Apple boots $1,000 app from App Store

The $1,000 application on Apple's App Store, which lets people know how rich you are simply for buying it, has been removed without explanation, making some developers wonder what it takes for Apple to pull the plug.

The "I am Rich" application developed by Armin Heinrich, a German software developer, does nothing more than display a picture of a red ruby on the iPhone screen. After initially approving the $1,000 application, Apple removed it from the store this week. Eight people managed to dish out $1,000 to buy the useless application, generating about $5,600 in revenue for Heinrich and $2,400 for Apple, which collects 30 percent of each sale on the App Store, according to a blog on the Los Angeles Times Web site.

Developer Heirnrich told the LA Times in an e-mail that he had no idea why Apple had pulled his application, since he was not aware of violating any rules of the software store. He claims that Apple has not provided an explanation as to why the application was removed.

I suspect the application was removed because Apple was afraid of being sued. Some people had already complained on the Web that they had clicked on the "buy" button for the application accidently. Considering that major wireless carriers, such as AT&T, have started settling class action lawsuits with plaintiffs who say they were hoodwinked into signing up for recurring charges for ringtones and other content, it's not surprising that Apple would try minimize liability. The European Union is also cracking down on wireless operators that allow companies to sell bogus products via cell phones.

But even if Apple had a good reason for removing the application, developers are concerned by the lack of communication from Apple about how and why certain applications are allowed or denied access to the App Store and why some are removed.

(Credit: Apple)

When the App Store was first announced earlier this year, company CEO Steve Jobs said there would be limitations on what applications could be sold. Specifically, he stated that porn would not be allowed. And beyond that, he left it pretty open. Now these loosely defined criteria are frustrating some developers.

At least two other applications have been removed from the App Store in the past week with seemingly no explanation. Several blogs have reported that Box Office, a movie showtime resource, and NetShare, which let people use their iPhone 3G as a modem to connect their laptops to the Internet, have also been removed from the App Store. At least in the U.S., exclusive wireless provider AT&T has explicitly said it does not allow the iPhone to be used as a laptop modem.

Nullriver Software, the developer of the NetShare application told MacWorld that it had tried for several days to reach someone at Apple to get an explanation for why its application was removed. The company said it finally made contact, and now is working with Apple to get NetShare back on the App Store.

Cyrus Najmabadi, developer of BoxOffice, also told MacWorld that he had tried to contact Apple to find out why his application had been removed, but he said he got no response.

Apple also did not respond for comment on this story.

testing usatoday link

[wigmo]

How could they have accidentally purchased this? Every app I have downloaded has requested me to manually type in my store password. How do you accidentally type in a password?

[ikramerica--2008]

if you enable one-click at Apple, or other retailers, you can conveniently accidentally buy a lot of things... ;)

[The_happy_switcher]

Some people mis-read the price as 99 cents.

[kbuntu]

As I have mentioned in another blog I think this App should have been screened by Apple in the first place. For the guy who clicked on it as a joke .......well I guess the joke was on him.
[CNET editors' note: Inappropriate material deleted. Please see the rules on posting comments for more details.]

[j.a.urban]

The developer is a thief selling an exorbitantly priced TOTALLY USELESS application.
Apple is protecting its customers. NO other "explanation" is required.
If the POS doesn't like the way he's been treated by Big Bad Apple,
He's free to take his applications and develop them for a different platforms.

[technewsjunkie]

Remember PT Barnum, "There's a fool born every minute" (something like that)

[Bellette]

Great!

[eboy545]

I guess Louie Vuitton is a thief as well? People have the right to purchase whatever harmless product they want, and the developer of this isn't being deceptive - those eight people knew what they were buying. As for 'accidental' purchases, maybe you should be more careful with a program that spends your money.

[ikramerica--2008]

My guess is that it may have been about liability when someone got mugged because a crook saw the app glowing. It would indicate the person is wealthy and stupid. Does Apple need to be named in a lawsuit when this wealthy but stupid sues everyone after being mugged?

[r1d3r3d]

How is he a thief? He made an the application titled 'I am Rich' for users that are WILLING and able to buy it to make a statement which is just that I have $999.99 to spend on an application that is just a Ruby Icon because I am Rich. It's the users choice to buy the app. But that's stealing right? I do agree that Apple should protect its customers but I do not agree with your statement in that he was stealing, that the application was totally useless (again its purpose was for rich people to show off), or that Apple should not be willing to give an explanation and or define what apps are allowed or not allowed.

[r1d3r3d]

That's a single minded and opinionated post! How is he a thief? He made an the application titled 'I am Rich' for users that are WILLING and able to buy it to make a statement which is just that I have $999.99 to spend on an application that is just a Ruby Icon because I am Rich. It's the users choice to buy the app. But that's stealing right, oh and he is a POS right? I do agree that Apple should protect its customers but I do not agree with your statement in that he was stealing, that the application was totally useless (again its purpose was for rich people to show off), or that Apple should not be willing to give an explanation and or define what apps are allowed or not allowed.

[Bellette]

Dear R1D3R3D,

Fortunately for Me, Apple is using some common sense these in these matters, could you also, please?

Ross/CHC/.

[sanjayb]

Why in the world would they pull off Box Office?????????????

[Earl Benzar]

This is not an application. It's a ripoff pretending to be an application.

That said, I am more concerned about the other apps you mention, such as the modem app. AT&T should not be dictating using my phone as a modem for my laptop. That is the sort of thing people should be angry with.

[kaibelf]

Kinda like the "application" that turns your screen white to serve as a "flashlight?" Honestly, people can make whatever they want, and spend money however they choose. In fact, many would argue that the original $600 iPhone was the same thing - a "look at me" item to show off your expendable income to people.

Apple's lack of communication is very alarming though. I'd like to know exactly how someone accidentally purchased something like this when I am prompted to enter my password every time I download, even for a FREE app.

Furthermore, I would like to know if apple will be refunding people who purchase apps that apple decides to yank and disable after the fact, malicious or not. From all my research, I have yet to find a single complaint about BoxOffice from anyone, or any copyright issues. It wouldn't kill Apple to at least clue in the people that dropped hundreds of dollars on their products.

[sulsa76]

Agreed! It's absolutely obnoxious that AT&T things it's their place to tell people they can't use their phone as a modem. These people own the phone, they should be able to do whatever they want with it, as long as it doesn't break the law. No, I don't consider an equally obnoxious EULA to be the law.

[gerrrg]

There is irony in 1984.

[Dleon84]

BREAKING NEWS: We are in America, there are many people with money out there and if they want to spend it, regardless of the price tag, they should be allowed to do such. We are supposed to be a FREE CAPITALIST country, and using that logic, an individual should be allowed to SELL/BUY a harmless product. Why aren't you upset at clothing stores that charge $400 for a pair of denim from Diesel when you could get them at $30 from Wal-Mart? Because the brand is a symbol of status and so is the price tag that goes along with it. If you don't like America then LEAVE.

[jsnbase]

That's a pretty ridiculous comment. Another part of living in a, ahem, FREE CAPITALIST country is that a company like Apple is free to sell or not sell whatever they want. Regardless, the app was pulled because it's stupid and it was making them look stupid. What's the issue?

[t26l]

I'm fine with America. It's you I have a problem with. Would you mind leaving? Thanks!

[diakr0n]

mindless consumption isn't what america is all about... it's just a phase.

[eboy545]

Well put. I'm glad there are realists posting on this board, unlike the 'thief' commenter above.

[newman8r]

Sure, it should be okay to buy or sell whatever you want in a capitalist society as long as it's legal.

Doesn't change the fact that anyone selling an application worth 25 cents for a grand is a moron, it makes apple look bad, it makes them look like ********** - so it was probably a good call to take it down.

People can and do sell stupid stuff every day, but Apple isn't the government and they reserve the right to pull products so they don't look like morons and **********. It's a stupid program and it seems like a good percentage of the people who downloaded this did so by accident, apple is doing a good job responding to customer complaints.

The developer should feel lucky that he scammed (I'm not saying 'stole') some people. I can sell you a magic bean for $100 in a completely legal transaction, but if you bought it, you got scammed.

[Travis Ernst]

That App sounds like one MSFT would post. We pay half of our check to buy the new version of Office only to deal with patches and updates along the line. It's look before you buy in ANY market.

[setgo]

Hey Tom, why are you making Apple out to be the bad guy here? This app sounds like a total rip-off. Did these so called developers you speak of call you and say "I am concerned", or did you call a few that you knew and say "doesn't this bother you..."? This article is a rip-off. You are just trying to play upon non-iPhone users Big Brother fears. The same ones that post time and time again why they won't buy an iPhone. That one always work doesn't it? Your work is crap right now.

[sciontcya]

I see the cyber-nanny state is a live and well.
If I want to sell dog-sh*t in a bag for $1000, I have that right.
As do the folks that may buy it.
Yes, it's Apple's sandbox, and they can make the rules, but for those of YOU that think we should be protected, I must say, p*ss off already.
The same folks wanna outlaw smoking in public places and fast-food restaurants in Compton (LA)
Give it a rest ladies. I don't need more baby-sitters.

[Zanny_Blowzsteve]

"If I want to sell dog-sh*t in a bag for $1000, I have that right."

Sorry, Apple beat you too it. It's called "The iMac".

I bet your "dog-sh*t in a bag for $1000" doesn't stink as much as theirs.

[t26l]

"The same folks wanna outlaw smoking in public places and fast-food restaurants."

I thought it was already illegal to smoke in fast-food restaurants!

You need an editor AND a babysitter.

[newman8r]

you do. you can sell your useless application to whoever you want to...

But not on the iphone or in the app store, why should you have th right to use their proprietary hardware and app store to sell crap? Why should you automatically be allowed to take advantage of the huge traffic and level of trust most users associate with itunes and the app store?

It's a ratio thing - you could charge a grand for any crappy application if if x million people look at it, eventually you'll get a click (accident, misunderstanding, dumb kids, etc.). If you decided to sell your crap application for $1000 on your own website, I highly doubt you'd ever sell a copy.

There's plenty of places where you can sell crap to consumers but fortunately apple is trying to prevent the app store from being such a place...

[jamalystic]

Apple is up to something in that it wants to take control of the entire iphone value chain- from hardware down to individual piece of software and in the process ostracize other vendors' influnce: Apple's Disappearing iPhone Apps Signal Indecision: (http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=539&doc_id=161176&F_src=flftwo)

[pol;0987]

you good sir are an idiot! The main issue here is blame Apple for success. People flocked to Apple because it was a closed system that worked, the OS, Apps, hardware, all tied soup to nuts, no challenges. Now the folks late to party want the thing opened up so that it can be as craptastic as everything else out there.

There very well may be hundreds of apps in the app store, but there definitely are not hundreds of apps worth buying. Apple is right to be concerned about who calls themselves a developer and what they are posting on the store and allowing users to install on their phones,

There are some apps that are at version 1.15 already and its only been a few weeks since the app store launched. Running a mac with xcode does not a developer make, but many idiots are out here thinking its a gold rush for software rather than hey lets make quality software and make money from it being good, not first, because at the end of the day when something happens on/in the phone, and it breaks or crashes, despite the fact that it was a crappily written app, who gets blamed and sued? Apple.

[Seaspray0]

LOL at this one. Barnum and Bailey would be proud! George Carlin once said, "if you nail two pieces of wood together like no one has done before, some schmuk will buy it!"

[thomasterranova]

to the people that think this is robbery - that's ridiculous. was it robbery when they sold "pet rocks" in a cardboard box filled with straw and it became one of the most popular items of the year? yeah, so it only displays a wallpaper. but what about when people spent many thousands of dollars on a PRINT of some piece of modern art that is nothing but a couple colored squares? Value is in the eye of the beholder. The idea was clearly somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and intended to be bought by a handful of people who had enough money to buy into the humor without caring.

it's no big loss that they pulled this, but on priniciple i don't think they should have. they should not encourage the people who are idiots, those who like to buy things they can't afford like a curious primate and then try to blame others for their stupidity, or those who like to stir up controversy by making mountains out of molehills.

if anyone tried to sue apple saying they had been mugged because someone saw the ruby, i'd say that merely having an iphone at all is pretty much a dead giveaway that you are somewhat affuluent or at least likely to have access to significant disposable and robbable assets. At $200 to $400 and almost $100 a month for service, merely having the iphone is just as bad as having this application.

[ikramerica--2008]

Not at all correct about the only rich people have iPhones. True, unlikely poor people have them, but I know plenty of non-rich people who have iPhones. None of them would pay $1000 for an application that does nothing because they couldn't afford to. The person who can afford to is rich and stupid. And rich stupid people like to sue others for their own mistakes.

[newman8r]

it's not robbery.

it's a bad idea that makes apple look stupid. that's why its gone.

[webpilgrim]

Caveat emptor. We live in a capitalist society.

[ikramerica--2008]

The modem app is a clear violation of the whole deal Apple has with ATT and developers. Unlimited internet phones are not supposed to be use as computer modems. The plans are too cheap. Dedicated computer modem cards and plans are designed for that, and are more expensive, because a computer uses more monthly bandwidth than does a phone.

Sure, you may think you have every right to use your phone as you wish, but ATT does not have to let you have unlimited bandwidth if you violate your contract terms...

[apesca]

We do indeed live in a capitalist society, and that does impart upon individuals not only to develop but also to purchase products which possess no innate value whatsoever. Indeed it is for that reason that we have spinners on rims.

Yet by that same token, Apple is also entitled the same rights granted any private citizen or organization that owns and operates a storefront. That is, the right to allow or disallow the selling of products in their own store. Apple has no obligation to stock a developers sub-par or otherwise worthless products anymore than a grocer has to stock a farmers spoiled produce. In fact weeding out poor products is essential to the Apple's well being as programs such as I'm Rich essentially embarrass the company as a
whole.

Meanwhile, the removal of seemingly more useful products by Apple, though questionable in motive, is nevertheless the company's right. It's their store to run as they see fit. Yet such actions are certainly not without consequence. The more talented developers Apple store scorns, the fewer there will be willing to develop for their platforms.

It's a risky business, Capitalism, and subtle. But in the end, it just works.

[artistjoh]

While it is not possible to accidentally buy something without entering a password, it is not easy to judge the full extent of the capabilities of an app from the description and screenshot of an app in the App Store. You only get to find that out once the app is bought and installed.

Since the app has been pulled I cannot examine the description, but if it did not clearly spell out that the only thing it would do is create an icon, then I can imagine some foolish people being separated from their money on a whim and then feeling robbed when the sober up later. While 8 sales have been quoted I wonder if there were angry calls to Apple looking for their money back over this? Or further sales that were reversed due to angry responses from customers, parents, and spouses? I know what my reaction would be.

While I sympathize with a general disdain of the sort of people who may be tempted by such an app, and it is their mistake (or joy) to buy it, an app is presumed by most of us to be a small program that processes something and does more than just display an icon. This one is not even enough to be called a wallpaper and as such should not be offered for sale among genuine applications. To leave it there potentially brings the entire app store into disrepute.

[telestarnext]

Please,

If you have the $$ and want to brag, that's your right. Like owning a bugatii veyron or a ferrari. Don't tell me what to buy. It's my money (well at least whats left after the government takes its share).

Simply put, if you work at burger king, don't buy it. (unless you have saved $27 a month for three years)