Developer suing Apple for (again) for stolen keyboard on new Apple Watch

[WolframaticAlpha]

Summary

Apple recently announced the Watch Series 7 yesterday at it's california streamin event. The watch's newest features was a quicktype keyboard for inputting text, one which FlickType developer Kosta Eleftheriou believed is remarkably similar to his own swipe keyboard, which was rejected by Apple for violating Apple's Human Interface guidelines. The developer is suing Apple again. He had initally sued apple

 

Quotes

Quote

It was just last month that Kosta Eleftheriou, the developer of FlickType, announced that his swipe-based keyboard for the blind would be pulled off the App Store over objections by Apple. Its reasoning was unclear, with Eleftheriou saying that Apple had begun rejecting updates for the app because it required full system access, a fact that Eleftheriou disputed, saying that it still worked without the permissions.

 

A separate version for the Apple Watch would remain, but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that keyboards aren’t allowed on the Apple Watch.

Quote

 

Quote

Being based in California, Apple’s move against FlickType could be in direct violation of the state’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which is broadly written but forbids unfair business acts and allows the court to order injunctions to prevent unfair competition. Apple doesn’t allow developers to offer their apps outside the App Store, meaning they have to follow its rules and are always at its mercy.

Quote

Eleftheriou has already filed one lawsuit about this same issue. Eleftheriou filed suit in March 2021, claiming Apple abuses its market power.

My thoughts

This was pretty scummy in my opinion. I know about sherlocking and all, but this was so brazen, that I am honestly surprised that Apple did it. (CLARIFICATION: The part about taking down the app is the part which angers me)

 

Sources

https://www.inputmag.com/tech/apple-blocked-the-flicktype-watch-keyboard-then-announced-a-clone-of-it

https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321

https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/14/flicktype-developer-suing-apple-again-over-apple-watch-keyboard

https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/08/16/vocal-app-store-critic-discontinuing-iphone-keyboard-app-citing-rejections

[Lightwreather]

I know this guy developed a pretty similar keyboard but hasn't there been such swipe-type keyboards for quite a while. I eman google keyboard does have such an option.

Granted this is specifically for the apple watch, so I can see a plausible case

[WolframaticAlpha]

2 minutes ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

I know this guy developed a pretty similar keyboard but hasn't there been such swipe-type keyboards for quite a while. I eman google keyboard does have such an option.

Granted this is specifically for the apple watch, so I can see a plausible case

The part about removing his app and then making yours the only choice is what gets me all fired up. Even in the past apple's sherlocking would leave the original program. This is so much more brazen.

[Vishera]

Copy the product of the competition and use your dominance to get them out of the market.

That pretty much is an attempt to monopolize the market,which is illegal.

[Nayr438]

2 hours ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

I know this guy developed a pretty similar keyboard but hasn't there been such swipe-type keyboards for quite a while. I eman google keyboard does have such an option.

Granted this is specifically for the apple watch, so I can see a plausible case

It's not that Swipe keyboards are not new or that Apple Pulled it. The problem is that Apple forcefully removed a App from it's store then implemented there own version afterwards.

This falls under unfair competition, by eliminating the possibility for anyone to compete with Apples own Product, even though Apple wasn't the first one to implement it and his app was accepted previously.

[suicidalfranco]

Inb4 "their platform, their rule" defence squad

[Arika]

25 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

Inb4 "their platform, their rule" defence squad

[Guest willies leg]

Apple is famous for doing this, in fact there's a term for it, they got sherlocked.

[tim0901]

Things get slightly complicated however when you realise that the keyboard was removed from the App Store because Apple Watch keyboards aren't allowed on there. This is written in red in the picture in the linked tweet.

 

Apple's defence here will likely be in the form of "we removed it because it was against our App Store guidelines" and will fall on some defence of their app moderation team making a mistake for it being allowed on there in the first place (a bullshit excuse imo but c'est la vie). They'll then produce evidence of internal development of such a keyboard from prior to this App's removal from the App Store to show that they made their implementation themselves.

 

Is this scummy behavior that is clearly immoral and against the intention of the law? Yes. But unfortunately for the developer, I imagine a court would rule in Apple's favor as they seem to have (at least from the evidence seen here) done things by the books. Enforcing the guidelines of the App Store isn't illegal and if the app had never been "mistakenly" accepted then there wouldn't be any debate here. As such the entire argument from the developer will come down to "but our app was accepted in the first place" - but this isn't a particularly difficult argument to defeat in court. "Large moderation team... mistake was made... rectified as soon as it came to our attention... bla bla bla".

 

Things will only swing in the developer's way if they can provide more evidence than we have here. I've seen reports elsewhere that Apple approached FlickType back in 2019 (prior to its App Store removal) about a potential acquisition, but I can't find hard evidence of this (eg email screenshots) and so am unsure how much of an official attempt was made here (was this an official enquiry by Apple, or an off-the-records inquisition by an Apple employee? Was a number involved, or was it just "are you interested?" Were the people involved in the App's removal aware of this communication? etc.) If it did happen it could certainly swing things more in the developer's favor, but given that FlickType for Apple Watch wasn't released until 2020 - after this supposed aquisition attempt - I'm not sure if this attempt would be considered relevant.

 

Not that I expect this to ever reach court. This will almost certainly be settled outside of court for an amount that Apple should have just paid to purchase the keyboard from the App developer in the first place.

 

To be explicitly clear: I do not believe that Apple is in the right here. I'm just not convinced they would actually lose this battle in court.

[WolframaticAlpha]

8 minutes ago, willies leg said:

Apple is famous for doing this, in fact there's a term for it, they got sherlocked.

In sherlocking, there is usually a way to use the app. Duet display is still on their app store. f.lux, which was the most blatant violation until now(ithey banned it from mac app store) could still be installed on a mac. Apple should either allow sideloading or stop being a dick.

[CTR640]

Oh dear Apple, can you please stop stealing people their stuff and claim they are yours? What's next, you invented oxygen?

[mr moose]

53 minutes ago, CTR640 said:

Oh dear Apple, can you please stop stealing people their stuff and claim they are yours? What's next, you invented oxygen?

We'll all have to pay a 30% breath tax.   

then:

Apple face ID...    No sorry that's not your face, your face violated our terms of service, you'll have to sue us if you want it back.

[Spotty]

I'm not against Apple or Google incorporating new features in to their devices that were previously provided for by third party apps, or "sherlocking" as it's called. It would stifle progress if they couldn't incorporate new features just because third party apps were already doing it. I remember on an old (very old) phone I needed a dedicated third party torch app to use my camera flash as a torch, now my current phone just has it as a built in feature and I can just toggle it off and on from the quick access menu and it's so much better. Having swipe keyboard built in as an option for the watch keyboard sounds great to me, I'm honestly surprised Apple hadn't already done it.

 

What I don't understand is why would Apple bother pulling this app from the store and risk the negative PR associated, let alone a lawsuit? If Apple released a swipe keyboard on the Apple watch and offered it as a pre-installed feature then every Apple watch would have it. There would be no need for people to download a third party option and either the third party developers would change to offer additional features or they will become obsolete and stop providing the app. Yes, that does suck for the developer but they can either innovate their app/service to offer something the default option doesn't offer, maybe targeting some niche use case, or they can just let it become obsolete and stop developing it. What benefit is there for Apple to pull it from the store? It wouldn't surprise me if this wasn't the full story.

[CTR640]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

We'll all have to pay a 30% breath tax.   

then:

Apple face ID...    No sorry that's not your face, your face violated our terms of service, you'll have to sue us if you want it back.

Even if you wanna sue us, we have an entire army of lawyers and you are just a small bug we step on it!

 

"No sorry that's not your face, your face violated our terms of service"

That's so fucking savage lmfao!

[nurax1337]

12 hours ago, Vishera said:

Copy the product of the competition and use your dominance to get them out of the market.

That pretty much is an attempt to monopolize the market,which is illegal.

That sounds a lot like Amazon

[Vishera]

8 hours ago, Spotty said:

but they can either innovate their app/service to offer something the default option doesn't offer

And what's stopping Apple from copying and implementing those features in an update?

[AnonymousGuy]

Quote

A version of the app is currently on the App Store and Apple says that it would welcome Eleftheriou submitting future updates to the App Store review team.

Anyways, this dude just took Swype and put it on Apple Watch.   Much innovation.

 

Love seeing Scribble though.  Looks like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti_(Palm_OS) is back and kicking.  You could get crazy fast at typing with it.

[wanderingfool2]

5 hours ago, AnonymousGuy said:

Anyways, this dude just took Swype and put it on Apple Watch.   Much innovation.

Well his gripe I believe is the fact that Apple put up roadblocks and eventually removed the app (only to a few months later have their own product released doing the same thing)

 

Also, it wasn't just taking Swype...the app was for the visually impaired as well, where it would be reading out the words are you typed; but I think the bigger idea that they decided to kill off the app and then introduce their own similar app is where copy is coming from

 

14 hours ago, Spotty said:

What benefit is there for Apple to pull it from the store? It wouldn't surprise me if this wasn't the full story.

I pretty much agree with all you said...while I wouldn't put it past there being another side to the story...the email posted (where it gave the reason for rejection) is pretty damaging and at least lead me to think that Apple did it because someone sent down a chain of command that said start enforcing "keyboard" apps a few months ago...and hoping that it doesn't bring bad publicity.

 

17 hours ago, tim0901 said:

Things get slightly complicated however when you realise that the keyboard was removed from the App Store because Apple Watch keyboards aren't allowed on there. This is written in red in the picture in the linked tweet.

 

Apple's defence here will likely be in the form of "we removed it because it was against our App Store guidelines" and will fall on some defence of their app moderation team making a mistake for it being allowed on there in the first place (a bullshit excuse imo but c'est la vie). They'll then produce evidence of internal development of such a keyboard from prior to this App's removal from the App Store to show that they made their implementation themselves.

I'm not sure if Apple can easily walk away by saying it was against the App Store guidelines...sure if they had made a mistake once or twice it might fly, but this App from what I can see has existed since 2018, 20+ updates (which iirc means each time it gets reviewed).  So yea...not sure Apple can really use the defense that it is against the guidelines (especially if they were developing a competing product which would be released).  Glancing over the Human Interface Guidelines I didn't see anything prohibiting it anyways.

 

We will see though, once the lawsuit starts.  If what was posted regarding Apple maybe contacting them before hand in questioning a takeover it's not going to be good for them though.

[tim0901]

3 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

I'm not sure if Apple can easily walk away by saying it was against the App Store guidelines...sure if they had made a mistake once or twice it might fly, but this App from what I can see has existed since 2018, 20+ updates (which iirc means each time it gets reviewed).  So yea...not sure Apple can really use the defense that it is against the guidelines (especially if they were developing a competing product which would be released).  Glancing over the Human Interface Guidelines I didn't see anything prohibiting it anyways.

 

We will see though, once the lawsuit starts.  If what was posted regarding Apple maybe contacting them before hand in questioning a takeover it's not going to be good for them though.

2018 release date was for the iPhone app. The Apple Watch companion app (which is what this lawsuit is about) was released in 2020.

[Commodus]

This would be pretty lousy of Apple if it happened as described. The problem, of course, is whether or not it happened as described. It's easy to cry "conspiracy!" and claim Apple was stifling competition for its future OS feature; it's harder to consider that the dev might have benefited from a mistaken approval or was trying to shift some of the blame.

 

Apple isn't exactly a saint, but it's not like most companies would reveal one feature of an upcoming OS at a very early stage solely to deter developers from building the same thing. And in cases like this it's seldom as clear-cut as "big tech company bad, indie developer good."

[StDragon]

The take-away here is that developers need to patent before releasing to market. Prior art? Then Apple can use analytics to incorporate the positive attributes of an app into their own OS.

 

Basically, as a developer, your own success will inevitably lead to your own downfall.

[wanderingfool2]

8 hours ago, tim0901 said:

2018 release date was for the iPhone app. The Apple Watch companion app (which is what this lawsuit is about) was released in 2020.

Yea, I guess it was 2020...that's still a year and 20+ updates (which would have gone through a review process) [Actually I think I counted 25 updates...so Apple would have reviewed it 25 time...and I can say that in that the 26th time they tried is when they got this response] 

 

2 hours ago, Commodus said:

Apple isn't exactly a saint, but it's not like most companies would reveal one feature of an upcoming OS at a very early stage solely to deter developers from building the same thing. And in cases like this it's seldom as clear-cut as "big tech company bad, indie developer good."

While it might not be as clear cut as it's made out publicly...one does have to notice that Apple seems to have a habit of doing this kind of thing.  They did it with Tile (blocked their access to an API that would have increased accuracy and then announced a competing product, and I believe there was more as well), they did that with using the volume rocker to take a picture (killed the app that supported it, under "didn't meet UI standards" and then released their own camera).

 

5 minutes ago, StDragon said:

The take-away here is that developers need to patent before releasing to market. Prior art? Then Apple can use analytics to incorporate the positive attributes of an app into their own OS.

 

Basically, as a developer, your own success will inevitably lead to your own downfall.

Honestly, I don't have a problem with it if Apple didn't use underhanded tactics (or at least apparently).

 

If Apple had just released their own competing product, even if it was almost a copy (which I mean it's a keyboard there wasn't much to innovate...so not really copying anyways) and left the competitors up without going through all this I would have no problem.  Sure Apple would still take over the market because their app would be a default on all watches, but at least it still is roughly fair (and I would not have any issues with it).

[PocketNerd]

On 9/15/2021 at 4:06 AM, Arika S said:

-snip-

Excuse me, but this meme is too good to NOT be in my library of memes.

Staying on topic,

 

Remember folks! Corporations are not your friend! God I hope Apple loses this one (but then again, they essentially won against Epic which should have been a slam-dunk)

[Inkz]

12 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Well his gripe I believe is the fact that Apple put up roadblocks and eventually removed the app (only to a few months later have their own product released doing the same thing)

 

Also, it wasn't just taking Swype...the app was for the visually impaired as well, where it would be reading out the words are you typed; but I think the bigger idea that they decided to kill off the app and then introduce their own similar app is where copy is coming from

 

I pretty much agree with all you said...while I wouldn't put it past there being another side to the story...the email posted (where it gave the reason for rejection) is pretty damaging and at least lead me to think that Apple did it because someone sent down a chain of command that said start enforcing "keyboard" apps a few months ago...and hoping that it doesn't bring bad publicity.

 

I'm not sure if Apple can easily walk away by saying it was against the App Store guidelines...sure if they had made a mistake once or twice it might fly, but this App from what I can see has existed since 2018, 20+ updates (which iirc means each time it gets reviewed).  So yea...not sure Apple can really use the defense that it is against the guidelines (especially if they were developing a competing product which would be released).  Glancing over the Human Interface Guidelines I didn't see anything prohibiting it anyways.

 

We will see though, once the lawsuit starts.  If what was posted regarding Apple maybe contacting them before hand in questioning a takeover it's not going to be good for them though.

I wonder why Epic didn't cite these in Apple's monopoly case, shutting down access of competitors for like half the US marketshare and then selling your own version right after it seems abusive.

[wanderingfool2]

1 hour ago, Inkz said:

I wonder why Epic didn't cite these in Apple's monopoly case, shutting down access of competitors for like half the US marketshare and then selling your own version right after it seems abusive.

I don't know...I think Tile was petitioning congress at the same time Epic's case was happening...but I think Tile only brought it to light after Epic's trial started...so not sure if it was brought up there, or if it even could be (as the evidence already would have to be submitted)