I think the article is confusing lookalike apps with bait and switch apps. As shady as what Zynga does is, they are lookalike apps. The Temple Jump, etc apps were bait and switch apps. They used a mishmash of popular sounding names and put up screenshots that were not of actual gameplay. They used icons that look similar to the game they are trying to use as bait. People mistake the app for something similar to the game whose name and icon was mimicked and pay for it. Then they find out that the game has nothing to do with what it was trying to convince them that it did.
Zynga, et al. are semi-ethical. The Temple Jump buy was just straight up unethical, and even predatory. Preying on people who don't have the sense to realize they shouldn't buy a game without being able to see gameplay shots or a detailed description of the gameplay. There is a difference.
Even if Temle Jump was an obvious example of a scam, such actions still are similar to nazi behavior.
Who has the right to decide what is similar to what and what intention brought that app to life?
Angry birds anybody?
It was similar to many other games already on the appstore, so not even the release date can determine, which app has more right to stay on the store.
Apple should enforce a better reporting/complain system user and developer side and should enhance the appstore with systems which teach the users to pay more attention, than to remove random apps blatantly and one sided based on the point of view of a random guy, no matter who that random guy is.
I don't blame the temple jump guy. I blame apple.
__________________
Last edited by Promo Dispenser; 02-05-2012 at 12:01 PM.
Who has the right to decide what is similar to what and what intention brought that app to life?
Apple absolutely has the right. It's their store. You agreed with that as soon as you signed the developer agreement. This isn't arbitrary, this is enforcing something that is SPECIFICALLY in the developer contract.
This is the problem of today's world, no matter in which regard.
They always try to cure the symptoms, not the source of the desease.
That is a cheap excuse to say "they can do what they want, it is their store". And the biggest problem is, that people like you take it as granted.
Sorry, they can't do what they want as you can't do what you want also when you have a store on the 5th avenue.
There are regulations and laws for any business. You can't for example set your prices as high or as low as you want, just because it is your store.
And my argument still remains.
If Temple Jump is violating the developer contract, then Angry Birds and Doodle Jump do it as well.
I don't try to protect the temple jump guy, I just want to point out that it is always a double sided sword to point with fingers screaming loud, because the line is really thin in most of the cases.
__________________
Last edited by Promo Dispenser; 02-05-2012 at 12:13 PM.
Sorry, they can't do what they want as you can't do what you want also when you have a store on the 5th avenue.
So, if I go to a music store on 5th avenue with a music CD I made of smooth jazz music and label it "The greatest hip hop album out today," the store on 5th avenue will carry it?
I'm pretty sure that, even if they support indie musicians, they would listen to the CD and make sure that it met their quality standards first. Standards which are MUCH higher in brick and mortar stores than they are in digital ones. Likely, my smooth jazz CD wouldn't make it onto the store shelves at all. And there is no way it would make it onto shelves if it was labelled as a hip hop CD.
I don't know what 5th avenue is like where you live, but remind me never to shop there.
TSorry, they can't do what they want as you can't do what you want also when you have a store on the 5th avenue.
Sure they can. They can absolutely decide what software they want to sell--and profit from--in *their* store. You can't force somebody to sell a particular product.
That is a cheap excuse to say "they can do what they want, it is their store". And the biggest problem is, that people like you take it as granted.
Sorry, they can't do what they want as you can't do what you want also when you have a store on the 5th avenue.
There are regulations and laws for any business. You can't for example set your prices as high or as low as you want, just because it is your store.
And my argument still remains.
If Temple Jump is violating the developer contract, then Angry Birds and Doodle Jump do it as well.
Are you claiming Apple is in violation of some law by doing this? Comparing them to the nazis is definitely quite a bit overboard... Look at it from Apple's perspective... they want to keep their customers as happy as possible. If they are getting tons of negative press or customer complains regarding some apps, why wouldn't they take it down if they legally could?
If they are getting ... customer complains regarding some apps, why wouldn't they take it down if they legally could?
Exactly what I am saying when I say "improved complain system for users AND developers".
Guys learn to read.
But in the article they suggest, that Apple will take down random apps, which THEY think are not matching somebody's (steve jobs', random reviewer employee's etc.) rules.
If they take down apps only if they get X ammount of complaints regarding that app, fine. They should. But starting to take down apps behind the curtains without any complaints, is nazi. Sorry, but true.
__________________
Last edited by Promo Dispenser; 02-05-2012 at 03:47 PM.
If they take down apps only if they get X ammount of complaints regarding that app, fine. They should. But starting to take down apps behind the curtains without any complaints, is nazi. Sorry, but true.
Someone needs a history lesson regarding the nazi party... you really make yourself sound ridiculous.
Someone needs a history lesson regarding the nazi party... you really make yourself sound ridiculous.
I live in europe. I live in Austria. My grandfather fought in ww2. Believe me, I know pretty much about the nazis.
Did you hear the widely used neo term "grammar-nazi"? It surely has something to do with the german Nationalsozialistische Partei, right? And all of those, who use the term, are just idiots not knowing anything about the nazis. You made your point. Thank you that you teached me.
None the less, when somebody has no argument anymore and therefor starts to pick on grammar, history or other knowledge of his opponent, that person dies as a discussion partner in that second for me. Bye.
__________________
Last edited by Promo Dispenser; 02-05-2012 at 07:30 PM.
None the less, when somebody has no argument anymore and therefor starts to pick on grammar, history or other knowledge of his opponent, that person dies as a discussion partner in that second for me. Bye.
To be fair, there's always going to be people (in this case, the Russian fella) who are willing to try and cash in and piggyback on other peoples success (in this case, Temple Jump). Happens in all walks of life.
The problem is, Apple review all our apps, and a lot of the time we get rejected for the (perceived) silliest, most pedantic of reasons. The question is this time, how the HELL did this get through their ever-increasing levels of scrutiny? WHY wasn't this flagged by the initial reviewer - are they completely out of touch with what's actually popular in THEIR store? It's so obviously set up as a scam, I cannot believe it actually made it onto the store in the first place - for which Apple has to shoulder the blame - I can imagine tens of thousands of kids, to some of whom $0.99 will still be a lot of their pocket-money, thinking they've been completely ripped off. They go on about quality apps in the store and 'pride' themselves on the curation of said store, but ultimately they let this **** through time after time, make a pile of cash off the developer, THEN take it down...
so am I not allowed to make a Doodle Jump kind of game that has temples in the background and call it Temple Jump then?
I mean how else should I call it if I really made such a game and I really like the idea of a Temple? I don't want to call it Shrine Hop
so am I not allowed to make a Doodle Jump kind of game that has temples in the background and call it Temple Jump then?
I mean how else should I call it if I really made such a game and I really like the idea of a Temple? I don't want to call it Shrine Hop
No, you can't. Or at least you can, but don't expect to not be harrassed by Temple Run and Doodle's lawyers. Welcome to the crazy world of Intellectual Property and trademark law. If you don't like it, talk to your local Pirate Party.
so am I not allowed to make a Doodle Jump kind of game that has temples in the background and call it Temple Jump then?
I mean how else should I call it if I really made such a game and I really like the idea of a Temple? I don't want to call it Shrine Hop
You are allowed. And you should be allowed.
Would be nothing wrong with it.
The problem is when somebody blatantly tries to rip off successful titles, but even then it is not an issue (see Zynga and that tower thing) if the app has quality and is not an 1:1 copy of a single game.
Temple run was a crap and I assume, many people complained about it. That's why they removed it.
And exactly that is what I am talking about when I say "the line is very thin in most of the cases".
Namely the line between "I was inspired by GameX and made a new game with improved elements" and "I made a crap and try to get rich by letting people believe, that my game is GameX".
Temple Run is also not a completely new game design. It also uses and combines already known game mechanics. It just happened to find the exact mix of them to be successful.
__________________
Last edited by Promo Dispenser; 02-06-2012 at 09:27 AM.
Calling a "fake" app a copycat app gives them too much credit. Fake apps have misleading titles, icons,
and screenshots and don't function as advertised. They are scams (not copies) in my opinion.
And people who write articles about this should do a better job describing what they really are,
because they give clones a bad name by throwing them all in the same pile.
Calling a "fake" app a copycat app gives them too much credit. Fake apps have misleading titles, icons,
and screenshots and don't function as advertised. They are scams (not copies) in my opinion.
And people who write articles about this should do a better job describing what they really are,
because they give clones a bad name by throwing them all in the same pile.
The question is this time, how the HELL did this get through their ever-increasing levels of scrutiny? WHY wasn't this flagged by the initial reviewer - are they completely out of touch with what's actually popular in THEIR store?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDiva
There is no way that this just 'slipped' through.
+1
+1
If I am the accusing type, I'd say Anton had a friend who is a reviewer
and cut a deal. And the person who reviewed Temple Jump should be held responsible,
called to an internal court of some sort and answer why he
approved such app. Check on his relationship with Anton as well.
Apple removes lookalike apps from App Store
LoL
Linear Mode
