Hello,
I am looking for guidance about a repeated Guideline 4.3(a) rejection affecting version 1.2 of an existing app.
FilmFold versions 1.0 and 1.1 were approved under the same App Store record and bundle identifier. Version 1.2 is an update to the same product. FilmFold is the only app published under my seller account. It is not a template or white-label app, and it has not been submitted through another developer account.
The rejection says the app shares a similar binary, metadata, or concept with apps submitted by me or other developers. I understand that Apple cannot disclose another developer's confidential information, but the replies have not identified whether the concern is related to code, assets, metadata or functionality.
FilmFold is a camera app with 22 original virtual camera bodies. Each body defines its own optics, focal range, controls, aspect ratio and processing profile. The app includes custom native Swift video processing, an on-device photo pipeline, lenses, accessories, double exposure and local preservation of the original media for nondestructive reprocessing.
The approved version 1.1 already contained the 22-camera catalog, continuous zoom and the current adjustment interface.
Version 1.2 added new native capture and rendering implementations for Tape 99 Hi8, Warm 8 and Cine 35, along with migration support for eligible videos created by older versions.
The rejected build also introduced RevenueCat for purchase entitlements, RevenueCat's remotely configured paywall, Meta App Events and attribution, App Tracking Transparency support, and EAS Update through expo-updates. These components were not present in the approved 1.1 binary.
I am not claiming that any of these services violates the guideline. I am trying to understand whether a shared SDK component, remote paywall resource or account identifier could contribute to an incorrect binary similarity result.
I have asked App Review to compare the rejected build with the approved 1.1 binary and to identify only the category of the matching element. The responses continue to repeat the general 4.3(a) message.
I have prepared a new build that removes RevenueCat, RevenueCat Paywalls, Meta SDK, ATT and expo-updates. It restores the app's own paywall and direct StoreKit entitlement handling. This build has not been submitted yet.
Has anyone resolved a similar case involving an update to an existing app? Would the recommended next step be to submit the cleaned build, request an App Review phone call, or file a formal appeal first? What evidence helped Apple perform a manual comparison with the previously approved version?
Thank you for any guidance or experience you can share.