We’re all familiar with the fact that Apple has trouble managing its App Store. While it is overflowing with applications, Apple governs it willy-nilly, and the web is rife with stories from developers who had their application rejected for no apparent reason. There’s now a new issue we can add to the list. Are you an iPhone developer? Do you want a similar, competing application out of the App Store? All you need to do is send an infringement claim to Apple, and they’ll happily threaten to remove the competing application without a second thought. Update: And here’s a similar case, about Stoneloops! vs. Luxor.
Satellite dishes
This story starts with iPhone application developer John Fehr, working for Cadabra Corp. On September 23, 2009, Fehr submitted Cadabra’s application “DishLoc” to the App Store. DishLoc is an application which uses augmented reality to help you in positioning your satellite dish in the most optimal way. Using the iPhone’s camera and screen, it uses augmented reality to overlay the position of geostationary satellites on the screen, in real-time, making it easy for you to properly position your dish.
The application was accepted into the App Store on October 8. Version 2.0 of the application was submitted to the App Store two days later, and approved on November 3.
Fehr was obviously happy the application got in. Imagine his surprise, then, when he received an email from Apple containing a complaint from another iPhone developer, who offers a similar application. The developer in question is DP Technologies Ltd., who offers the application DishPointer, which appeared in the App Store September 22 – a day before Fehr submitted DishLoc. The complaint from DP Technologies goes like this (this is the entire complaint, submitted via a web form on iTunes Connect – I’ve seen the real one):
The disputed developer copied design elements and functionality from our app DishPointer AR Pro and DishPointer Maps. In particular, showing the clarke belt and satellites on the camera preview is propriatary [sic] to us for which we are filing a patent. Showing a street map and displaying alignment lines on top of that map is also propriatery [sic] to us. Please remove infringing app from store.
In the email, Apple stated that Cadabra has 5 days to remove the alleged infringing content. Fehr received the ultimatum on November 5, so if he doesn’t amend the application before November 10, Apple will remove it from the App Store.
Back-and-forth
Fehr obviously disagrees with the complaint from DP Technologies. “We submitted our app through iTunes Connect a day or two before theirs was released, so we couldn’t have copied design elements,” Fehr explains on his blog, “Copied functionality? Really? Two apps on the app store can’t have similar functionality? Tell that to all the flashlight apps, video poker apps, [insert game here] apps.” It is important to note here that Fehr is wrong on the dates: DishPointer appeared on the Ap Store on the 22nd, whereas DishLoc was submitted on the 23rd. Still, it seems unlikely you can develop and submit an application like this within 24 hours. Update: Fehr pointed out that while the App Store states DishPointer arrived on September 22nd, there were problems with iTunes Connect (more here) and the servers at the time, meaning the application became visible later than the 22nd.
Fehr finds the other claims ridiculous too. “Nevermind that they spelled proprietary wrong, but are they really saying that nobody else can show satellite positions on the camera preview?” Fehr wonders, “This is a relatively simple calculation you can find in many math books and the web. The clarke belt is simply an extension, showing where the clarke belt is located.” In all fairness, judging by this blog post, it does seem like Fehr added the Clarke belt display after seeing it in action in DishPointer.
The bit about “are filing a patent” is also quite vague. Is the patent pending? Do they have a patent already? If so, what is its USPTO number? I emailed DP Technologies for clarification and their side of the story. Alan from DP Technologies stated in a reply that they do not have a patent, nor have a patent pending. They are only “preparing” a patent submission – which raises the question: on what other basis than a patent can you claim that something is “proprietary to you”?
In addition, according to Alan, Apple didn’t give Fehr a deadline at all. “Apple didn’t give him 5 days to alter his application,” Alan writes, “I’ve got copied into the email, it says ‘please take steps to review your application to ensure that it does not violate the rights of another party’. That’s all, no deadline.”
I’ve seen the actual email Apple sent to Fehr, and it would seem Alan is incorrect: the email quite clearly states that Fehr has five days to amend his application before Apple will take measures – including removing the application from the App Store. I can’t publish this email, obviously, as Fehr doesn’t want to risk ire from Apple.
Alan further claims that Fehr did not come up with the idea on his own. “Please note that he did not indepentenly [sic] came to the same ideas as he posted in a discussion forum in September about “this satellite pointing apps which have no competition”,” Alan details. Alan did not provide a link to this forum posting, but he’s most likely talking about this one.
That forum posting was made 5 days after Fehr submitted his application, and six days after DP Technologies’ application was approved and showed up in the App Store. In other words, this doesn’t seem like proof Fehr copied his idea from DP Technologies. Fehr does admit he was a little upset that a similar application made it into the App Store before his did. “Admittedly, I was a bit pissed that someone had the same idea but got to the app store first,” Fehr recalls.
DP Technologies did post a video on YouTube showing the augmented reality portion of DishPointer in action. This video was posted in August, so it could be that Fehr saw it in action before he started working on the application. When I asked Fehr about it, he responded pragmatically:
I know it’s hard to prove not having seen a video. When I started, all I did was a quick search of the app store, and only told a few friends and my wife about it. I never even thought once about making a public announcement until I was ready to submit my app so I could limit my initial competition. I won’t feel bad if you mention that it’s a bit suspicious though. As I said, it’s hard to prove you didn’t see something.
It’s indeed hard to prove anything here, but judging by the looks of the two applications, they are indeed quite different. “If I was going to copy their design and functionality from seeing that video I would have released a much different app,” Fehr argues.
He further explains that the only thing he could possibly be guilty of – had he indeed heard of the competing application, which he denies – is taking an idea and implementing it. You can hardly call that illegal, unless the idea was under an NDA or something.
Fehr also contacted Apple about this, but the company is unwilling to arbitrate, and told Fehr Cadabra will have to work things out with DP Technologies. “I’m hoping before they just take our app off, they’ll actually look at the facts,” Fehr states.
Now, it is important to stress that this story is not about this case in particular – this case is just an example, and all I’m trying to say is this: I managed to piece all this together in a matter of hours, coming to the conclusion that DP Technologies’ claim seems to hold little water. This raises the question: if I can do this relatively easily, shouldn’t Apple be doing the same? Is it acceptable that Apple treats infringement complaints like this as fact without giving the accused party a means to defend itself?
Shouldn’t Apple handle this matter with more grace than just threaten to remove an application from the App Store within five days whenever you send in an infringement complaint, without ever stopping to think that maybe the complaint holds no water? How many perfectly valid applications have been removed this way?
Odd situation
This is of course a very odd situation. Without having to back anything up with facts, you can apparently get Apple to remove any application you do not like from the App Store. It would appear that the App Store reviewers are too busy reviewing applications to actually care about the validity of complaints like the one Cadabra received.
However, even if the claims were valid, and Fehr had indeed copied elements from DP Technologies’ application, I’d still say that would hardly qualify it for removal. I’ve been using my own iPhone for a few days now, and the sheer amount of completely equal applications, differentiated only by their icon, is staggering.
I also can’t really blame DP Technologies for trying. I mean, this is competition, and even though it all seems a little childish to me, they are just using the system to gain a competitive advantage.
For now, all this probably means that either Fehr cripples his application beyond the point of uselessness, or have it removed from the App Store by Apple, rendering his work for naught. I’d say that this is yet another sign that Apple is incapable of handling the App Store model in a fair way. I hope Cadabra and DP Technologies can work all this out in a mutually beneficial way. A possible compromise could be that Cadabra raises the price of DishLoc to the level of DishPointer, so the applications can compete on merit. Just putting it out there.
In any case, don’t let the number of applications in the App Store fool you. Popularity is not a measurement of quality – something Apple specifically should realise all too well.
Apple has to feed its Nosferatu lawyers something to sustain them in between lawsuits… why not let them sic their dogs on innocent iPhone app developers?
they’re still selling iphone’s hand over fist, even with the half-shod run app store. Why should apple allocate more resources tightening up the app store when a) most iphone owners apparently could give a rats ass, and b) they’re still selling boatloads of iphone’s, regardless?
Personally, I believe this is a microcosm of what it would be like if apple ruled the PC landscape with the same market share that MS has.
The real question is
How many people who buy an iPhone actualy bother to use the App Store?
I don’t own one but the three people I know certainly have not bought anything from the AppStore.
Lets see if we can work this out. Approximately 50 million iPhones sold to date. More than one billion apps sold to date. That means on average at least 20 apps per phone. Either your friends are not very representative or someone out there has got really a lot of apps on their phone.
Edited 2009-11-09 11:05 UTC
Apple is being insane here.
Instead of taking such claims at face value and getting into the middle of fights about who copied from whom they should stay out of it until a court tells them to take an app out.
Less work for apple and less room for abuse.
If they keep doing this the IPhone app world could go to war with itself, where everybody feels the need to be the first to request the competition being taken out.
If author A has a case against author B s/he’s free to go to a real court and sue for copyright or patent infringement.
American software patents are crazy enough without Apple pre-accepting such silly claims.
Apple and other companies including most large corporations have commoditized software to the point of no value. Apple wins with very over priced hardware, very poorly paid employees at the front lines, and the software developers they leverage to make this all happen get the shaft with 1 and 2 dollar crap apps. Honestly, at some point, folks will wake up and feel the Steve Big Dong sliding in and out for the last time.
Proving that even a 1960’s, progressive flower child CEO can run a prison work camp.
All this explains why tens of thousands of app developers have flocked to the iPhone platform, why there are over 100,000 apps for the iPhone and why consumers in their tens of millions are queuing up to buy Apple kit. Its because Apple does bad things and makes bad things. Welcome to the Homer Simpson view of world of modern technology.
Volume != Better
Public opinion != Good
Apple makes and sells a worldview. They have more in common with a fashion house than a tech company.
You do realise that making such a nonsensical statement makes you look like a nitwit?
You do realise that making such a nonsensical statement makes you look like a nitwit? [/q]
Don’t look now, but your post doesn’t exactly make you look like a master debater either.
You do realise that making such a nonsensical statement makes you look like a nitwit? [/q]
Don’t look now, but your post doesn’t exactly make you look like a master debater either. [/q]
I know, I know – and I started to write a more substantive rebuttal but then I just gave up – come on, if some can make such a statement like that in public they are not going to respond to rational discourse. In the end I was just lazy and wrote what came first into my head when I first saw this guys drivel.
Apple’s primary focus hasn’t been on selling computers for years. Now they sell a lifestyle, and their tangible products are just fashion accessories for that lifestyle.
All this explains why tens of thousands of app developers have flocked to the iPhone platform, why there are over 100,000 apps for the iPhone and why consumers in their tens of millions are queuing up to buy Apple kit. [/q]
And by that reasoning, Stephen King is a better writer than William Shakespeare, Miley Cyrus is a better musician than all four of the Beatles combined, the Big Mac superior to Kobe beef, and Transformers 2 was the greatest film over made (choke on that, Citizen Kane).
It’s really hilarious to watch the schizophrenia of the common Apple fanboi when it comes to the importance of market share. With the iPhone, bragging about its success obviously gives Maclots get a huge hardon, a mentality that puts them (barely) a step above the feces-chucking apes who get fired up chanting “USA, USA, USA!”
But bring up the completely, laughably, pitifully small market share of Macs and OS X relative to Windows PCs? All of a sudden the Mac fanbois get all enlightened and egalitarian, bleating on about how “popularity does not indicate quality.” And that’s when they actually bother to rationalize it rather than just relying on vague, simpleminded cliches about supporting the underdog.
The StoneLoops vs Mumbojumbo/Luxor argument seems a little more worrisome. If I believe the guy behind StoneLoops, Apple allowed Mumbojumbo to decide if StoneLoops could be allowed to sell their product (and the answer was, unsurprisingly, no).
I mean, yay Capitalism and all (Mumbojumbo found a way to make money and they took it), but that’s not so much market competition as having a more convincing-sounding argument in front of a judge who doesn’t look at any evidence. Oh, and the judge allows the prosecutor to decide the case.
I can’t see this ending well, but at the moment it just doesn’t matter: Apple can do no wrong, and everyone wants an iPhone. I think the comments previously made about iPhone developers being like prostitutes applies.
Edited 2009-11-08 19:46 UTC
Microsoft is smart enough to realize that, if you want your platform to be successful, then you do everything your power to make life easier for the people developing software for that platform.
But Apple does everything in their power to piss off people who develop software for the iPhone. Apple history is poised to repeat itself once again: they get a few years of success, then competitors catch up and Apple eventually gets left in the dust because of their own arrogance.
That would be the reason that there are now over 100,000 apps for the iPhone – ten times as many as any other phone platform.
And look at how many are fart apps…
As a Mac user, you should know very well that quantity doesn’t mean quality. But I guess every Mac user forgot that when they saw the success of the iPhone. Because by your logic, Windows is better than OS X.
Is there some sort of mailing list that sends those Mac fanboy talking-points? Or are you just repeatedly copy-pasting that “OMG 100,000 apps” bit because you have real argument?
I think if someone says “Apple does everything in their power to piss off people who develop software for the iPhone” its worth reminding them that currently the iPhone has the largest library of apps created by independent developers of any phone platform – heck they have more apps than all other phone platforms put together. This indicates to me that the iPhone platform is very attractive to developers which means Apple isn’t doing too much that is wrong in that area.
No… all it means is that developers haven’t YET found a sufficiently compelling alternative to jump-ship to.
Even two years ago, the best that any objective user could say about the iPhone was that it sucked less than the existing alternatives (discarding all of the insane superlatives from fanbois who cream their shorts over any new Apple product).
Today, though? Apple has rested on the laurels of a product that was already barely-capable of competing 2 years ago. In 2009, the iPhone is the new smartphone “crap standard” – the device that most new hardware aspires to “suck less” than.
Clearly you are suffering from what is known as “Inablility to Dig Cool Stuff Syndrome”. There’s an app for that
Let me see if I can guess that app’s name: iOoohShinyShinyThing?
I have officially begun work on iOoohShinyThing: an app targeted towards the many iPhone users who enjoy the iPhone’s “shiny object” appeal, but find that whole “screen” thing distracts from the glorious shininess.
Enter iOoohShinyThing, which will make the iPhone screen appear to have the same metal finish as the rest of the device. So now Apple fans can enjoy hours of staring slack-jawed at their expensive toy, without any danger of distraction.
Edited 2009-11-12 14:39 UTC
I would figure that giving a free copy of a full version of Xcode since the initial release of Mac OS X would be an indicator of that goal. A very $99.00 to release an app for the store VS how much is the full version of Visual Studio?
Great. So after you’ve paid the exorbitant price of a Mac (and presumably an iPhone too), you get the development tools for free. How generous of Apple.
Of course, the reality is that even Apple is smart enough to realize that they have no choice in the matter. No one in their right mind would buy development tools for an OS with such a small userbase.
Which version? But whatever the cost, it’s a small price to pay for not being tied to development tools that only run on over-priced hardware from a single vendor. And the biggest value? Not having to deal with Apple’s ridiculously arbitrary, draconian app store submission process and policies.
Oh, and a counter-question: how much does Microsoft charge you for the “privilege” of releasing software for their mobile platform? That would be $0? Interesting.
And while we’re on the subject, how much does the Android SDK cost? How about the webOS SDK? And how much does it cost to release software developed with those tools? Unlike Apple, the answer to all three questions is $0. Amazing, no?
Thanks to Apple behaving like a short-sighted control freak when it comes to iPhone third-party development, Palm and Google look downright magnanimous just by providing a basic, common courtesy to developers. Maybe they should send Apple a “thank you” card.
Been saying that for years in relation to another OS and it’s applications…
From another angle though, lets ask this question. As unlikely as it seems by the “evidence” put forward, if DishLoc was somehow legally found to impinge on IP contained in DishPointer and subsequently had to be withdrawn from sale, therefore negating any possibility of upgrades or bug fixes, who would those who have purchased it go to for their refund? The defunct developer, or Apple?
I can see where Apple are coming from on this, however I think the better solution would be to temporarily withdraw BOTH products from the App Store until it is determined where the facts lie. That way neither company is gaining any advantage over the other and more importantly customers wouldn’t possibly be purchasing something that may have no future.
What makes you think you’re ENTITLED to free upgrades/bug fixes much less a refund if they stop? If an app is withdrawn from sale, that doesn’t mean it ceases to function or you have to destroy it.
The concept of automatic online updates is a fairly new one. One which I’m not too fond of because most software nowadays is perpertual beta quality because it’s rushed out the door and they’ll “just fix it later”. Back when your home computer OS was burned into an EPROM, they were more inclined to get it right the first time. Doesn’t mean there weren’t bugs however.
Apple is defaulting to one due to a filed Patent application with USPTO.
If that doesn’t pass the smell test they are free to let both of them in.
The guy complaining about the novelty should know to do such an application most likely will have competition and patents involved.
Go read some patent books on how to gain a patent in the US.
The company he works for should have filed a patent and had that on record.
Apple isn’t the USPTO.
A really solid explaination: Patents & Trademarks, Plain and Simple by Michael H. Jester is a clear, concise and inexpensive read.
You can pick it up for ~ $7 on Amazon.
It’s an eye opener on how the USPTO works, period.
Did you read – at all?
There is no patent. Heck, there is no filed/pending patent. They are preparing to submit a patent.
If that is reason enough to kick someone out of the App Store, then I hereby state that I am preparing a patent on using the iPhone as a remote control. Apple, please remove all remote control applications – including your own – from the App Store.
Thank you.
Thom, did they mention what part of their app exactly they plan on filing a patent on?
The original complaint isn’t very clear. Is it displaying the clarke belt? Overlaying the satellites? Maybe just the fact that they’re overlaying information onto the camera view? Using the accelerometers to calculate the angle of your iPhone? Drawing lines? The colour red?
Thom, in the later part of your article you have:
“That forum posting was made 5 days after Fehr submitted his application, and six days after DP Technologies’ application was approved and showed up in the App Store.”
Doesn’t this also need to be updated due to the change below:
“Update: Fehr pointed out that while the App Store states DishPointer arrived on September 22nd, there were problems with iTunes Connect (more here) and the servers at the time, meaning the application became visible later than the 22nd.”
Since without that update being mentioned there too it sounds like Fehr could, in principle, have done the (unlikely) “24 hour copy” you alluded to in the article. As I understand it, this is completely ruled out now?
How bizarre. So what do they propose the developer do to prevent his app getting pulled? Persuade his competitors to write to Apple and withdraw their complaint? Doesn’t sound like a great system. Seems like by threatening to remove the app unless something is done, Apple have *put* themselves into a position of arbitration. If they really wanted to stay out of this, surely they could tell the complaining developer to seek remedy against the alleged copycat?
Maybe it’s time someone really spams the process, filing lots of different complaints against all sort of games. Maybe then people realize how shitty this process is. I also wonder if the people in question don’t have a case here (unfair competition, trade practices…). I guess it’s time for someone to stand up to the bullies.
…that Apple wants to be like the old AOL. Everything nice and tidy and under control. Until it breaks down completely in the face of the open, decentralized internet.
Which goes back to what I said about the iPod/iPhone – they should allow people to load on applications without needing to use AppStore where by the end user uses some weird key combination that unlocks it (thus they lose technical support as a result); that way the morons are protected from themselves, the network providers know their network isn’t going to be clogged with excess traffic and those of us who know what we’re doing have the freedom.
It would be a win-win-win situation but buggered if kow why Apple hasn’t done it – control freaks or the mobile network providers have Apple by the balls? AT&T have denied it but for some reason I find it unconvincing that Apple would go to the extent that they have to stop unauthorised third software being loaded. The reason for that was a remark a few years of ago about AT&T not wanting their ‘network bought down’ by a misbehaving application.
It is the same issue of DRM; if Microsoft and Apple could get away with not having to provide DRM in their software – they would. It would be one less piece of technology they would have to write and maintain. As much as people like to label Apple and Steve Jobs as control freaks, I think there is a lot more at play behind the scenes which we aren’t privy to.
Edited 2009-11-09 04:28 UTC
Phloptical is right, and I believe Apple is concern in their growth and market penetration reaching a point where Antitrust lawsuits might have more weight.
It is a odd situation. Besides the fact these authors seem to be amateurs who probably have no problem using free open source software and tools to write this stuff but have a problem when other people does similar work, what or whom is exactly Apple trying to protect? a) themselves from lawsuits? b) watered down (and profit share) applications from clones?
I also have trouble with the idea of the mindeset Apple is instilling here.
I’m the CTO of one the early online hosting application servers that began with modems and later incorporated internet connectivity. 3rd party applets are written to work over modems, console or the web. Just recently, in answering a question, one popular applet is a caller id callback verification. I found over 100 of them from free to shareware to commercial listing in our support file library! I can’t imagine ever comtemplating getting involved in picking and choosing which ones are worthy of staying in our applet download library or offering a policy where authors can issue a complaint. In 25+ of operations, I don’t even recall such a complaint and if there was a copyright infringement complaint, we were never involved in disputes between 3rd party developers. Short of anyone actually stealing source code, infringing on a patent and/or “look and feel”, complainting about the existence of similar applications was just unheard of.
That said, one thing we are doing different for a new pending release is including some 3rd party applets to fill in product features we don’t have the time to do ourselves. For one feature, there were 4-5 applets available and I choose the best one and contacted the author of our intentions.
But I do remember wondering how the others will feel when they find out. Will they stop supporting us as 3rd party developers? Will it create a PR problem for us? What if the success of doing this for one, prompts a complaint that it infringes on someone else?
Currently, we make recommendations for customer to explore which similar applets works best for them so it was never an issue. Maybe we might begin to see what Apple is going thru by picking and choosing what qualifies for their iPhone. We don’t charge or get an percentage (other than our compiler and SDK is not free), so maybe this is also a factor for apple and her developers. Apple is getting a piece of the pie so that might create the environment for exclusivity and pressure to remove duplicate work by lesser known developers.
DDDDDRRRRRRRAAAAAAMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
To me, the app store is a double-edged blade. On one hand, if a developer doesn’t have to go through a lot of hassle with Apple and gets their app in right away, it’s a very efficient way for them to get their app out to as many people as possible. The only people on most other phone platforms (Symbian, WM, etc) who installed or bought apps were people who were specifically looking for them on the web. A good many people didn’t, and still don’t, realize that their smartphones can have additional programs installed. So on that level, it’s good for some developers and very good for users who now have an easy way to find apps. In this respect, it’s much like a *NIX package repository.
However, it almost seems to me as though Apple wasn’t prepared for what they were trying to do, and they’re struggling not only with themselves but with third parties such as the cel providers. They had all the technology in place, but the actual exercising of their store policies either was not laid out for the employees or the policies themselves are not clear enough and can be interpreted differently. Looking at the policies, I’d say it is some of both. I understand why they’re trying to control the app store, even though I don’t agree, but they weren’t ready to handle that type of control and they’re trying to find their feet so to speak, and all the while being badgered by cel providers and politics although they deny this. They simply weren’t, and obviously still aren’t, prepared to take on the role of gatekeeper/arbitrator for something this large.
Yes. That is the only way that we will ever get Apple’s attention regarding their attrocious App Store policies: By purchasing their phones.
Edited 2009-11-09 17:34 UTC