Apple's hard line on apps that seek in-app donations could have been the element that led to it being pushed off the App Store - but is that hard line justified? (Updated)
Give generously. Photo by HowardLake on Flickr. Some rights reserved
The news that Apple has pulled the Wikileaks app from its iOS App Store has brought predictable groans and suggestions of censorship - but one possible reason for the move may be Apple's hard-to-explain refusal to allow apps to make in-app donations to charities or non-profits.
(Update: see addition at end.)
The issue of rejection of donation apps has been growing in size for some time now, but it may be the Wikileaks issue - if this is indeed what it's about - that tips it into visibility.
(The Register suggests that it was pulled because it was "useless", only doing the same things as you could do on other apps - bringing together Twitter and the web site - though if you were rejecting on that basis you'd be chucking apps out of the App Store with abandon. Though maybe Apple is now. But we doubt it.)
Other charities have already been having problems. Nick Aldridge, chief executive of MissionFish, a registered charity whose purpose is (recursively enough) to help charities raise money, got in touch to point out how this is hurting them: "Apple continues to block charitable donations (specifically) from within all its apps. Instead, would-be donors have to send texts or open browser windows to donate, which (broadly speaking) they don't. We'd collaborated with PayPal to add a donations function to their main iPhone App, which went live at the end of August and raised $10,000 in the first couple of months. Once we'd properly integrated a disaster response within the App, I suspect it would have raised millions. However, Apple kicked it off the platform in October, with no explanation of why they'd changed their mind."
He adds: "While we will push ahead and launch the system on other mobile platforms, charities are missing out on a huge opportunity by having no simple way for donors to give money from their iPhones."
As Aldridge points out, "Apple has never explained the reasons for its policy that 'The collection of donations must be done via a web site in Safari or an SMS'. I suspect it is because they don't want to be responsible for verifying that Apps really do send money to genuine charities. But many other tech companies have solved this problem, including eBay (with our help), PayPal and Google - so why not Apple?"
Beth Kanter, chief executive of Zoetica, has already blogged on the Guardian's Voluntary Sector network blog about this earlier this month; nothing has changed as far as we can see.
And the fact that the Wikileaks app - which did call for "donations" (see it here, and install it if you've jailbroken your iPhone) - has vanished seems to show a pattern.
While Apple hasn't commented on the Wikileaks takedown, there have been nudges from the company that the reason it bans "charitable" donations is precisely because of that concern that it would be held responsible if someone were embezzling funds or if it weren't transmitted correctly.
A quick scan of charity law for the US doesn't reveal anything there, but equally you can see that people might cut up rough from both the giver's and the would-be recipient's side if, say, Apple were to approve an app that appears to be letting you donate to, say, the Disasters Emergency Committee but the bank account it was sent to wasn't one controlled by DEC (or was set up by someone nefarious - after all, you could set up a meta-giving app which let you give to multiple charities, already filled in for you).
Then Apple could be held liable, in the land of tort, for not having checked first that the details were correct.
And that would quickly become very tedious. Far simple just to stick to what it details in its App Store Guidelines, where in section 21 it specifically sets out that "1. Apps that include the ability to make donations to recognized charitable organizations must be free" and that "2. The collection of donations must be done via a web site in Safari or an SMS".
The use of an SMS still seems like it would leave Apple slightly liable to criticism - does it check that each SMS is a valid lookup for that charity? Maybe so, given that it's in the ratings - but it certainly distances it from people who'd want to scam your money. And never forget that there are plenty of those.
Update: Apple has made a statement to Wired's Threat Level blog:
"We removed the WikiLeaks app from the App Store because it violated our developer guidelines," a spokeswoman told Threat Level, reading from a statement. "Apps must comply with all local laws and may not put an individual or targeted group in harm's way."
Which would seem to put the charity argument out of the picture - although it's still a live topic of annoyance for charities.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/dec/21/apple-wikileaks-app-ban-charity
QUALCOMM QUANTA COMPUTER RESEARCH IN MOTION ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS SAIC
No comments:
Post a Comment