First of all, this is not a programming question, but still this is the most appropriate site to ask it, since it's still development-related.
I know that according to Apple, the app should hide the iAd banner if no ads were loaded. I could do that, this is not what I'm asking.
I plan to add iAd to a game, and there would also be an option (in-app purchase) to remove ads. Now if I implemented the iAd banner like Apple advises (hiding it if no content is available) then it would be really easy for anyone to hide ads without paying extra. They would just turn on airplane mode so the device cannot connect to the internet, and the iAd banner would go away.
But since I'm interested in revenue (who isn't?) I don't want users to be able to remove the banner without paying. So I made my app to display a black banner (same size as iAd banner) saying "iAd could not be loaded" in place of the iAd banner if it fails to load any ads (and if the purchase to remove them wasn't made yet). This way users can only recover that portion of the screen via the in-app purchase to remove ads.
I know it sounds a bit cruel, but come on. iAds and in-app purchases are for revenue. I think there's no problem with patching an "exploit" to hide ads while not paying for that.
My question is that will my app get rejected for this? Is it okay to do? Since Apple advises to hide the banner if there are no ads in it, I don't think they will like it, even though I think it's totally reasonable. What do you think?
I think you shouldn't specifically reference iAd in the banner, but rather simply state something like 'pay to remove ads to make this ugly banner go away'. I have not seen specific requirements from Apple in this area, but I am sure they would have no problem with a big irritating banner at the bottom of your app if it didn't reference their technologies directly. So you don't run the risk of angering Apple, and you still get your irritation revenue.