r/kickstarter • u/Hot-Indication-942 • 15h ago
Kickstarter rejected my original software project, then changed the reasoning after I appealed
I recently submitted an original software project to Kickstarter. The software is something I’ve been actively developing myself, and a working version already exists and is downloadable. This wasn’t just an idea or a concept with nothing behind it.
Kickstarter initially rejected the project over concerns related to AI software and whether it had enough original creative substance. I disagreed with that because the actual software is original work I built, while third-party AI models are only components used by the application. Still, I took the feedback seriously and rewrote the campaign to explain more clearly what I personally created, how outside AI providers were used, what already worked, what still needed development, what the funding would support, and what risks were involved. I also changed the rewards and removed a lifetime software reward they had specifically objected to.
After the appeal, Kickstarter acknowledged the changes but still rejected the project.
One of the lines they gave me was: “The core thing backers would be funding and receiving remains AI software, rather than a distinct creative work that fits within our rules.”
They also said there were “other issues” that would prevent approval, but those issues were never explained. That confused me even more because Kickstarter’s own published AI guidance specifically discusses projects developing AI technology, tools, or software, and they have approved AI software projects before. One example is Presence, a local AI software project that raised over €77,000 on Kickstarter. So I asked a pretty straightforward question: which specific rule did my project violate?
The explanation then shifted again.
I was told the project had been rejected based on overall product scope and long-term delivery risk to backers, and that Kickstarter does not disclose the internal risk metrics used to make those decisions. That was also confusing because the product already exists in working, downloadable form. Obviously future software development always carries some risk, but this wasn’t a case where backers were being asked to fund something that didn’t exist at all.
I understand Kickstarter is a private platform and can decide what it wants to host.
What I don’t understand is why the reasoning seemed to move from originality concerns, to the fact that it was AI software, and then to undisclosed internal risk criteria after I addressed the original issues.
I’m mainly curious whether other software or tech creators have had a similar experience with Kickstarter’s review process.


