现有网站帐户需按月付费并附加到（免费）iPhone 应用程序吗？拒绝？
一个已经运行的网站，拥有中等数量的付费用户（客户每月为该帐户支付 10 美元），询问我是否愿意编写一个 iPhone 应用程序来帮助扩展该网站的功能。 他们很可能想免费赠送该应用程序 - 他们认为，iPhone 应用程序将成为让更多客户愿意支付网络帐户月费的有力论据。
Android 市场中明确指出，除了应用程序的价格之外，您不得赚取金钱。
android 开发者分发协议：
“4.5 非竞争。您不得使用市场分发或提供主要目的是促进市场外产品分发的任何产品。”
在 Microsoft App Store 中也有非常相似的术语。但你找不到 iPhone 应用程序商店的许可协议，其中不允许赠送能够连接到付费网站的免费应用程序。
您可以在一些博客中找到 iPhone 的拒绝标准：
http:// /10base-t.com/unofficial-appstore-rejection-criteria/
我还阅读了“iphone开发者计划许可协议”，但我仍然不清楚。
iPhone版的kindle是一个与上述情况非常相似的例子，这个应用程序已获得批准，但我认为亚马逊正在向苹果支付一笔未公开的金额。我不相信我们的申请会获得批准。
是否有任何我没有阅读的条款和条件。
提前致谢， 汤姆
An already running Website which has a medium number of paying users (the customers pay 10$ per month for the account) asked me if I am willing to program an iphone app which helps extending the functionality of the website.
They most probably want to give the application away for free - they think, that the iphone app will be a strong argument to get more customers willing to pay the monthly fee for the web-account.
In the Android-Marketplace it is quite clear pointed out, that you are not allowed to earn money other then the price for the app.
android developer distribution agreement:
"4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Product whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of Products outside of the Market."
In the Microsoft App Store there are quite similar terms. But you cannot find a license agreement for the iphone app store where it is not allowed to give away free apps which are able to connect to paid websites.
There are some blogs out there where you can find rejection criterias for the iphone:
http://10base-t.com/unofficial-appstore-rejection-criteria/
I also read the 'iphone developer program license agreement', but still it is not clear to me.
The kindle for iphone is a quite similar example to the above mentioned situation, this app is approved, but I think that amazon is paying a not disclosed amount of money to apple. I'm not convinced that our application will get approved.
Are there any terms and conditions which I didn't read.
Thanks in advance,
Tom
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
“非竞争”条款意味着您不能向市场发布“android 市场”，从而分发应用程序并与 Google 直接竞争。
协议顶部表示，“产品”（大写 P）是指“根据 Android SDK 为设备创建并通过市场分发的软件、内容和数字材料”。
换句话说，Android 应用程序。
翻译：“4.5 禁止竞争。您不得使用 Market 分发或提供任何 Android 应用程序，其主要目的是促进 Android 应用程序在 Market 之外的分发。”
这意味着“是”，您可以通过 Android Market 分发的 Android 应用程序使用 Android Market 之外的付费服务。否则，我无法将我的付费 Skype 帐户与 iPhone 上的免费 Skype 应用程序副本一起使用 - 也无法在 Android 上使用（它甚至存在吗？）
The "non-compete" clause means that you cannot post an "android market" to the market, thus distributing apps and competing with Google directly.
On top of the agreement it says that "Products" (capital P) refers to "Software, content and digital materials created for Devices in accordance with the Android SDK and distributed via the Market.".
In other words, Android apps.
Translation: "4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Android Application whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of Android Applications outside of the Market."
This means that "yes", you are able to use a paid service outside of the Android Market with your Android app distributed through the Android Market. Otherwise, I couldn't use my paid Skype account with my copy of the free Skype app on the iPhone - nor on Android (does it even exist?)
《华尔街日报》应用程序是免费的，但您必须为大多数内容付费。据我所知，这也不是应用内购买。
The Wall Street Journal app is free, but you have to pay them for most content. As far as I know, it's not an in-App purchase, either.
有很多免费应用程序仅适用于外部付费服务的示例。我的 iPhone 上最好的例子是 Spotify 播放器。
我的印象是，如果该应用程序是免费下载的，那就没问题。他们可能会反对的是付费应用程序需要通过非应用程序商店机制额外付费才能使用。苹果公司担心，如果人们付费购买某些东西，但如果不额外付费就无法使用，他们会有一种被敲诈的感觉。如果该应用程序是免费的，那么用户可以将其删除（尽管如果 Spotify 应用程序是任何措施的话，他们可能会给你留下糟糕的评论）。
请记住，您必须向 Apple 提供一个在您的外部系统上设置的帐户，以便在批准过程中进行测试。
There are lots of examples of free apps that only work with external paid-for services. The prime example on my iPhone is the Spotify player.
My impression is that you will be OK if the app is a free download. What they are likely to object to is a paid-for app that requires additional payment through a non-appstore mechanism to be used. Apple are concerned about the ripped-off feeling people get if they pay for something that they then can't use without additional payment. If the app is free then the user can just delete it (although they'll probably leave you a shitty review if the Spotify app is any measure).
Bear in mind that you will have to provide Apple with an account on your external system set up for testing during the approval process.