions.

Indeed something had gone wrong in the process they agreed on phone. But it's words against words. So I really think it's better not to chose to believe in one over another, because that would always be tainted by our own personal predisposition (which of course may differ).

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#124

Post by moduspwnens14 »

pfg wrote: post #112
interpol_p wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both sides agree with the facts of the case: - Developer used his credit card to enrol in multiple accounts - Developer had same test devices on both accounts - One account engaged in fraud - One account was notified of fraud Apple's request is that the developer make these facts known and have his account reinstated. Because Apple doesn't want to be seen as arbitrarily shutting down developer accounts — they have re…

> They weren't asking the dev to admit to fraud. They were asking him to admit to opening multiple developer accounts and losing control of one. Which both sides acknowledge he did. I'm not sure I understand why the developer thinks this would be an admission of wrongdoing on his part Just to be clear, the developer would've been happy to do exactly that: > On Saturday they told me that they are fine with me writing…

It's also very possible that the developer is not telling the whole story. It's not like Apple does this kind of thing every day and their statement is fairly clear.

They also likely have additional information, like the IP addresses and timestamps in use when the reports were made. Keep in mind that Apple doesn't make money (directly) from taking the guy's app down, and even the guy's story doesn't really make sense.

It hinges on the idea that he bought the developer program for a relative, who then used a bunch of his devices years later to leave a bunch of fraudulent positive reviews for his apps and negative ones for competitors. Really?

It sounds to me like Apple had him dead to rights and gave him an out, despite having no need to do so. He knows he screwed up AND publicized this with his blog, so he can fix it with his blog or he can lie in the bed he made. He stuck with his made-up story to save face (at the expense of Apple) so they're sticking with the original decision.

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#125

Post by moduspwnens14 »

0x0 wrote: post #55
wvenable wrote: post #19

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.

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 tes…

You're reading into this too much. If this were happening all the time and people were raising concerns left and right, then yes--it'd indicate this was caught by an automated system that makes big assumptions.

That's not the case here. They reiterated many times on that phone call that they're sure they didn't make a mistake and they have no financial interest in banning his account. They gave him an "out" by letting him post a carefully worded post without even admitting wrongdoing and he instead recorded their phone call and posted part (!) of it on his blog.

How people are seeing Apple as in the wrong here is mindblowing.

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#126

Post by moduspwnens14 »

metafunctor wrote: post #111

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 t…

Where did you hear the entire call? I only heard the part on his blog that clearly didn't start at the beginning.

Apple didn't notify both accounts because they're under no obligation to notify someone that they're committing fraud and ask them politely to stop.

Why would you take the word of a developer dumb enough to post this audio clip and publicly shame Apple in blog posts as someone honest and working in good faith with them? Here's a much more likely story: he's not telling the truth and he's in over his head. His cousin didn't leave fraudulent reviews from his test devices on his and competitors' apps for no apparent reason.

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#127

Post by moduspwnens14 »

Twisell wrote: post #113
metafunctor wrote: post #111

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 t…

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…

What mistake did Apple make?!

Is everyone here taking the developer's word at face value? Despite him giving no reason to do so?

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#128

Post by moduspwnens14 »

pier25 wrote: post #90
eridius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kapeli did not commit fraud. But that does not mean Apple was incorrect in linking the two accounts. In fact, 20 seconds into the call, the Apple rep says > We don't believe that there was a mistake here, right. We don't think that we made a mistake. So no, Apple is very explicitly saying they were not in error.

I agree. But then why force him to write a PR blog post in favor of Apple? That's what's really wrong here.

It was to give him an "out" to resolve the issue in a way that's positive to both of them. He didn't have to write a PR blog post. He just had to state the facts:

His account was linked to one involved in fraudulent activity.

He's working with Apple to get his account unlinked from the fraudulent one.

That's it! He doesn't have to admit wrongdoing and Apple (despite being very confident they didn't make a mistake) gives him the benefit of the doubt and unlinks the account. Instead, he decided to dig his own App Store grave.

Re: Dash developer's response to Apple's response

#129

Post by moduspwnens14 »

Mithaldu wrote: post #41
eridius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kapeli did not commit fraud. But that does not mean Apple was incorrect in linking the two accounts. In fact, 20 seconds into the call, the Apple rep says > We don't believe that there was a mistake here, right. We don't think that we made a mistake. So no, Apple is very explicitly saying they were not in error.

They're saying they think they did not make an error. That's entirely separate from what happened in reality. Besides, even if they say they think it, that might just as well be rethoric.

Why is a random developer (out of millions who have not had this issue) immediately trustworthy, while Apple (who has no financial interest in banning him) is assumed to be untrustworthy?
Post reply on HN