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

81–90 of 134 posts

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

#81

Post by pkamb »

luketheobscure wrote: post #74

His summary doesn't at all reflect what was in the phone call that he posted. He says that Apple insisted he admit wrongdoing, but the representative from Apple was very clear about the three points he wanted expressed (his account was "linked to an account with fraudulent activity", he's working with Apple to unlink the accounts, and that he's working with Apple to get back into the program). He even specifically sa…

There are multiple communications and phone calls in play. It was a previous phone call on Friday that required admitting wrongdoing.

> on FRIDAY they told me they’d reactivate my account if I’d make a blog post admitting some wrongdoing. I told them I can’t do that, because I did nothing wrong.

> On SATURDAY they told me that they are fine with me writing the truth about what happened. [this is the call that was recorded]

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

#83

Post by riskable »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #44
jbob2000 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did we read the same article? He used his credit card to pay for a friend's developer account and gave her one of his old devices to test on. Though he didn't mention it (sticking to facts) it looks like he was teaching someone how to make an iOS app and provided a bit of charity.

Which sounds like a load of bull to me, but is ultimately irrelevant. As if someone wjo didn't even know how to set up an account and didn't have their own devices is going to engage in fraud. He got caught and didn't realize they would make the connection, so he's blaming someone else.

Don't assume the fraudulent reviews were intentional by either party. Spam systems are well-known to post reviews of completely unrelated products in order to make their intentional fraudulent activity appear more legitimate. It happens on Amazon, Yelp, basically everywhere.

It's the same tactic that makes Facebook advertising so useless. You have millions of fake people posting regular fake "updates" complete with fake GPS locations just so that some of them can provide fake traffic for pages when someone pays.

I want to see the proof that the reviews were fake in the first place and I want to see all the reviews posted by these supposedly fake users.

It probably won't happen but here's to hoping. Maybe some public visibility into these sorts of things will breed sympathy for Apple's position because it's a real problem and it's very difficult to solve.

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

#84

Post by riskable »

Spooky23 wrote: post #53
rhapsodic wrote: post #23

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.

Depends on the state. Most states are "one party" where only one party (i.e. a person making or receiving a call has to know about it).

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-co...

Federal law is "one party" as well.

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

#85

Post by davrosthedalek »

metrognome wrote: post #45
Mithaldu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple representative states there was no wrongdoing on Kapeli's side. Absent any wrongdoing on his side the termination is in error. Additionally they made the error of not contacting the holders of all accounts involved.

The Apple representative also stated that the accounts were the same legal entity (due to the accounts being based on the same bank account). I don't think it's necessarily an error for them not to contact all involved accounts if they share something as private as a bank account.

Them linking accounts by some heuristic does make them the same /legal/ entity. Shared bank accounts/accounts with multiple owners do exist. They bet that their heuristic is correct. In this case they might have gotten it wrong. That's their problem.

Do they make people aware that the accounts are linked?

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

#86

Post by _pr »

davrosthedalek wrote: post #85
metrognome wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Apple representative also stated that the accounts were the same legal entity (due to the accounts being based on the same bank account). I don't think it's necessarily an error for them not to contact all involved accounts if they share something as private as a bank account.

Them linking accounts by some heuristic does make them the same /legal/ entity. Shared bank accounts/accounts with multiple owners do exist. They bet that their heuristic is correct. In this case they might have gotten it wrong. That's their problem. Do they make people aware that the accounts are linked?

It's in the Apple Developer Program License Agreement. You're responsible for anything that happens with your stuff while it's enrolled under your name.

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

#87

Post by lamontcg »

Apple and Google and the Walled Gardens they've constructed seriously need some regulation and need to be considered "common carriers" which provide a service to the general public without discrimination.

Telephone companies are one such an example.

If you paid the bill of your friends phone one month, and later the phone company got into a dispute with them and cut off the phone that you do business on out of your home office -- and then refused to reinstate your phone line unless you publicly apologized to them, I suspect the FCC would not approve of their actions.

Apple has way more power in this situation and is much more of a monopoly over many software developers lives, but is operating by rules that it makes up itself.

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

#88

Post by pier25 »

If Apple is open to admit the dev back to the program means he didn't really commit fraud.

And if he didn't commit fraud, why is Apple enforcing him to write a PR blog post in favor of Apple as a condition to get back into the program?

Apple wants him to write fake review. Oh the irony.

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

#89

Post by pier25 »

Reason077 wrote: post #15
Mithaldu wrote: post #5

After listening to the first 2 minutes of the call, i can say with absolute confidence that Apple is straight-up blackmailing him.* I would love to hear opinions on whether this is something that could be taken to court. * They did make a mistake in not verifying whether the second account activity was actually done by Kapeli, yet they want him to claim they made no mistake, otherwise they won't reinstate Dash.

I think Apple's position is reasonable here. A second developer account, which is the account linked to fraudulent reviews, was opened using the same credit card, same bank account, and same test devices as the main Kapeli account. So it's reasonable that they would assume the same person was in control of both accounts. The developer claims this is not the case, however. Apple seems willing to accept that. All they…

Not at all.

If Apple is ready to bring him back it's because he didn't commit fraud.

And if he didn't commit fraud he shouldn't need to write a blog post as a condition to get back. Quite contrary, Apple owes him an apology.

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

#90

Post by pier25 »

eridius wrote: post #37
Mithaldu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple representative states there was no wrongdoing on Kapeli's side. Absent any wrongdoing on his side the termination is in error. Additionally they made the error of not contacting the holders of all accounts involved.

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.

Post reply on HN