Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Apple, iPhone, App Store
App Store Lessons: No promo codes for apps rated 17+
Developers whose apps meet the criteria for a 17+ rating in the App Store are now running into yet another roadblock, but this time it's not about getting their apps approved, it's about distributing them. Or, more specifically, distributing promo codes for them.Typically, when a developer uploads a new version of an application to the App Store, they have the ability to create up to 50 promo codes, which they can then provide to media outlets for reviewing the application, give away to users in a contest, etc. Aside from some reasonable restrictions on their usage (you can't sell them, they expire after 28 days and are one-time use only), promo codes provide quite a bit of flexibility to developers of paid apps who wish to freely distribute their app to select individuals without having to worry about the hassles of exchanging device information and doing special ad-hoc builds.
This obviously puts developers of these apps in a bit of a bind, as well as eliminates the potential amount of sales that could come from being able to distribute promo copies. Developers in this position may be stuck doing ad-hoc builds or going back to the questionable practice of sending iTunes gift cards to reviewers.
And if you're thinking this just applies to the massive number of adult-oriented apps that have recently poured into the App Store, you're wrong. Apple specifies that any application that may contain high levels of offensive language, violence, sexual content, or references to drugs or alcohol receive a rating of 17+. But, according to Apple, apps that feature an embedded web browser or provide access to 3rd party content also automatically require the 17+ rating, regardless of the application's content or intended audience.
Here's hoping that Apple is already working on a solution to this, as the lost potential sales caused by this not only affect the developers of the individual apps, but the overall success of the App Store as well.
Update: Several developers have reported that they are now able to request promo codes for their 17+ rated apps. We have an updated post with details here.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Spedione said 7:32PM on 7-16-2009
Dang, talk about overkill. An embedded web browser or 3rd party content means an automatic 17+ rating? Wow...
Reply
Michael Jones said 7:35PM on 7-16-2009
Yup. Any content that is "unfettered" or unfiltered. So if the app links to other content or allows the user to search a database of some kind, it has to be rated 17+ unless the developer provides some sort of filtering that guarantees the user won't see any possible objectionable content.
To me, an "unrated" or "at risk" category definition would make more sense than just using 17+ as a blanket.
Kento Ito said 7:32PM on 7-16-2009
Unfortunatly, there will not be any solution to this.
This is because of the fact that promo codes for 17+ is how people under 17 got the games that is reserved only for 17+.
Over-reaction by Apple? Yes! But will Apple ever reverse it's decision: sadly, very unlikely.
The only solution is to actually implement ESRB rating in the app store.
Reply
Michael Jones said 7:44PM on 7-16-2009
The problem with implementing ESRB ratings on the App Store is the significant amount of overhead and burden that would be placed on the developer to certify their apps.
In order to obtain an ESRB rating for a game, the developer would have to pay anywhere from $800 to $4,000 (depending on their development costs), and would be forced to wait while the submission is reviewed, adding to the already long delays to submit the application to the App Store.
This is particularly true for free apps, as there would be no incentive for the developer to pay for the ridiculous fees if they are not planning on making money off of the app. They would likely choose not to continue development rather than deal with the hassle.
Dan said 9:12PM on 7-16-2009
Guess I should have checked on promo codes.
I'm an iphone developer and my app Downloader was just updated, and I had to rate it 17+ to get it approved.
One of the features is a web browser with a download mode. Apple approved 1.0 a month ago, then rejected my first update because it was still rated 4+. I didn't add any major features, just a couple bug fixes and some 3.0 stuff.
Now it shows up in the store with all of these ridiculous content ratings and just points out how absurd the process is. I'm temped to add random drunk zombies since I feel I have license to do so.
Reply
Just_a_guy said 10:13PM on 7-16-2009
I have to say that apple will get a huge backlash from all the developers and end users who won't be getting some perfectly good apps such as mobile colloquy (for IRC), and even apps such as the KINDLE app will also get that rateing, even though there is nothing there that is 17+ about them. Heck, at this rate, I think apple is using ther 17+ raiting to say something on the lines of "we didn't want your app in the app store, but if it weren't there, we'd have hell on our hands so we will make it as hard to get and review as we can!"
What would work is if the ESRB were to come in and figure out a way to rate apps for a LOW fee, or to do it free of service for free apps (or something) so that people have a third party deciding what is for adults and what is for kids.
I also think that apple should be putting on an 18+ section for the app store, which would require some REAL identification, and stuff, so that the end user gets more choice, and so those "adult" apps in the app store can do what they really wanted to do.
On a last note, I think that apple should rethink how they rate 17+ games so that we can restore our faith in their rating system, and so that apps which are designed for the 17+ crowd will go to the 17+ crowd and the 4+ crowd will get everybody else.
Reply
janey said 1:04AM on 7-17-2009
Aww thanks for mentioning Colloquy. I'm one of the devs and the half of the team that has read this story so far are pretty bummed because the only reason Colloquy has a browser built-in is so users don't have to quit the app to browse a webpage :(
In fact, this affects (to my knowledge) all or almost all the IRC clients for iPhone, at least, which all have something similar because of the inability to background applications.
I *really* hope Apple changes their decision in this regard. Forcing that rating on us because of our inability or unwillingness to filter content and *then* turning around and slapping us with "no promo codes for you!" is pretty rough. I can't even begin to imagine how we'd be giving away promo codes to people under 17 for the express purpose of getting around that rating...most of ours have gone towards reviewers, even including to TUAW. Not to 17 year olds wanting to cyber on IRC. Sigh.
Drunken Economist said 5:03PM on 7-18-2009
The ESRB is their own racket; and it's never gonna be 'low cost'.
If $AAPL really wants to get into the ratings game then they should beef up their 'parental controls framework' to their [I think] unrealistic criteria.
And then require devs to use it.
Of course, then devs would call them on it even more than now and go somewhere else.
Seriously. The easiest thing to do now is for $AAPL to fire the guy who's setting policy for this. It will cost them less and they can use him as a scapegoat to get back in good graces with the Devs.
The Devs make the AppStore / Platform. Not the other way around. Even MSFT knows this. $AAPL seems to have forgotten. Again.
tuaw said 3:09AM on 7-17-2009
As I recall embedded browsers are popular in RSS clients. They have to be rated 17+ now?
Reply
Fudmottin said 3:21AM on 7-17-2009
This is so boneheaded that Steve Ballmer must have come up with it.
The iPhone is NOTHING without the app store and developers to populate the app store with compelling apps.
Out of the box, the iPhone is just an over priced phone. Only the app store and people willing to pay the $99 to develop on the iPhone (and iPod touch) makes it compelling.
I suppose Safari Mobile is a 17+ app now? What about Messages? What about the phone itself?
Apple needs to rescind this policy. Google can easily do an app store for their G1.
Reply
jesnq said 4:15AM on 7-17-2009
Well, you still can't get any promo codes for non-US App Stores at all. Or for apps that are not sold in the US.
Reply
robc.03 said 4:47AM on 7-17-2009
I can't help but find all this a little ridiculous. I wonder how many kids just lie and download apps that are rated 17+...they really have very little they can realistically do to stop it, why are they so up tight about it? Some interest groups breathing down their neck?
For all Apple does to stand out on its own as a company and always lead the way with new ideas and all, they seem to always fall back on catering to some least common denominator that is in a position to bitch and moan JUST loud enough that Apple is forced to listen, majority be damned.
Reply
JKT said 6:58AM on 7-17-2009
>"why are they so up tight about it? Some interest groups breathing down their neck?"
Based on other app store rejections (an e-book reader because it was able, if the user went out of their way, to get the Kama Sutra?), it's not 3rd party pressure. It's my belief that there are a couple of fundamentalists/evangelicals working in the app store review team or possibly even running it. These restrictions are too systemic and too stupid to be the result of mere fear of outside interest groups. What surprises (disappoints) me is that SJ hasn't recognized the problem and fixed it.
madrns said 8:21AM on 7-17-2009
For our drawing app Colors we already made sure the online-gallery has a checkbox for 'adult and or inappropriate' paintings...
Still this new insight scares me into thinking they are going to label our app '17+' :(
http://colors.collectingsmiles.com/
Reply
Rick said 9:25AM on 7-17-2009
I fail to see how this is something Apple needs to fix as the article suggests. It's their store, their policy, deal with it. If you have an adult app, it's on you to promote it. Simple. Loss of sales? Ah, well, then tone it down for the masses, since the masses aren't adults. Duh.
Reply
Michael Jones said 10:38AM on 7-17-2009
I would be inclined to agree, if this only affected adult-oriented apps. But as noted, other apps fall under the 17+ as well.
If you have an e-Book reader that searches a public repository, like the Gutenberg project, it gets a 17+ because someone *may* be able to read the Kama Sutra or similar books with it. If you have an app with an embedded web browser, so the user can browse the web without having to leave the app, that gets a 17+ as well, even if the app is not adult-oriented.
This is why I believe Apple needs to change something. Even making it so if an app that is otherwise non-objectionable can display a popup when opening a browser to notify the user that the browser may allow them to access 3rd party content that is not controlled by the app, that would be a step in the right direction. But I just don't agree with their decision to place a broad 17+ rating on any app that *may* be able to access content, regardless of what the focus of the app is.
George said 3:57PM on 7-18-2009
Rick,
You miss the whole point of this article. The issue is NOT 'adult apps'. It is *ANY* app that includes an embedded browser, because, you know, someone COULD use said embedded browser to look at something naughty. Oh, e-books readers fall into this category as well.
Go to http://www.marco.org/143265621 and read that. It explains it from a developer who is going through this now.
Now, how is Apple any better than Microsoft or Google?
Noah said 10:44AM on 7-17-2009
The next Tweetie update will make it 17+. Heh.
Reply
nonnus said 11:17AM on 7-17-2009
this is just another app review sad joke
so now it seems any web app that works as browser with a url box has to be rated +17 just like any xxx app !
even though one pushes mature content and the other doesnt...
all apple processing in the last months has been terrible and this is just another example
they provide no info at all to developers,
allow them to set ratings just to keep rejecting updates until we put the rating they require !
it would be better if they set these ratings automatically, but i guess it would sound too censorship-alike so its better to keep this stupid approach that is just wasting resources, media would not like
this way is just some more dev mumbo jumbo...
likewise this new concept of not allowing +17 apps to use promos codes is just ridiculous, as i assume the restriction set on the end device will be respected regardless of the promo code being for +17 or +4 app so it makes no sense at all, as usual with app review related stuff
it is also intriguing why they let in a slew of xxx apps to now take this kind of damaging behavior to all the other non xxx apps that are treated same way, is it was already intriguing that apps that were accepted into app store are not allowed to have working promo codes but is totally ridiculous if it is applied to all the other apps
it was one of the few promo mechanisms available to devs, gone now
needless to say i have a non mature app i have developed,
iDownload,
that is now being required to have a +17 rating,
(not that app review has given any info, they just blindlessly rejected any other rating and spent a week to let me know, all this while i am waiting for a whole month for a critical bug fix to be released),
this was already bad enough
but now it seems i wont even be allowed to provide promo codes for review sites ????
it would be better if they had never let the xxx apps in to the app store,
it got a lot worse since then...
Reply
Noah said 11:51AM on 7-17-2009
Should the iPhone itself be rated 17+ since it includes the Safari browser?
Reply