What is Audit Regulation 5.6
5.6 Regulations is a category within Apple's Developer Regulations. Its category name is Developer Code of Conduct .
To put it bluntly, a 5.6 violation means that Apple has discovered that you are "dishonest".
According to what my interviewees have learned, 5.6 of 99% of developers are indeed in violation, and there is no wrongdoing. It can be seen that the accuracy of the 5.6 trial is very high, so if you feel that you have won 5.6 and think you have been wronged, it is best to think again.
unfriendly behavior
Please treat everyone with respect, whether responding to user reviews in the App Store, responding to user support requests, or communicating with Apple (including your responses to the review team on App Store Connect). Do not engage in any form of harassment, discrimination, intimidation or bullying or encourage others to do any of the above. Repeated acts of manipulation or misleading or other fraudulent conduct will result in removal from the Apple Developer Program.
- 1: The developer replied to the user in the AppStore comment area: Fuck.
- 2: Apple's review appeal: I don't understand this and suspect you are blind.
- 3: Several marketing emails a day harass users.
- 4: Reply "Don't buy poor ghosts" through the customer service center in the App.
Apple developers have two gods, one is the user and the other is Apple. Neither party is to blame.
Among them, the punishment for offending Apple is the simplest and most direct. I have written in a past article that if you find an error in the results of Apple’s review, you can consider being “tough”. I also wrote that you should not be too “poor” when communicating with Apple. However, that doesn't mean you can be disrespectful to Apple.
The so-called "toughness" is to ask you to state your views with reason and evidence. During this process, there should be no emotions, no insults, and even no elements of yin and yang and insinuations.
I know that someone has shared the experience of "spraying apples" in the final review, but I want to tell this friend that luck is part of strength, but don't take luck as strength. There are specific regulations for Apple to review and process the results of the review, and he has every right to handle the result of this appeal as "verbal discrimination in communication with the review".
For the user part, generally speaking, whether there will be encounters in the case depends on the user's enthusiasm for rights protection. If the user is willing to report, even if the developer will not be banned, there is a high probability of receiving a Warning email.
Therefore, developers must train their own words when dealing with communication, and small essays must be written smoothly and properly.
Now because of AI assistance, I believe that there will be fewer and fewer developers who have emotional problems in this regard.
malicious inducement
User trust is the cornerstone of the App Store's success. Apps must not: trap or attempt to blackmail users; induce users to make involuntary purchases; force users to share unnecessary data; deceptively inflate prices; charge for features or content that are not delivered ; or any other manipulation within or outside of the App.
- 5: Users cannot view the comment area without opening the push permission.
- 6: Buy the title "Limited Time Special 8 Yuan", the actual price is 999.
- 7: Any inadvertent operation will pop up an in-app purchase pop-up window.
- 8: Buy "jump level", and restart after buying this level.
Malicious inducement includes authority inducement and purchase inducement. Case 5 is a typical authority inducement, such as push, IDFA, five-star praise, etc.
Pay attention to the difference between "reasonable guidance" and "induction". For example, in case 5, the user cannot view the comment area without enabling the push permission , which is an obvious inducement. But if it is the push permission that pops up when the user wants to turn on the "match reminder" function, it is "reasonable guidance".
Problems with 6 to 8 cases are much more common.
One possibility is that the team took risks due to performance pressure. The first two times it was not discovered by Apple and it felt "really fragrant", but the third trial was rejected or reported by users. Such results often lead to the direct locking of payment And the serious consequences of title.
There is another type of problem that is more aggrieved, that is, the developer's negligence or bugs cause the copywriting to not match. For example, the purchase is "Limited time special price 8 yuan", the actual 999 question, if the time limit has passed and the copywriting is not revoked in time, it may lead to a large number of reports and refunds. If you complain to Apple at this time, saying "overslept and forgot", "programmer's bug", such a reason may be as reluctant as "temporary workers come in disorder" in the review, and it is easy to overturn.
Non-compliant praise guide
Please use the API we provide to prompt users to rate your app: This convenient feature allows users to leave ratings and reviews directly in the App Store without leaving the app; custom review prompts are not allowed.
- 9: Custom praise pop-up window.
iOS specifically provides developers with APIs to prompt users to rate Apps, and requires developers to only use these APIs to prompt users to rate Apps.
In order to guide users to give five-star praise as much as possible, the developers' creativity is endless. One of the solutions is to first pop up a five-star praise pop-up window that is exactly the same as the system API pop-up window. If the user clicks one star, it pretends that the praise is successful, and the window disappears. If the user clicks five stars, it immediately jumps to the AppStore to let the user evaluate.
The purpose of the developers doing this is obvious. It is to detect users’ willingness to evaluate through the pop-up window of false reviews. If the one-star review is ignored, the five-star review will jump immediately. In this way, users with good reviews are directly screened to artificially control the positive rate.
This type of practice is a violation of 5.6.1, which does not allow custom comment prompts.
Developer Identity Question
Providing verifiable information to Apple and users is key to building user trust. You must accurately represent yourself, your business, and the apps you offer on the App Store. The information you provide must be truthful, relevant, and up-to-date so that Apple and users know who they are interacting with and can contact you with any questions.
- 10: It is related to the blocked account.
Here are the most common developer rejection and ban warning issues: 5.6.2 Developer Identity .
Apple checks the relevant information of the developer's account: application binary, contact information, test equipment, bank account, etc., and finds that the developer is associated with other accounts (often blocked accounts), then this violation will be triggered.
When encountering 5.6.2, Apple will require the developer to reply within a limited time and provide a written explanation, otherwise the developer plan (that is, the title) will be terminated.
For association-related knowledge, you can read my article: Self-inspection list for Apple developers to prevent association and open a new account .
As for how to make a written explanation to Apple, there is no standard answer to this question. It depends on the developer's association status and account income. It must be dealt with by weighing the pros and cons. Generally, Apple must have certain evidence before issuing such a notice. In some cases, it is possible to solve the problems after frank explanations with Apple because of the relationship problems arising from teamwork and dissolution.
Operation ranking and product quality
Users expect the App Store to provide high-quality apps, and maintaining high-quality content, services, and experiences helps to enhance user trust. Signs that this expectation is not being met include a high number of user reports of issues related to your app, such as negative user reviews and a high number of refund requests. Whether the high quality of the app can be maintained is a major factor in determining whether the developer follows the developer's code of conduct.
- 11: Get good reviews.
- 12: Download and refresh the list.
- 13: Lots of one-star negative reviews.
- 14: A large number of users refunded.
11 and 12 This part is encountered by a large number of developers. The problem of reviewing praise and ranking is an area that developers want to do but don't want to be caught by Apple.
In the past, it was not so strict to review positive reviews, but now it is becoming more and more strict. Let's do it and cherish it.
Questions like 13 and 14 are mostly 14, if the developed product has too many bad reviews, or the refund rate is too high. It will be suspected by Apple that "the product has quality problems". Unless it is maliciously manipulated by an opponent, or there are a large number of "sweeping wool" users in some regions (India, I didn't mention you), such suspicion is reasonable.
If you are badly criticized by your opponent, remember to communicate with Apple in time, and after submitting a new version, it should be reset. A large number of refunds by the "wool wool" group is an intractable disease. Generally speaking, it is rare in developed countries, and most of the time it will happen in certain areas. The rough solution is to temporarily abandon the area and directly purchase Check it off in the area, you can't afford to provoke it and hide it.
More
| No public | |
|---|---|
| Fenghai Tonggong | xq2723866 |
Apple Developer Anti-Association Checklist for Opening New Accounts
Professional guidelines for mobile account maintenance and disaster preparedness for overseas teams