Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

Developer files antitrust complaint after Apple rejects COVID game

Developer's rejected coronavirus app was accepted after being renamed

A German developer and lobbyist has filed a complaint with the EU, claiming that both Apple and Google are unfairly rejecting apps with coronavirus themes.

As Apple faces one lawsuit claiming it wants a monopoly on contact-tracing apps, another developer is accusing both Apple and Google of unfair competition. The new complaint says it is an antitrust issue that the companies are rejecting any COVID-related apps, including games.

German developer Florian Mueller — who is better known as a lobbyist and blogger on legal issues — reports that he submitted an app named Corona Control Game in November 2020. Both the Apple App Store, and Google Play Store, rejected it.

It's not clear whether either company formally told Mueller why it was rejected. However, Apple has stated before that it will not allow any COVID-19 apps on the App Store unless they are officially-approved ones from governments and health authorities.

According to Reuters, Google has responded that, too, it will only approve COVID-19 apps that are authorized.

"The stated goal of 'ensuring the credibility of health and safety information' does not justify blanket rules based on authorship or merely the combination of a broad category and a topic," argues Mueller in his complaint.

Mueller has now filed complaints about this with the US Department of Justice, and also antitrust authorities in Australia, the UK, the Netherlands and Germany. A further complaint is expected to be filed in India.

In the meantime, Mueller reports that he has renamed the app to "Viral Days," and that it has been accepted by both stores.



20 Comments

Fidonet127 5 Years · 598 comments

If they renamed the app and it was accepted by both app stores, then how is there a case? With all the covid problems, isn't it a bit incentive and worn out already? After all this time I wouldn't want to play a covid game anyhow. 

flydog 14 Years · 1141 comments

Seems like the new thing is to sue for antitrust violations every time you don't like Apple's rules. 

Mueller really should know better. 

ihatescreennames 19 Years · 1977 comments

If they renamed the app and it was accepted by both app stores, then how is there a case? With all the covid problems, isn't it a bit incentive and worn out already? After all this time I wouldn't want to play a covid game anyhow. 

Yeah, I don’t really get what the issue is if a name change covered it. Also, it’s not like Apple has it’s own COVID-19 themed game they are trying to push.

As to the insensitivity part, it seems like a double standard. When I search for “virus game” the first result I get is for “Infection Bio War” with “Spread the Plague!” as it’s tag line. How is it that spreading the plague is deemed fine but if the developer of that game changed it to spreading COVID-19 it would be rejected (theoretically)? Will it be OK in 5 years to have a COVID-19 themed game?



It’s at least a little odd that Apple rejected Mueller’s COVID-19 app which, from a quick glance, is about preventing the spread, wearing masks, quarantining, etc, but the above app is geared at spreading disease and is apparently OK.

rob53 13 Years · 3313 comments

If they renamed the app and it was accepted by both app stores, then how is there a case? With all the covid problems, isn't it a bit incentive and worn out already? After all this time I wouldn't want to play a covid game anyhow. 

Haven’t checked but are there any games about polio, measles, mumps, or any of the other life threatening diseases we’ve dealt with? No reason to allow stupid apps like this. 

mac_dog 16 Years · 1084 comments

Seems to me the quick way to make a buck is to violate apples developer rules intentionally, only to turn around and sue them when it gets rejected. Talk about a lack of ingenuity and a bunch of lazy fucks out to make a quick buck. Furthermore, this should be a conflict of interest case, since this guy is a lobbyist and has influence with law makers.