I thought that exact thing when I read "Cupertino company still shelled out more than $6,000".
I.e. shelled out implies cost. It cost them nothing, rather the devs simply lost a sale.
Wait, do we know that? Does Apple's agreement with the developers permit them to refund a purchase for this reason, or is Apple swallowing the dev's share, too? Apple might well do it to avoid a pr problem.
Part of me wishes that Apple had never implemented IAP. It feels like the current state of the App Store discourages developers from making high quality, high value, "honest" apps.
Some of these games with in-app purchases are quite high quality, high value apps. I've seen some that have quite a following, quite a few updates by the developer and quite a story line(s).
I'd rather pruchase some of these then the other junk that costs money.
And just because there are in-app purchases, doesn't mean you have to pay for them. Often playing the game without the in-app purchases (or reducing your in-app purchases) can be just as fun.
Seems to me these stories ail go on forever until Apple actually realises they shouldn't approve "freemium" games with ridiculously high value purchases in them.
If your kid knows your password and you aren't paying attention it doesn't matter the cost, they can rack up a high bill in anything in the store. Games, IAP, movies. We aren't hearing about the kid that found out daddy's password and bought every movie they wanted but it could happen.
It's up to the parents to secure their accounts etc. You can bet Apple is doing any refunds on a strict 'this time' rule. And it won't shock me if the warnings I talked about before happen, even if it annoys the grown ups to no end. Or even the kids account system my cousin blogged about recently.
Just in case it isn't clear, this refund didn't cost Apple anything besides some lost income. They simply took it out of funds due the app developer. They also didn't do it from the kindness of their hearts -- the girl's father could just contest the charge and it would be up to Apple to take him to court and prove that he approved the charges (which he didn't).
So Apple didn't really have much choice here.
As I recall in the UK you can't merely contest a charge. You would have to claim the card was stolen. This came up with the guy that didn't pay attention while his 12 year old, knowing his password, bought tons of stuff over like three months. The guy, a cop even, filed that his own kid stole his credit card.
And if you can just call and contest, it's probably like here in the US on the first level where the card company calls the merchant. Apple would tell them it was via the online store, requires a password, was over an extended time etc and they might not agree to remove the charges. Especially if Apple reports that the card owner admits his daughter knew his password even if he didn't directly tell her and he wasn't paying attention to emails or bills from the card company. And Apple and the card company would give this info in court if you tried to sue.
If your kid knows your password and you aren't paying attention it doesn't matter the cost, they can rack up a high bill in anything in the store. Games, IAP, movies. We aren't hearing about the kid that found out daddy's password and bought every movie they wanted but it could happen.
It's up to the parents to secure their accounts etc. You can bet Apple is doing any refunds on a strict 'this time' rule. And it won't shock me if the warnings I talked about before happen, even if it annoys the grown ups to no end. Or even the kids account system my cousin blogged about recently.
Can you make a reasonable argument for the appropriateness of $100+ in-app purchases in games meant for pre-teens? If not then what's wrong with Apple disallowing it in the best interests of their user-base? Surely the user experience is more important than developer's interests. IMHO anything more than $10 for an in-app purchase in a child's game is questionable.
Can you make a reasonable argument for the appropriateness of $100+ in-app purchases in games meant for pre-teens? If not then what's wrong with Apple disallowing it in the best interests of their user-base? Surely the user experience is more important than developer's interests. IMHO anything more than $10 for an in-app purchase in a child's game is questionable.
That whole issue is beside the point. Even if they were $1 IAP if your kid knows your password and/or you haven't turned on the highly publicized restrictions they can go crazy in the stores and buy whatever they want. At which point whining about the appropriateness of IAP is beside the point. As is whining about it when you didn't pay attention and let your kid download a game meant for someone twice his/her age because it was free and you didn't bother to check out the game rating etc. which has happened more than once with these 'my kid ran up my credit card' stories.
Parents and the Media need to take some responsibility and stop putting the blame solely on evil Apple and their developers.
UNLESS the "Require password" setting is set to 15 minutes (the default) AND someone else entered the password within the last 15 minutes.
Repeat.
UNLESS the "Require password" setting is set to 15 minutes (the default) AND someone else entered the password within the last 15 minutes.
It used to be by default (which was idiotic)- but Apple has since changed it- as they should have. I also agree that the refunds should have been given in those cases.
This one on the other hand, is just ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Parents and the Media need to take some responsibility and stop putting the blame solely on evil Apple and their developers.
Do you agree that Apple and their developers should have shouldered the majority of the blame though (in the early cases- not this one of course)?
Some of these games with in-app purchases are quite high quality, high value apps. I've seen some that have quite a following, quite a few updates by the developer and quite a story line(s).I'd rather pruchase some of these then the other junk that costs money. And just because there are in-app purchases, doesn't mean you have to pay for them. Often playing the game without the in-app purchases (or reducing your in-app purchases) can be just as fun.
I've seen some great ones like Paper too. However, it feels like the average quality has dropped. Look at the top 10 grossing apps. None of them are interesting, innovative apps. They all make their money through consumable IAPs.
What the App Store really needs is a proper demo mechanism. In fact, I'm surprised some kind of a time-limited demo mode isn't a mandatory feature for every paid app.
Just in case it isn't clear, this refund didn't cost Apple anything besides some lost income. They simply took it out of funds due the app developer. They also didn't do it from the kindness of their hearts -- the girl's father could just contest the charge and it would be up to Apple to take him to court and prove that he approved the charges (which he didn't).
So Apple didn't really have much choice here.
Not sure how it works in England, but in the US parents are fully liable for the actions of their children. The only reason Apple reversed the charges is because the media got hold of the story.
I do not get these stories. First, you can shut in-app purchases off in settings. To change the settings, you need a password. Second, who would give his or her kid his or her password? At some point people have to take responsibility for their own stupidity. Perhaps, Apple should shut off in-app purchases by default.
That whole issue is beside the point. Even if they were $1 IAP if your kid knows your password and/or you haven't turned on the highly publicized restrictions they can go crazy in the stores and buy whatever they want. At which point whining about the appropriateness of IAP is beside the point. As is whining about it when you didn't pay attention and let your kid download a game meant for someone twice his/her age because it was free and you didn't bother to check out the game rating etc. which has happened more than once with these 'my kid ran up my credit card' stories.
Parents and the Media need to take some responsibility and stop putting the blame solely on evil Apple and their developers.
It's hardly "beside the point". Apparently you don't have any reasonable argument for a $100 in-app purchase in a kid's game. The intent of developer's that do it in children's games is obviously to scam users. Simple. Do you disagree about the intent?
Wait, do we know that? Does Apple's agreement with the developers permit them to refund a purchase for this reason, or is Apple swallowing the dev's share, too? Apple might well do it to avoid a pr problem.
Yes, even though the public side of the store is "no refunds", the developer agreement says the developer eats the cost. And IIRC, it's even worse for the developer, because Apple still keeps the 30%, so the developers wind up out of pocket for refunds.
So if I got drunk and bought that much music and movies off of iTunes, could I get a refund?
No...you sue the beer company.
Back in the 80's, VHS videos were $60-$70. They started putting them in vending machines and drunks were buying a bunch of them while plastered then complaining the next day because they bought a few hundred dollars worth of videos.
Maybe because you don't read the articles, you just scan them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Second, who would give his or her kid his or her password?
He didn't- she observed it.
I don't think he should have gotten refunded, and I think he needs to beat that girl- but you're the third person who has said this, proving once again, that several people fail to actually read the articles and just form an opinion based on the topic, not the actual story.
Back in the 80's, VHS videos were $60-$70. They started putting them in vending machines and drunks were buying a bunch of them while plastered then complaining the next day because they bought a few hundred dollars worth of videos.
A contract is non binding if you were drunk when you signed it. You have to prove it of course.
I am not sure about this, since I do not do in app purchases in the first place, however, any time I do a purchase or my kids purchase something in itune I get an email about it. How can people say they have no clue that their kids are purchasing stuff without them knowing about.
Others already said, people need to be held accountable for their action or lack of action in this case. Too many people are walking around in a cloud of ignorance bliss and begin rewarded for it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by realwarder
I thought that exact thing when I read "Cupertino company still shelled out more than $6,000".
I.e. shelled out implies cost. It cost them nothing, rather the devs simply lost a sale.
Wait, do we know that? Does Apple's agreement with the developers permit them to refund a purchase for this reason, or is Apple swallowing the dev's share, too? Apple might well do it to avoid a pr problem.
Part of me wishes that Apple had never implemented IAP. It feels like the current state of the App Store discourages developers from making high quality, high value, "honest" apps.
Some of these games with in-app purchases are quite high quality, high value apps. I've seen some that have quite a following, quite a few updates by the developer and quite a story line(s).I'd rather pruchase some of these then the other junk that costs money.
And just because there are in-app purchases, doesn't mean you have to pay for them. Often playing the game without the in-app purchases (or reducing your in-app purchases) can be just as fun.
If your kid knows your password and you aren't paying attention it doesn't matter the cost, they can rack up a high bill in anything in the store. Games, IAP, movies. We aren't hearing about the kid that found out daddy's password and bought every movie they wanted but it could happen.
It's up to the parents to secure their accounts etc. You can bet Apple is doing any refunds on a strict 'this time' rule. And it won't shock me if the warnings I talked about before happen, even if it annoys the grown ups to no end. Or even the kids account system my cousin blogged about recently.
As I recall in the UK you can't merely contest a charge. You would have to claim the card was stolen. This came up with the guy that didn't pay attention while his 12 year old, knowing his password, bought tons of stuff over like three months. The guy, a cop even, filed that his own kid stole his credit card.
And if you can just call and contest, it's probably like here in the US on the first level where the card company calls the merchant. Apple would tell them it was via the online store, requires a password, was over an extended time etc and they might not agree to remove the charges. Especially if Apple reports that the card owner admits his daughter knew his password even if he didn't directly tell her and he wasn't paying attention to emails or bills from the card company. And Apple and the card company would give this info in court if you tried to sue.
Parental controls have been in iOS since 4.3, the version that released on the first iPad.
Can you make a reasonable argument for the appropriateness of $100+ in-app purchases in games meant for pre-teens? If not then what's wrong with Apple disallowing it in the best interests of their user-base? Surely the user experience is more important than developer's interests. IMHO anything more than $10 for an in-app purchase in a child's game is questionable.
That whole issue is beside the point. Even if they were $1 IAP if your kid knows your password and/or you haven't turned on the highly publicized restrictions they can go crazy in the stores and buy whatever they want. At which point whining about the appropriateness of IAP is beside the point. As is whining about it when you didn't pay attention and let your kid download a game meant for someone twice his/her age because it was free and you didn't bother to check out the game rating etc. which has happened more than once with these 'my kid ran up my credit card' stories.
Parents and the Media need to take some responsibility and stop putting the blame solely on evil Apple and their developers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
UNLESS the "Require password" setting is set to 15 minutes (the default) AND someone else entered the password within the last 15 minutes.
Repeat.
UNLESS the "Require password" setting is set to 15 minutes (the default) AND someone else entered the password within the last 15 minutes.
It used to be by default (which was idiotic)- but Apple has since changed it- as they should have. I also agree that the refunds should have been given in those cases.
This one on the other hand, is just ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Parents and the Media need to take some responsibility and stop putting the blame solely on evil Apple and their developers.
Do you agree that Apple and their developers should have shouldered the majority of the blame though (in the early cases- not this one of course)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonard
Some of these games with in-app purchases are quite high quality, high value apps. I've seen some that have quite a following, quite a few updates by the developer and quite a story line(s).I'd rather pruchase some of these then the other junk that costs money. And just because there are in-app purchases, doesn't mean you have to pay for them. Often playing the game without the in-app purchases (or reducing your in-app purchases) can be just as fun.I've seen some great ones like Paper too. However, it feels like the average quality has dropped. Look at the top 10 grossing apps. None of them are interesting, innovative apps. They all make their money through consumable IAPs.
What the App Store really needs is a proper demo mechanism. In fact, I'm surprised some kind of a time-limited demo mode isn't a mandatory feature for every paid app.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxgraphic
Just in case it isn't clear, this refund didn't cost Apple anything besides some lost income. They simply took it out of funds due the app developer. They also didn't do it from the kindness of their hearts -- the girl's father could just contest the charge and it would be up to Apple to take him to court and prove that he approved the charges (which he didn't).
So Apple didn't really have much choice here.
Not sure how it works in England, but in the US parents are fully liable for the actions of their children. The only reason Apple reversed the charges is because the media got hold of the story.
I do not get these stories. First, you can shut in-app purchases off in settings. To change the settings, you need a password. Second, who would give his or her kid his or her password? At some point people have to take responsibility for their own stupidity. Perhaps, Apple should shut off in-app purchases by default.
It's hardly "beside the point". Apparently you don't have any reasonable argument for a $100 in-app purchase in a kid's game. The intent of developer's that do it in children's games is obviously to scam users. Simple. Do you disagree about the intent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
Wait, do we know that? Does Apple's agreement with the developers permit them to refund a purchase for this reason, or is Apple swallowing the dev's share, too? Apple might well do it to avoid a pr problem.
Yes, even though the public side of the store is "no refunds", the developer agreement says the developer eats the cost. And IIRC, it's even worse for the developer, because Apple still keeps the 30%, so the developers wind up out of pocket for refunds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla
So if I got drunk and bought that much music and movies off of iTunes, could I get a refund?
No...you sue the beer company.
Back in the 80's, VHS videos were $60-$70. They started putting them in vending machines and drunks were buying a bunch of them while plastered then complaining the next day because they bought a few hundred dollars worth of videos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
I do not get these stories.
Maybe because you don't read the articles, you just scan them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Second, who would give his or her kid his or her password?
He didn't- she observed it.
I don't think he should have gotten refunded, and I think he needs to beat that girl- but you're the third person who has said this, proving once again, that several people fail to actually read the articles and just form an opinion based on the topic, not the actual story.
No...you sue the beer company.
Back in the 80's, VHS videos were $60-$70. They started putting them in vending machines and drunks were buying a bunch of them while plastered then complaining the next day because they bought a few hundred dollars worth of videos.
A contract is non binding if you were drunk when you signed it. You have to prove it of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Unfortunately, we really do reward idiocy sometimes.
This will only encourage more idiocy.
Yes. From Apple. For not having an option to set a limit on in-app purchases. Although this is really greed not idiocy.
Edit: Never mind. My bad. Didn't realize you could disable/limit in-app purchases. But it should be off by default.
I am not sure about this, since I do not do in app purchases in the first place, however, any time I do a purchase or my kids purchase something in itune I get an email about it. How can people say they have no clue that their kids are purchasing stuff without them knowing about.
Others already said, people need to be held accountable for their action or lack of action in this case. Too many people are walking around in a cloud of ignorance bliss and begin rewarded for it.