technology lawyer

Custom end user licence agreements for the iStore

HomePrivate: BlogTechnology lawSoftware development lawCustom end user licence agreements for the iStore

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

When Software Developers (Developers) or their clients launch a new application (App) in the iStore, the default terms and conditions are Apple’s standard End User Licence Agreement (EULA).  However, a number of situations arise where it may be in the best interests of the owner of the App to provide their own EULA in place of the default one.  

Why would you need to deviate from the standard EULA?

Apple’s EULA deals with most of the usual licensing issues, however it may not align perfectly with Australian law.  For example, regardless of the customer (End User) agreeing to the jurisdiction of the Courts of California and the law of the United States, various terms will apply including the statutory guarantees as provided in schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth).  Further to this, because of the evolution of the case law in the area of unfair contract terms, it’s possible that some of the terms and conditions in the default EULA will become “unfair” and unenforceable by default.

Apple requirements for bespoke EULA’s

Prior to inclusion of the App in the iStore, Apple has provided a guide for Developers who intend to supply their own EULA with an App.  In short, the guide describes the minimum requirements which the bespoke EULA must meet:

  • the EULA should acknowledge that parties to the agreement are the Developer and the End User and not Apple;
  • the Developer is solely responsible for the App;
  • the EULA must not conflict (be less restrictive) that the terms and conditions of the iStore;
  • the scope fo the EULA is to be limited to a non-transferrable licence to use the App on the device which it is downloaded;
  • the Developer is solely responsible for support;
  • the parties must acknowledge that Apple is not responsible for supporting the App;
  • the Developer must be responsible for product warranties;
  • should the App fail, Apple will refund the purchase price of the App and thereafter Apple will have no further responsibility;
  • the EULA must not attempt to limit the Developers liability over and what is allowable under statute;
  • in the event of any claimed intellectual property infringement, the Developer must be responsible for investigating the defending the matter and not Apple;
  • the Developer must warrant that they are outside of the United States and in particular that they are not in a country which is “embargoed by the United States” or is deemed to be a “terrorist supporting country”;
  • the contact details of the Developer and customer service information in the event that the end user needs to contact the developer;
  • the EULA must provide that the Apple is a third party beneficiary to the EULA and agree that Apple and any of its subsidiaries may enforce the terms of against any end user.

In short, there is quite a few issues to consider when drafting bespoke EULA’s to comply with Apple’s requirements.  The complete guide is available  on the Apple website.

Ensuring that the terms and conditions are legally binding

The usual rules of bringing the EULA to the attention of end users apply in this instance.  The Developer must do all that is reasonably possible to bring the EULA to the attention of the end user.  See our article: “Are your website terms and conditions binding?”

Further information

If you would like to discuss having a lawyer draft a bespoke EULA that complies with the rules for the iStore, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about technology law

  • AI businesses should have duty of care

    AI businesses should have duty of care

    In a recent interview with InnovationAus.com, Victorian Senator Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Senator) emphasised the need to adopt digital duty of care laws for artificial intelligence (AI) companies.[1]  As a representative of the ALP and former AI start-up founder, the Senator calls for the proposed digital duty of care to apply to AI companies.  If implemented, the…

    Read more …

  • Federal Court orders winding up of crypto mining investment scheme

    Federal Court orders winding up of crypto mining investment scheme

    The Federal Court of Australia delivered judgment in Australian Securities and Investments Commission v NGS Crypto Pty Ltd (No 5) [2025] FCA 1611, on 18 December 2025 ordering the winding up of two (2) cryptocurrency related entities after finding that they operated an unlicensed financial services business and an unregistered managed investment scheme in contravention…

    Read more …

  • Online Safety – is your online business a DIS or a RES?

    Online Safety – is your online business a DIS or a RES?

    Whether your online business has to comply with the obligations contained in the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (OSA), and related standards and industry codes will largely depend on how your business is classified because of the functionality it provides to end users in Australia.

    Read more …

  • Bill to allow victims of AI deepfakes to sue for emotional damages

    Bill to allow victims of AI deepfakes to sue for emotional damages

    On 24 November 2025, Senator David Pocock introduced a private Senator’s bill, the Online Safety and Other Legislation Amendment (My Face, My Rights) Bill 2025 (Cth) (Bill) to amend the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Online Safety Act) and the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act). 

    Read more …

  • Malcolm Burrows on ABC’s “Legal Eagles” segment – Deepfakes

    Malcolm Burrows on ABC’s “Legal Eagles” segment – Deepfakes

    On 3 December 2025, Malcolm Burrows appeared live on Katherine Feeney’s ABC Radio program, “Legal Eagles” as the Technology and Intellectual Property Lawyer to discuss the proposed amendments to the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) through the introduction of the Online Safety and other legislation Amendment (My Face Rights) Bill (Cth) 2025 (My Face Rights…

    Read more …

  • Federal Gov rules out copyright text and data mining exception for AI

    Federal Gov rules out copyright text and data mining exception for AI

    On 26 October 2025, the Attorney-General, Hon Michelle Rowland MP, published a media release reiterating that the current Federal Government will not introduce a text and data mining (TDM) exception to copyright infringement in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Copyright Act).  The Attorney-General’s Department will instead engage in further consultations with members of the Copyright…

    Read more …

  • Australian Government announces a digital duty of care

    Australian Government announces a digital duty of care

    The Australian Government has announced that it will soon be introducing legislation to create a digital duty of care under the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Act) in response to findings from an independent Statutory Review of the Online Safety Act 2021 (Review).  The Honourable Anika Wells MP announced that “big tech” companies will soon…

    Read more …

  • Dundas Lawyers achieves SMB1001 gold level cyber security certification

    Dundas Lawyers achieves SMB1001 gold level cyber security certification

    On 14 November 2025 Dundas Lawyers achieved the Gold level of the SMB1001 cybersecurity standard.

    Read more …

  • OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban

    OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban

    On 10 October 2025, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), led by Privacy Commissioner, Ms Carly Kind, released a twenty-nine (29) page Privacy Guidance on Part 4A (Social Media Minimum Age) of the Online Safety Act 2021 (New Guidance).  This New Guidance details the privacy obligations for Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms (Restricted Platforms)…

    Read more …

Send this to a friend