Is there a way around this shitocracy?
- after fixing the app description I got rejected for using my app name(?!), multiple back and forths with the reviewer got me nowhere, they just copy pasted the same response not addressing my messages at all
- filled the app store review board appeal, it's been 5 days and I've got no response.
At this point I'm seriously considering rewriting the app for MacOS and distributing myself. I can't imagine going through all of this with every app update, it's beyond ridiculous.
"I didn't impersonate a third party," I explained in my message to Lieutenant Appleby. "I only wrote a disclaimer stating: Not affiliated with ACME."
"Exactly," lieutenant appleby replied. "By stating you have nothing to do with ACME, you have involved ACME. Therefore, you are unlawfully impersonating an unaffiliated party."
"But I only mentioned them to prove I wasn't affiliated with them!"
"Which is a violation," Lieutenant Appleby pointed out.
It was a Catch-22. The Guidelines stated that to prove you were not affiliated with a third party, you had to write a disclaimer. But to write the disclaimer, you had to type the third party’s name, which was a strict violation of the rule against mentioning third parties you were not affiliated with.
I deleted the disclaimer, thereby making myself safely affiliated with nobody by refusing to acknowledge anyone. I resubmitted the app.
Lieutenant Appleby rejected it again.
"What is it this time?" I asked.
"You are using your app's name," Lieutenant Appleby replied.
"Of course I am using my app's name," I replied back. "It is the name of my app."
"You cannot use that name. It is trademark infringement."
"Infringing on whose trademark?"
"The app's."
"But I am the app! It is my app!"
"Which is exactly why you cannot use it," Lieutenant Appleby wrote patiently. "If you use the app's name, you are impersonating the app. And impersonation is strictly forbidden by the Guidelines. An app cannot go around pretending to be itself!"
However, thanks to many of us that only favour Chrome like IE of yore, and ship it alongside their "native" applications, the Web is nowadays ChromeOS Application Platform, so we are only a couple of years away of Google owning that as well.
Companies operating in Europe must provide a clear way to appeal automated decisions: https://www.edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/publicat...
You might not have a way to actually file a complaint against them but quite often, their legal department will just have a quick look at your case and just give you what you want without bothering to tell you anything. Worth a shot.
Refuse to play. Switch to technologoy that the shitocracy has not gotten around to yet, or, eventually, pick up woodworking.
1: I mean, it is, certainly. I'm just not sure if I can make money by making leather gear.
If you are in EU you could try complaining to your local DPA. That certainly sounds like "automated decision which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her" which is against article 22 of GDPR. Or you could consider suing them directly at least for the refund.
Outside of EU maybe try passing law like GDPR to actually get some rights back.