App Store Disputes FAQ

When Apple rejects your app, California developers have limited but potentially significant legal options under the Developer Program License Agreement and California law. Apple's App Review Guidelines establish rejection criteria, and the agreement grants Apple broad discretion. However, California Civil Code Section 1636 requires contracts to be interpreted according to mutual intention, meaning Apple should apply its guidelines consistently. California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 prohibits unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent business practices, potentially applicable to arbitrary rejections that contradict stated guidelines.

Document the rejection notice, cited guidelines, and your app's compliance. Submit an appeal through App Store Connect, explaining how your app meets guidelines and providing supporting documentation. Apple's App Review Board provides a second-level appeal for rejections you dispute. If rejection appears to reflect anti-competitive behavior (favoring Apple's own apps), consider whether antitrust claims may apply. California Business and Professions Code Section 16720 (Cartwright Act) addresses restraint of trade. For significant business impact, consult an attorney about potential claims and regulatory complaints.

Appealing Google Play app removal in California involves specific procedures through Google's Developer Console and potential legal considerations. When Google removes your app, review the suspension email for specific policy violations cited. Submit an appeal through the Google Play Console within the timeframe indicated, typically 7-14 days depending on violation type. Your appeal should address the specific violation, explain compliance measures taken, and request reinstatement.

Under California Civil Code Section 1639, Google should apply its policies consistently, and arbitrary enforcement may violate reasonable expectations. California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 prohibits unfair business practices, potentially applicable to removals that contradict stated policies. Document all communications, removal notices, and your compliance efforts. For policy disputes, provide evidence showing your app meets guidelines. If removal relates to content issues, cite comparable apps that remain available. Consider whether removal reflects inconsistent enforcement suggesting bias. For account terminations affecting multiple apps, the business impact may justify legal consultation. California small claims court (up to $10,000) may provide a venue for damages from wrongful removal.

Apple and Google's ability to terminate developer accounts is addressed in their respective agreements but subject to California legal limitations. Both platforms' developer agreements typically allow termination for policy violations, fraud, or terms breaches. However, California Civil Code Section 1639 requires contract interpretation based on reasonable expectations, and termination without following stated procedures may violate these expectations. California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 prohibits unfair business practices, potentially applicable to arbitrary terminations.

The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under California law requires platforms to act fairly when exercising termination rights. For Apple, the Developer Program License Agreement specifies termination procedures and appeal rights. For Google, the Developer Distribution Agreement addresses termination. Document your account history, compliance record, and termination notice. Appeal through platform-designated processes immediately. If termination affects significant business operations, consider whether breach of contract or unfair competition claims may apply. File complaints with the FTC for potentially anti-competitive termination practices. California small claims court may provide a venue for damages up to $10,000.

California has robust antitrust laws that may apply to app store disputes involving anti-competitive practices. The Cartwright Act (Business and Professions Code Section 16720 et seq.) prohibits combinations in restraint of trade, potentially applicable to exclusive platform requirements or anti-competitive app policies. California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 encompasses unfair competition including anti-competitive conduct. The Unfair Practices Act (Business and Professions Code Section 17000 et seq.) addresses certain pricing practices.

Federal antitrust laws (Sherman Act, Clayton Act) also apply and may preempt some state claims. App store issues potentially raising antitrust concerns include commission requirements (the 15-30% fee), in-app purchase mandates preventing alternative payment methods, search ranking favoring platform apps, and rejection of apps competing with platform features. Epic Games v. Apple (currently in appeals) addresses several of these issues. For antitrust claims, document evidence of anti-competitive effects on your business, compare treatment to similarly-situated developers, and consider whether platform actions constitute tying arrangements or monopoly maintenance. Antitrust litigation is complex and expensive, typically requiring substantial damages to justify pursuit.

When Apple or Google withholds app store revenue, California developers have specific legal protections depending on the reason for the hold. Under the respective developer agreements, platforms may hold revenue during account reviews, suspected fraud investigations, or refund processing. California Civil Code Section 3287 allows recovery of interest at 10% annually on wrongfully withheld funds. California Financial Code provisions regarding payment processing may apply to systematic withholding practices.

Document the withheld amount, holding period, stated reasons, and your compliance with policies. For Apple, contact App Store Connect support and escalate through their dispute resolution process. For Google, use the Developer Console support and appeals process. If holds exceed stated timeframes or appear arbitrary, California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 may provide recourse for unfair practices. The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing requires reasonable handling of earned revenue. For significant amounts, file complaints with the California Attorney General's Consumer Protection Division. California small claims court (up to $10,000) provides a venue for fund recovery claims. Consider whether systematic revenue practices violate platform agreements or California law.

App store commission disputes in California involve contract law, antitrust considerations, and evolving regulatory frameworks. Apple charges 15-30% commission on in-app purchases under the Developer Program Agreement. Google similarly charges 15-30% under the Developer Distribution Agreement. Under California Civil Code Section 1636, commission terms must be interpreted as understood at agreement formation. If platforms modify commission structures without proper notice, California Civil Code Section 1698 governs contract modifications.

California Business and Professions Code Section 16720 (Cartwright Act) may apply to commission requirements that constitute restraint of trade. The Open App Markets Act and similar legislation (pending in various jurisdictions) may affect commission requirements. Recent litigation (Epic Games v. Apple) challenged certain commission practices, with mixed results. California developers may argue that mandatory commission coupled with exclusive distribution requirements constitutes illegal tying under antitrust law. Document commission charges, compare to stated rates, and identify any discrepancies. For systematic overcharges, class action litigation may provide remedies. Individual developers should evaluate whether commission disputes justify the cost of legal action given platform dependency concerns.

Intellectual property disputes significantly impact app store listings, with specific procedures and California law considerations. When someone claims your app infringes their IP, platforms typically remove the app pending resolution. For copyright claims, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. Section 512) governs the notice-and-takedown process. You can file a counter-notification if you believe the claim is invalid, stating under penalty of perjury that removal was mistaken.

For trademark claims, platform policies address disputed marks, and the first sale doctrine may protect apps using genuine marks. California Business and Professions Code Section 14340 addresses trademark issues, while California Civil Code Section 3426 (Uniform Trade Secrets Act) applies to trade secret claims. If you receive a baseless IP complaint designed to harm your competitive position, California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16 (anti-SLAPP statute) may provide remedies. Document the complaint, your original development work, and any competitive relationship with the complainant. Respond promptly through platform IP dispute processes. For complex IP disputes or significant business impact, consult an intellectual property attorney. Consider whether the complaint constitutes tortious interference with business relations under California law.

California privacy laws impose significant compliance requirements affecting app store listings and potential rejection or removal. The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), codified in Civil Code Section 1798.100 et seq., requires businesses collecting California residents' personal information to provide specific disclosures, honor opt-out requests, and implement reasonable security measures. Apps must include privacy policies complying with CCPA requirements. The California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) amended and expanded CCPA protections effective 2023.

California Business and Professions Code Section 22575 (CalOPPA) requires conspicuous privacy policy posting. For apps collecting children's data, California Business and Professions Code Section 22580-22582 (SOPIPA) and federal COPPA impose additional requirements. Both Apple and Google require privacy policy compliance for app approval. Apple's App Tracking Transparency framework requires user permission for tracking. Google's Data Safety section requires disclosure of data practices. Non-compliance can result in app rejection, removal, or account termination. Document your privacy practices, maintain compliant privacy policies, and implement required technical measures. For apps handling sensitive data (health, financial), additional California and federal requirements may apply.

App store developer agreements contain arbitration clauses that significantly impact California developers' dispute resolution options. Apple's Developer Program License Agreement includes mandatory arbitration with class action waivers. Google's Developer Distribution Agreement similarly requires arbitration. Under the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. Section 2), these arbitration agreements are generally enforceable.

However, California courts apply Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services standards to evaluate unconscionability. Procedural unconscionability exists when developer agreements are presented as non-negotiable adhesion contracts with unequal bargaining power. Substantive unconscionability applies if terms are unreasonably one-sided, impose excessive costs, or limit statutory remedies. California courts have occasionally found platform arbitration clauses unconscionable when combined with fee-splitting provisions that exceed typical litigation costs. For claims under California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 seeking public injunctive relief, arbitration may not apply under McGill v. Citibank. Small claims court often remains available for disputes up to $10,000. Before accepting arbitration, evaluate specific terms, potential unconscionability arguments, and whether exceptions apply. Consult an attorney for claims involving significant damages.

California developers should maintain comprehensive documentation to support potential app store disputes regarding rejections, removals, or account issues. For app approval history, save all submission records, review feedback, rejection notices with specific guideline citations, and appeal communications. Screenshot App Store Connect or Google Play Console status pages regularly. For revenue and financial disputes, document all earnings statements, commission calculations, payment receipts, and any discrepancies identified.

California Civil Code Section 3287 allows interest recovery on wrongfully withheld funds, requiring clear records of amounts and dates. For intellectual property protection, maintain development records including original code commits with timestamps, design documents, and creation dates to prove originality if accused of infringement. Save competitor analysis showing similar apps' approval status. For policy compliance, document how your app meets each cited guideline, including screenshots demonstrating compliance. California Evidence Code Section 1552 governs electronic record authentication, so maintain original files in recoverable formats. Store records securely for at least four years (California Code of Civil Procedure Section 337 contract limitation period). Consider automated backup of key platform communications and financial data.