Here's an interesting one - a minor update to the description of my Content for Symbian was failed by QA, because they believe my support website (not actually the thing I changed, but never mind) violates:

"According to the Nokia Store publisher registration and
distribution agreement: “5.4. Non-Compete – You may not use the
Program to distribute or make available any Content whose primary
purpose is to facilitate the distribution of Content outside of the

because the website ( ) linked to versions of the Content for Maemo that aren't on Nokia Store. My content is an open source game, that someone ported to Maemo. He put the Maemo version on a repository. I mean yes, it would be nice to also have it on Nokia Store and maybe that can be done in future. But in the meantime, it seems annoying to say that I can't link to it at all. This would basically mean users are unaware of the Maemo version, and I don't see how that benefits users or Nokia.

Even when I do have it on Nokia Store, even when linking to the Nokia store Maemo version, I have been told that I still cannot also link to the respositories.

I also had a similar problem with the Meego version, which I was hosting on the open source hosting site Launchpad.

I've seen a few people mention alternative stores for Symbian - how do you handle this? Does it mean you were not allowed to link to the other stores on the site you put as a support link? (I can't help feeling this seems rather anti-competitive behaviour...)

I also find it a bit bizarre that Nokia QA consider to be a competing website - don't they own it? Also my understanding is that Maemo has its own Debian-like method of distribution (repositories, and hosting source+binaries for open source packages like my own) independent of Nokia Store, so it seems odd to consider this to be a competitor and try to clamp down on it - why allow it on Maemo in the first place if they didn't like that?

Has anyone come across this problem, or heard of this issue before? Or have I been unlucky with mistaken interpretation of the rule (I seem to have got away with this on earlier submissions with my game)?

There's also the problem of hosting previous versions, something that Nokia Store doesn't support - but hosting older versions (either via, or elsewhere) might also be seen as violating this rule.

One way round this would be to put a separate support site just for Symbian, but I don't want to have to maintain parallel pages with and without the "offending" links - so in practice it would be a minimal support page only offering contact info, which is a bit more of a pain for users to find useful info like the instructions. So for now, I've just removed the links, and said that it's also available on (which seems to be okay).

I always interpreted that rule as meaning you can't do things like put an app on Nokia Store that allows people to download from another competing download site or whatever. It seems rather odd to claim that the *primary* purpose of my Symbian game was simply for me to get people to download via, just because of one link to that site for the Maemo version that isn't available on Nokia Store...