61–70 of 134 posts
After listening to the call recording, I can't see how Apple was being all that unreasonable with the guy. I suspect that his recording and posting audio of that call is going to blow up in his face. Especially if he broke any laws by doing it.
Undisclosed call recording is a really bad idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They also told him that, from their perspective, the two accounts belong to the same entity because they have the same payment details and test devices. There was no reason for them to know that this developer purchased an account for someone else and gave them his test devices (which sounds like an excuse anyone accused of anything gives when they're caught).
Apple would also be aware that various sets of contact data are attached to those accounts, but ignored them. The linking is furthermore also only done on their side via metadata, and not communicated to, or done by, the developer.
Sounds a little fishy to me. I'm not saying that he was aware of or involved in review manipulation that was coming from his "relative's" Apple Developer account that he happened to pay for.
But I wouldn't bet money that he wasn't.
And the fact that he feels the need to mention giving said relative "test hardware that I no longer needed" suggests that said hardware might have been involved in the alleged review fraud.
I don't think this will end well for this guy.
So this guy has a lot of suspicious activity on accounts linked to him. Apple have done what they believe is the right thing to protect the integrity of the app store, in line with there own terms and conditions which the developer has agreed too.
Said developer has published blog posts online that give Apple very bad publicity over this, making them look like the bad guy for trying to protect users and maintain quality (What does apple have to gain by randomly disabling this guys account?)
Apple have reached out to him and offered to sort the issue out as long as he posts the facts in a blog post, which is fair after his previous posts have outright caused Apple PR issues for something that is his own fault.
Apple have also got top execs dealing with this issue, trying to make things right. Developer doesn't release said blog post, so Apple releases statement with said facts to protect themselves for further incorrect accusations.
Developer then gets but hurt and releases the conversation that does nothing to help there situation.
What is the developer trying to achieve here exactly? Sounds like the developer is guilty as sin for this fraud and is more interested in accusing apple and covering themselves.
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…
I don't think so. The fact that you have your device registered on two different accounts is unlikely to be sufficient to link the two accounts. It's merely one of the ways in which the accounts were linked. Using the same CC and/or bank details is another. And there's probably other links too that Apple didn't disclose (because they're only effective at combating fraud if fraudsters don't know about them).
Dumb move. Most people will forget about this in a week and his business will be affected for months (in the shortest possible time frame) and probably permanently.
This is a dangerous bluff to make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's rethoric because their stated beliefs clash with the facts of reality they admit to in that call.
That doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that Apple admits to certain beliefs, and to certain facts that contradict those beliefs, in the same call? Because I'm pretty sure they don't. They explain that the accounts were linked and that they don't think they made a mistake in linking those accounts. And they offered the developer a way to unlink the accounts and restore his account without the developer having to…
Yes, and it boils down to one thing:
Either the termination of his account was correct, and should be upheld; or it was wrong, and should be rescinded.
There are many times in life when things are in a range of grey between black and white, but this case is entirely black and white. Either they made an error with the termination or they didn't. If they made an error the account should be reinstated without question, delay or condition. If they did not make an error it needs to remain closed.
By the very fact that they are willing to reinstate it, they admit to the fact that the termination was in error, regardless of what they believe of say they believe.
Doublethink is real.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Apple representative told him he doesn't need to admit to any wrongdoing which is different from saying they believe there was no wrongdoing on Kapeli's part.
It does not matter what they think or believe. They admit to certain facts being reality and that's all that matters.
>Apple representative states there was no wrongdoing on Kapeli's side.
which is a misrepresentation of what the Apple rep said on the call.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The audio didn't start from the beginning so it is hard to say if they notified that they were recording, but in California, all parties must consent if one wants to record a phone call. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#Uni...
Since the dev behind Dash is based in Romania[1], is this law still applicable? [1] https://blog.kapeli.com/about
According to his blog post, the developer sent his blog draft to Apple and hadn't yet heard back. He then today refreshes Loop Insight / iMore and reads "According to Apple, all attempts to work with the developer have failed". Was the press release really Apple's answer to the blog draft? Was it meant to torpedo the ongoing "blog negotiation", or independent of it?
I'm assuming it was completely independent. And when they said attempts failed, this was before the account was terminated. It's not referring to any communication with the developer post-termination.
But the Dash developer clearly read the press releases as responses to the ongoing communication, rejections of his draft blog post. In his view they made a new decision and went to the press with it. Account ban final. He has nothing to lose by posting his telling of the events and the audio.
> Tonight Apple decided to accuse me of manipulating the App Store in public via a spokesperson.
It's really unfortunate for both sides if this drama is the result of bad timing and/or siloed organizational departments.