[lisp-fan-007]

Sorry for your experience.

Its a very difficult situation. However the issue is if Apple takes a view, they open themselves up to legal risk - they are not the court so its not their place to determine copyright infrigement. Rather, if you get a court order stating infringement, then Apple has to take down the offending app.

Whilst yours may be a clear cut case, it is not too difficult to think of examples where it is not copyright infringement or is very difficult to prove - is Signal an infrigement of Whatsapp?

I don't think Apple could have done anything differently, to some extent it is your word vs. theirs and the right medium to settle the dispute is the legal system, not Apple.

[gman83]

It's literally against the terms of service, so they could remove it for that reason: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#cop...

[coldtea]

And how would they know it's one or the other party that violated the terms?

"Because our app was posted first" is not enough.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

One of the reasons I like to open-source my work (even in “source-available” form), is so that there is clear “prior art.”

However, I have yet to write an app that has been highly successful, so being copied has not been a problem for me.

Seeing the behavior of these scammers, I have no doubt that they would gleefully take my source, tweak the storyboard, and release a clone. They don’t seem to have any sense of shame, at all. Some of these shops have stables of hundreds of apps; each, a minor tweak of other apps in their roster.

It is annoying that Apple gives me a hard time for some small cosmetic detail on my app, while rubberstamping these tsunamis of pure, shameless garbage.

I do get annoyed by “looks like” scams. A couple of years ago, my wife accidentally purchased a “looks like” app that was basically a screengrab of another app (and was approved on the App Store!).

She was able to get the subscription (!) canceled, but it was a pain. Apple also left the junk app on the store.

She was also so unnerved by the situation, that she never got the original app, so it shows that these spam/scam apps can cause a lot of collateral damage.

Getting a refund did not fix the problem.

[exikyut]

Out of curiosity, how do you handle the "source-available" scenario?

Also... I just realized... in the same way the article OP mentioned they were ahead of everyone else wrt features/implementation etc, I wonder if the scammers are ahead of the game in terms of preternaturally staying under the App/Play Store radars? Like, specifically, exactly what might they be doing, I wonder?

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I just publish it on GH, without a distribution license[0].

These folks are experts. They probably know exactly what terminology to use, which screens to optimize, etc. Just because they are scammers, doesn't mean they are stupid.

They could probably actually make legit money, giving classes on the Apple App Store process.

[0] https://github.com/RiftValleySoftware/ambiamara

[exikyut]

Huh, interesting. I was imagining GH would be the worst place to put code considering the existence of immoral vacuum cleaners, but the platform is such a firehose, and the apps you're publishing sufficiently domain-specific, that it seems to work. Interesting.

And yeah, wow, the scammers could give classes... with the only irony that the once out of the "game", as it were, an individual ex-player's info will literally become outdated within 30 seconds :/ - or at least that's the impression I get.

[solarengineer]

“Because our app was posted first” is actually what I thought of. Could you explain why this isn’t enough?

[coldtea]

The app could very well be developed before and you stole it from their version control, or copied ideas the posted in their blogs, or copied from their betas.

Or theirs could be available in another store, and you copied theirs from there.

[mwexler]

You post screenshots of your app in progress for feedback. Scammer dupes those, rushes app into store, and when you finally launch, they "were there first" and requests your deletion on those grounds.

So, I suspect Apple just wants to stay out of it, let courts decide based on a collection of evidence (and whomever has the money to pay for lawyers, and time to do all the proceedings), and profit no matter who wins.

[_qulr]

> You post screenshots of your app in progress for feedback. Scammer dupes those, rushes app into store, and when you finally launch, they "were there first" and requests your deletion on those grounds.

I seriously doubt this has ever happened in the history of the App Store.

Scammers are "lazy". The look for the easy targets. Copying an existing app is easier and more lucrative than trying to write a new app based just on some in-progress screenshots, as if scammers would even be paying attention to you before you published an app.

[coldtea]

>I seriously doubt this has ever happened in the history of the App Store.

Don't know about the App Store, but people have copied in-progress websites and did copy-cat products (sometimes complete with the original artwork/styles).

[hmottestad]

Youtube auto DMCA anyone?

[Abhinav2000]

I think the difference there is that they have established copyright - have you done so with your App when there is a potential dispute?

Also a movie or song is a lot easier to determine copyright infringement. But a program might be harder due to its complexities.

But this is just my thoughts, I'm no expert AT ALL.