or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple removes HMV rival music store from iOS App Store
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple removes HMV rival music store from iOS App Store

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 
Apple has pulled British music retailer HMV's app from the iOS App Store because of functionality that allowed users to buy songs for download.

BBM for iOS
The HMV app removed from the App Store | Source: The Guardian


The app, whose removal was first reported by The Guardian, was released last week. Paul McGowan, HMV's chairman, said that Apple "politely" asked the retailer to remove the app on Monday and that HMV "politely declined" the request.

McGowan says Apple then demanded HMV alter the app to remove the digital music store within a matter of hours, then pulled the app from the App Store after HMV was unable to make the deadline. McGowan called the deadline "unrealistic" and said it was "disapointing that Apple has chosen to suspend an app that has proven to be very successful in only a few short days."

HMV said in a statement that the app had been downloaded more than 10,000 times since it hit the iOS and Google Play stores on Oct. 17, and that the company was working diligently to make changes that would allow it to be replaced in the App Store.

"HMV's developers are working around the clock to deliver an updated version of the iOS app for Apple's approval which will retain the innovative Image Search and Sound Search functionality to discover music and listen to 30 second previews," the statement said. HMV also noted that the app-based music store would be replaced with functionality allowing users to manage their music purchased via the company's HTML5 shop, similar to services offered by Amazon and Google.

The app was reportedly removed for violating clause 11.13 of Apple's iOS developer guidelines --?"Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used outside of the application will be rejected."
post #2 of 51
The guidelines are there for developers from the start. If they don't follow them, that is on them. If they are unsure if what they want to do is okay they should ask for clarification.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #3 of 51
Don't know why there's a guideline that prohibits music stores.
post #4 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post

Don't know why there's a guideline that prohibits music stores.

 

Because Apple takes a cut out of everything sold in-app.  If HMV wants to sell something without paying Apple it needs to do it outside the app.
 
HMV knew that, maybe they want to start a debate or lawsuits over Apple policies. The way around it is to make an HTML5 app with a shortcut icon. Once the user have that icon installed, it looks like a normal app and behave like one and the dev dont have to pay Apple anymore.
 
Someone may ask why dev just dont make HTLM5 apps in the first place.  Its because they want to be in the App store for the marketing power it brings. If you only make an HTML5 app, then users will need to find youre app on the net, it will not be visible in the app store. Most dev's thinks the marketing power of the app store is worth paying Apple a cut for there in-app purchased.
 
Of course if you are a reseller of content like HMV, you can't pay Apple a 30% cut because it would eat up all of you're margins.  If I was Apple, I would simply make another rate for resellers like google, amazon or HMV...  its better for Apple to get a 5% cut then get nothing.

Edited by herbapou - 10/22/13 at 6:01am
post #5 of 51
Hasn't something like this always been part of the App Store guidelines? Why on earth, several years into the App Store, did HMV suddenly think, "Ya know, I bet Apple will be okay if we go ahead and do this.... Forget every other music retailer that's wanted to and forget the rules for the store, gosh darn it, we're gonna do it!"
post #6 of 51
It always seems harsh when Apple cuts out these sorts of apps, but at the same time I'm sure HMV wouldn't be too willing for Apple to set up a store-in-a-store at their retail locations without paying rent.

It's also pretty inane to for HMV to suggest that they have the technology to offer instant downloads and check-out transactions, but not have any internal facility for managing that.
post #7 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post

Don't know why there's a guideline that prohibits music stores.

If you read it, it's not just music stores. Apple doesn't allow the selling of any product or service using in-app-purchasing system provided by Apple..

 

One main reason? Apple is liable for any funds it collects through it. I wouldn't want to be liable for 3rd party stuff either.. Apple has never been an Amazon retailer.. seems they want to avoid that and I'm glad they do.

post #8 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post

Don't know why there's a guideline that prohibits music stores.

Don't know why or how Apple approved such an app in the first place.

Daniel Swanson

Reply

Daniel Swanson

Reply
post #9 of 51
What reality was HMV living in when they assumed they would be able to have their own music store on iOS?

These kinds of stories pop up every few months. Developer is clueless, Apple removes the app, developer whines and cries, developer changes their app to adhere to the app store rules.
post #10 of 51
I know some people cry foul with this rule, but if you think about it - Apple supplies the storefront, and more importantly, the purchasing service that links all those credit cards to other vendors. Apple pays to bill those credit cards, so I think it's practice is reasonable. Linking to outside forms of purchase avoids the payment fees.
post #11 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrayven View Post
 

If you read it, it's not just music stores. Apple doesn't allow the selling of any product or service using in-app-purchasing system provided by Apple..

 

One main reason? Apple is liable for any funds it collects through it. I wouldn't want to be liable for 3rd party stuff either.. Apple has never been an Amazon retailer.. seems they want to avoid that and I'm glad they do.

 

Yup! You’re absolutely correct—I wouldn’t want to be liable either.

 

“HMV "politely declined" the request.”

 

So their APP was in violation of the developer guidelines, it got past someone, Apple found out, asked them to alter it, they declined and now “McGowan called the deadline "unrealistic" and said it was "disapointing that Apple has chosen to suspend an app that has proven to be very successful in only a few short days."”

 

DUH!

post #12 of 51
I think this is wrong. It should be up to the consumer how or where they buy their music from, not Apple.

It is healthy to have different avenues to buy music. HMV is struggling as it is and it is mainly because of Apple.

Why do they not object to subscription music apps like Spotify since essentially they are competing with Apple, albeit with a different business model?
"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee
Reply
"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee
Reply
post #13 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

Meh, some statement defending Apple. Apple is always right. They were probably terrorists.

Meh, some knee-jerk Anti-Apple bigot, trolling for lolz and/or to stroke his epeen on the interwebs but can't even muster the brain power to read what he's replying to.

 

Oh, giggle, giggle, giggle ... I haven't laughed that hard since I was a little girl. I think I almost shot coffee out of my nose ... and I wasn't even drinking coffee at the time.

 

But seriously, why has nobody hit you with the forum banhammer yet? The only rationale I can think of at the moment is that your brand of pathetic is just too funny.

post #14 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

Meh, some statement defending Apple. Apple is always right. They were probably terrorists.

 

No point in using a substantive argument when you can say something inflammatory like that. I call the use of 'terrorists' in this context a corollary to Godwin's Law. 

post #15 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius View Post

I think this is wrong. It should be up to the consumer how or where they buy their music from, not Apple.

It is healthy to have different avenues to buy music. HMV is struggling as it is and it is mainly because of Apple.

Why do they not object to subscription music apps like Spotify since essentially they are competing with Apple, albeit with a different business model?

 

Like I said, there is nothing keeping HMV from making a HTML5 app and sell music on iOS devices without paying Apple...  If they want to use the app store, then they have to pay Apple a cut. I agrees that Apple model doesn't work for resellers of content, its design for app devs that sell there own content.


Edited by herbapou - 10/22/13 at 6:18am
post #16 of 51
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post
Don't know why there's a guideline that prohibits music stores.

 

 

First of all, because they have their own.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #17 of 51
If Apple really rejected the app for "selling songs" then it would be newsworthy (and much more courtworthy than DoJ's ridiculous suit on iBooks).
Apple rejected the app for using In App Purchases for real world purchases, right? I can understand why they would do that, and I can understand the developer assuming that those "real world purchases" being digital files, it would be fine to use IAP. It's not, too bad for them...

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #18 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius View Post

I think this is wrong. It should be up to the consumer how or where they buy their music from, not Apple.

It is healthy to have different avenues to buy music. HMV is struggling as it is and it is mainly because of Apple.

Why do they not object to subscription music apps like Spotify since essentially they are competing with Apple, albeit with a different business model?

It is up to the consumer how or where they buy their music.  Apple does not require anyone to buy from iTunes.  But if you use the Apple App Store then you pay Apple.  

 

"Essentially", "albeit with a different business model", I think that if you are different then that changes the rules.

post #19 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

 

First of all, because they have their own.

See my previous response why it's precisely where it would go afoul of "monopoly" rules. At least in my understanding, it s not what happened.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #20 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius View Post

I think this is wrong. It should be up to the consumer how or where they buy their music from, not Apple.

It is healthy to have different avenues to buy music. HMV is struggling as it is and it is mainly because of Apple.

Why do they not object to subscription music apps like Spotify since essentially they are competing with Apple, albeit with a different business model?

1) What precisely do you think is wrong? The consumer can go by his/her music elsewhere. Apple isn't stopping that. So that can't be it.

 

What Apple is doing is enforcing their right to say that if a retailer wants to play in their [Apple's] sandbox, the one Apple developed, cultivated and forms a critical component in Apple's business, they have to play by Apple's rules. Why should a 3rd party be allowed to do anything they want on Apple's dime?

 

2) Again, there are different avenues to buy music for an iOS device. If HMV struggling, it is a result of HMV failing to develop or evolve their business properly.

 

3) Spotify? Well, perhaps they followed the rules for playing with Apple's toys, so Apple is all sorts of happy to let them play. Fairly easy, no?

post #21 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

Meh, some statement defending Apple. Apple is always right. They were probably terrorists.

Now I see why everyone is wanting to block you. In Wikipedia they will probably be adding soon a picture of you to help people know what an internet troll looks like. Three threads with xx posts in less than one day that are all obnoxious.

I like how the company politely declined to remove it on their own. Just make it an HTLM5 app already.
Jimbo
Reply
Jimbo
Reply
post #22 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius View Post


It is healthy to have different avenues to buy music. HMV is struggling as it is and it is mainly because of Apple.
 

I'd reword that as "It is mainly because Apple proved to be superior", which makes your argument untrue (it's healthier to have the superior option win out than have mediocre offerings drown the better one, and Apple's fully integrated experience is more pleasing to the user, right?)

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #23 of 51
Apple approved of this app when they approved the app. What changed?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #24 of 51
I've never created an app for iOS but I've heard the approval process is extensive. Any idea how this app got approved by apple in the first place? It just slipped through the cracks?
Edited by darthW - 10/22/13 at 6:59am
post #25 of 51
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post
See my previous response why it's precisely where it would go afoul of "monopoly" rules. At least in my understanding, it s not what happened.

 

 

Right, absolutely. It was kicked because of the overarching in-app purchases rule. But that rule’s to stop music stores.

 

How would it be monopolistic? You don’t like it, develop for Android.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #26 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post

Don't know why there's a guideline that prohibits music stores.

 

Well, how about this? You own and operate a music store. One day the owner of another music store down the street, in a bad location, walks in and asks if he can put a cash register on your counter and have one of his employees man it so he can sell his music to your customers too. What would your answer be? Let's say you tell him no. Now he goes to the government and demands that they force you to allow him to sell his music in your music store, because he's a lot smaller business than you and his store is in a bad location. They agree and the next day your competitor has his cash register all set up in your music store. Is that okay with you?

post #27 of 51
"Politely declined."?

I often exceed the speed limit by a few Mph near my home but have not been ticketed by the local cop yet. So I guess when, and if, he does I can politely refuse to pull over because he has let me get away with it previously.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #28 of 51

What I find funny is all the people who do not understand this and think is okay to set up your own store within a story and also think what Apple is doing is illegal or constraint of trade or something similar.

 

This is no different than any store in america or elsewhere who sells products, they will not allow anyone to just walk in into their store and set up their own operations to sell the exact same products as the store owner. If this company wants to sell music, set up your own store and if you want to lock in consumer to your product then design your own ecosystem and compete like everyone else. 

 

This company is no better than a parasite trying to live and grow off the hard work of others. 

post #29 of 51

It does seem a bit inconsistent that Apple expressly refuse to host other stores, but they do allow subscription services like Spotify, Pandora and the like (Netflix if you include movies).  

 

iTunes and HMV are competitors, but so are the subscription services, so from a perspective it seems harsh that HMV gets penalised for following a similar business model (purchase music outright) to Apple while the others are fine because the "purchase" takes place elsewhere.

 

Not defending HMV, but if you're talking about parasites standing on the shoulders of Apple's technology then HMV aren't the only ones, and the rules aren't working in an even and fair way.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #30 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by diz_geek View Post

Hasn't something like this always been part of the App Store guidelines? Why on earth, several years into the App Store, did HMV suddenly think, "Ya know, I bet Apple will be okay if we go ahead and do this.... Forget every other music retailer that's wanted to and forget the rules for the store, gosh darn it, we're gonna do it!"

 

They wanted to get their name out there (play for relevance) and gauge user reaction. They were hoping for an uproar. 

 

This is a non-story anyway, for the following reason:

 

The app was reportedly removed for violating clause 11.13 of Apple's iOS developer guidelines --?"Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used outside of the application will be rejected."

 

It could have been HMV or Joe small-time developer. The rules apply to everyone. 

post #31 of 51

I think this is prelude to a lawsuit from a third-rate, has-been company trying to extract a few court-adjudicated bucks from Apple. Given some of the recent idiotic rulings -- e.g., Cote/DoJ vis-a-vis iBooks -- one can see why they are emboldened to do something like this.

 

They have little or nothing to lose.

post #32 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

It does seem a bit inconsistent that Apple expressly refuse to host other stores, but they do allow subscription services like Spotify, Pandora and the like (Netflix if you include movies).  

 

iTunes and HMV are competitors, but so are the subscription services, so from a perspective it seems harsh that HMV gets penalised for following a similar business model (purchase music outright) to Apple while the others are fine because the "purchase" takes place elsewhere.

 

Not defending HMV, but if you're talking about parasites standing on the shoulders of Apple's technology then HMV aren't the only ones, and the rules aren't working in an even and fair way.

It is simple, if you want to sell your product in someone else's store you have to follow their rules. No different than any brick and mortar store that have been around for 100 years, You can not walk in their store and set up your own shop or direct customers within their store ways from their store to buy your competing product at some other location.

 

Again if you want to sell product your own way apple and no one else is stopping you, just go get your own store and working capital and make it happen. Stop living off others efforts.

 

Notice how no government is law enforcement entity has step in to stop Apple from enforcing these rule everyone believe is wrong. Why, because it is acceptable business practices which have been around for a long time ad it is legal. Apple just wrote them all down since it appears developers fail to understand normal business practices.

post #33 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

It does seem a bit inconsistent that Apple expressly refuse to host other stores, but they do allow subscription services like Spotify, Pandora and the like (Netflix if you include movies).  

How is it inconsistent? Pandora, for example, sells the Pandora One subscription IAP through the App Store not through a third party mechanism and thus do not run afoul of the rules. Spotify and Netflix do not sell their subscriptions through their iOS apps so also do not run afoul of the rules. There is zero inconsistency since all those apps you mention follow Apple's rules about IAP.

 

Also, it's pretty bizarre that only Apple gets flak for this when Google Play has the same guidelines that all IAP use Google Wallet instead of a third party.

post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

 

Right, absolutely. It was kicked because of the overarching in-app purchases rule. But that rule’s to stop music stores.

 

How would it be monopolistic? You don’t like it, develop for Android.

 

Your last sentence is, in my opinion, the most important thing anyone has said concerning this story.  Apple needs to be careful it doesn't win the battle and lose the war.

post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesMac View Post
 

 

Your last sentence is, in my opinion, the most important thing anyone has said concerning this story.  Apple needs to be careful it doesn't win the battle and lose the war.

Except that if you put your app on Google Play, which 99% of apps will do, you can only use Google Wallet for any IAP. So the terms are no different to Apple's App Store.

post #36 of 51

Quote:

Originally Posted by diz_geek View Post

Hasn't something like this always been part of the App Store guidelines? Why on earth, several years into the App Store, did HMV suddenly think, "Ya know, I bet Apple will be okay if we go ahead and do this.... Forget every other music retailer that's wanted to and forget the rules for the store, gosh darn it, we're gonna do it!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post
 

 

They wanted to get their name out there (play for relevance) and gauge user reaction. They were hoping for an uproar. 

 

This is a non-story anyway, for the following reason:

 

The app was reportedly removed for violating clause 11.13 of Apple's iOS developer guidelines --?"Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used outside of the application will be rejected."

 

It could have been HMV or Joe small-time developer. The rules apply to everyone. 

 

I think that was kind of my point...  Rule has been there since Day 1 - why on earth would HMV think that suddenly they are going to change the terms and conditions of the App Store all on their own by sneaking one past the App Store review process?  They should have realized that this would have been a problem and had their backup plan ready to go right away rather than trying to be sneaky.  Just kind of strikes me as a bit of a "oh, look at how eeeevil Apple is being...  poor little us....  all you poor, maligned consumers should come back to us... we'll treat you nicely...." - a.k.a., a false bit of outrage to try to get some free publicity.

post #37 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by baeder View Post


Now I see why everyone is wanting to block you. In Wikipedia they will probably be adding soon a picture of you to help people know what an internet troll looks like. Three threads with xx posts in less than one day that are all obnoxious.

I like how the company politely declined to remove it on their own. Just make it an HTLM5 app already.

It's more to do with the double-standard. We don't tolerate this from anyone else. As for people blocking me, that's their perogative. I don't see a lot of it because I recognised a lot of the troublemakers from the Cnet forum and blocked them before I made my first posting. I don't need that nonsense here. It's bad enough on Cnet. 

post #38 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


First of all, because they have their own.

But not allowing others could lead to anti-trust issues.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #39 of 51

1. How did this slip by Apple? Seems like an obvious feature to look for when a company like HMV submits an app.

2. How could HMV expect to get away with this, when the terms of the App Store are pretty clear on forbidding competing functions?

post #40 of 51

The whole point of blocking 3d party in app purchases is to protect people. If Apple didn't block it, every developer would do their own IAP so they can only pay the credit card fees instead of Apple's 30%. Stupid people (and there are LOTS of them) would punch in their credit card info in lots of these apps to buy stuff. It would be highly likely that lots of these smaller developers wouldn't have the correct security in place and stories of people's credit cards being compromised would be on this site daily. The end result would be a perception that the iPhone is a dangerous item that you should not get if you want to keep your credit card secure...

 

Apple is securing this for developers and customers and the cost is 30%. For this reality to hold though, they need to be hard on their rule. There is no exceptions (not even a big "trusted" store like Amazon or HMV) since that would open it up to others too. Afterall, it wouldn't be fair to let one developer role their own IAP but not the next guy; in fact, would it be illegal?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple removes HMV rival music store from iOS App Store