[i]

 

 

FMA is a reward based marketing strategy campaign to improve B2C relationships. Indie developers use FMA to jump start their launches and maintain a steady stream of new users on a predictable cost per install basis. For this purpose the app developer pays them to promote their product, a small portion of which is utilized to create incentives in the form of credit to convince the consumer to download the product and utilize it for at least 30 seconds. When enough credits are earned in this way, the consumer may then resort to purchasing a specific range of products. By this type of promotional exposure of their products, revenue is pumped back into the app ecosystem in the form of either in-app purchases or either through purchases of paid apps. FMA charges on a CPI-basis, meaning you only pay when FMA drives a download. Clients have the ability to choose their bid (minimum is $0.25). The higher the bid, the more credits the app's download is worth, and the higher on the offer wall they are. Therefore, clients with higher bids are likely to have higher click through rates and conversion rates because they are (1) higher than other apps and (2) offer more credits than other apps.

 

[ii] To arrive at a conclusion, following questions need to be answered:

1. If the primary function of a computer program is of harām utility (pics, music, chess, casino etc), will it be allowed to receive such a program?
2. Is it allowed to pay for the transportation costs involved for an item of impermissible utility?
3. Is it allowed to assume ownership of such a program?
4. Is it allowed for such a program to be in one’s possession in the first place?
5. Is it allowed to make such a program run on your device even if one doesn’t look at it by turning it around and doesn’t listen to the music by switching off the sound?
6. The incentive is preconditioned with downloading the app and opening it for 30 seconds. Will this constitute a contract of ijārah in any of the following two ways?
   1. In the sense that the incentive in actual fact is remuneration for the 30 seconds of usage of the cell phone? If so, will this constitute ijārah ‘alā al-m’aṣiyyah?
   2. In the sense that one is remunerated for downloading the app as a way to promote the app in the process.

 

The following ‘ibārat answers most of the above mentioned questions:

• الفتاوى الهندية في مذهب الإمام الأعظم أبي حنيفة النعمان, الشيخ نظام وجماعة من علماء الهند, الشيخ نظام وجماعة من علماء الهن, عبد الكريم سامي الجندي, دار الفكر, الأولى،, بيروت, 1411هـ - 1991م, 6 [373 5] ولو أمسك شيئا من هذه المعازف والملاهي كره ويأثم وإن كان لا يستعملها كذا في فتاوى قاضي خان

 

Thereafter, if it is not permitted to even have such items in your possession in the first place, then how can it be permitted to bear the transportation costs in the form of downloads?

 

After it is downloaded, iḥrāz of the program has come about. If ownership is not established, then point number 6.a can be argued. In this case, the program was merely borrowed to the recipient for usage according to its terms and conditions. Just like a normal item can be borrowed out to someone, likewise a program. The source code is encapsulated and decoded in a way that it is inaccessible for the general public, which corroborates the lack of transfer of ownership of the program. In this case, it can be regarded that they hire the services of one’s phone for thirty seconds for their program to run. After this period is over, the program remains on the phone as a borrowed item which the owner of the phone can utilize. The maqīs ‘alayh for this type of masāil would be the askimam website itself which runs on a server. On a yearly basis, ujrat has to be paid in exchange for the website to run on those servers and to be accessible to the public at large. Likewise for the sponsored app download, a person is remunerated with credits to run the program for thirty seconds on his phone. In the case of leasing out the usage of your phone for harām apps, then this would be akin to leasing out a premise for a casino, prostitution, music etc.  However, there is one important difference, which is that in the case of a casino, the mustajir brings in all the equipment and he decides to utilize the premises for the purpose contracted. In our case, the program is brought in by the ajīr himself and he presses a button to activate it. As such, he is the one responsible for the m’aṣiyyah. With respect to a liquor store, following ‘ibārat could be resorted to:

الهداية في شرح بداية المبتدي, علي بن أبي بكر بن عبد الجليل الفرغاني المرغيناني، أبو الحسن برهان الدين, 593هـ, طلال يوسف, دار احياء التراث العربي - بيروت - لبنان, الأولى، 1405هـ - 1985م, مكتبة الرشد - السعودية، الرياض, 1411هـ - 1991م, 4

[378 4] قال: "ومن أجر بيتا ليتخذ فيه بيت نار أو كنيسة أو بيعة أو يباع فيه الخمر بالسواد فلا بأس به" وهذا عند أبي حنيفة، وقالا: لا ينبغي أن يكريه لشيء من ذلك؛ لأنه إعانة على المعصية. وله أن الإجارة ترد على منفعة البيت، ولهذا تجب الأجرة بمجرد التسليم، ولا معصية فيه، وإنما المعصية بفعل المستأجر، وهو مختار فيه فقطع نسبته عنه، وإنما قيده بالسواد لأنهم لا يمكنون من اتخاذ البيع والكنائس وإظهار بيع الخمور والخنازير في الأمصار لظهور شعائر الإسلام فيها. بخلاف السواد. قالوا: هذا كان في سواد الكوفة، لأن غالب أهلها أهل الذمة. فأما في سوادنا فأعلام الإسلام فيها ظاهرة فلا يمكنون فيها أيضا، وهو الأصح. قال: "ومن حمل لذمي خمرا فإنه يطيب له الأجر عند أبي حنيفة. وقال أبو يوسف ومحمد: يكره له ذلك"؛ لأنه إعانة على المعصية، وقد صح " أن النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام لعن في الخمر عشرا حاملها والمحمول إليه " له أن المعصية في

 

However, with respect to our scenario, this is completely impossible as the nisbat to the m’asiyyah is not cut off at all. The Ajir in our case is the one responsible for the ma’siyyah to come into existence in his mahall, by willingly pressing a button.

 

If ownership does get established then we would be dealing with obtaining remuneration for merely using it. This would entail a hibah on condition that you utilize your personal item for thirty seconds, which is a sharṭ-e-fāsid. Hibah does not become bātil with such shurūt, as such there would be scope for the remuneration if it was not for the fact that 6.b applies. As such, the remuneration provided is merely for promotion of the app, which constitutes aiding in sin. To promote Haram is Haram. Therefore, this is Ijarah of a m’asiyyah, which is Baatil. On top of that, possessing a harām app in any way is sinful, let alone turning it on etc.

 

As such, no matter in what way we look at it, the remuneration resulting from this has no scope of being ḥalāl at all.

 

[iii] الفتاوى الهندية في مذهب الإمام الأعظم أبي حنيفة النعمان, الشيخ نظام وجماعة من علماء الهند, الشيخ نظام وجماعة من علماء الهن, عبد الكريم سامي الجندي, دار الفكر, الأولى،, بيروت, 1411هـ - 1991م, 6 [373 5] ولو أمسك شيئا من هذه المعازف والملاهي كره ويأثم وإن كان لا يستعملها كذا في فتاوى قاضي خان