Apple Now Blocking 'Overtly Sexual' Apps from App Store

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Feb 18, 2010.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]

    iPhone developer ChilliFresh posted (via TechCrunch) that they received an email from Apple tonight indicating that their iPhone app Wobble iBoobs had been pulled from the App Store. The email indicated that Apple was now removing overtly sexual content due to customer complaints:
    A search of other similarly adult themed apps on AppShopper shows that many (but not all) have already been removed from the App Store.

    ChilliFresh's app had been well known and generated over $260,000 in its App Store lifetime. The developer points out that his app actually ships with no images and simply uses user supplied images. Meanwhile, at least one other developer seems to have accidentally gotten caught in the crossfire with his Invisible Girl book being removed despite the developer's insistence that the ebook contains no sexual references. Of note, Playboy's official app remains on the App Store at this time.

    Article Link: Apple Now Blocking 'Overtly Sexual' Apps from App Store
     
  2. jo0
    macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #2
    another great example making all the sense in the world...
     
  3. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Location:
    East Lansing, MI
    #3
    Good riddance.

    I'm as raging a liberal as anyone and love freedom of speech, but seeing iBoobs or HoxSexSuperHotGirls in the top apps makes me really lose faith in humanity and I'd rather see more worthwhile apps (or at least more...content-heavy apps) be celebrated instead.
     
  4. macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    Good. You have to draw the line somewhere. If you want mobile porn there's Safari browser.
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2006
    #5
    I do not think you understand the meaning of the word "liberal."
     
  6. macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #6
    So then don't feature them, but that doesn't mean you need to pull them.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    zombitronic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    #7
    Exactly. While this particular app provided more function than a sultry slide show, it could easily be rebranded as iWobble. Same functions, just take away the implications that it should be used on breasts.

    I'm sure we'll have some of the usuals on here complaining that Apple is too draconian and big brother-like and "they don't need to decide what's best for me" and "this is all Obama's fault" and the rest of the typical entitlement nonsense, but seriously, this gets rid of a good amount of waste on the App Store.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #8
    Yet Call of Duty remains.

    Not that I'm anti-violence. I'm in support of all the things that create R/M ratings, not just the visuals that go boom.
     
  9. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    #9
    I hope it's just a beginning. There are about 130K useless apps in the App store. Someone has to do something about it. :p
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    #10
    I am glad, lately there have been tons of boobie apps every day that just clutter the app store. asian girls, latina girls, ...... it seems some companies were releasing 20 similar apps every day that were just different half naked girls. Glad this won't be cluttering up the app store anymore!
     
  11. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #11
    That's one less trashy app on the app store, and more to follow. I was getting fed up of all these "sexy" apps filling up the top 25 lists.

    Now if Apple would remove all the "lite" apps and add a lite/trial feature for paid apps, that would make the app store a nicer experience :)
     
  12. macrumors 603

    marksman

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    #12
    Good thing I just finished or I might be upset about this.
     
  13. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    #13
    So, farts are OK but boobs are not? Is not it a slippery slope? Luckily we have Steve Jobs to resolve all these issues.
     
  14. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    #14
    Par for the course

    This is just stupid. No one is forcing anyone to buy these apps. If you don't like them, don't buy them.

    If there is a problem sifting through all the adult-oriented apps when you're not interested in them, the proper response is to FIX THE FRIGGIN' STORE. Rejecting apps from the store just because Apple is too lazy to bother putting in a toggle for "show me adult apps" is ridiculous.

    It's certainly consistent with Apple's other ridiculous app-rejection policies. The whole idea that Apple would reject an app for anything other than it being malicious is ridiculous. But it's still ridiculous. Being consistently ridiculous doesn't make it right.
     
  15. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #15
    Censorship and the iPhone

    Apple would never sell sexually explicit software at their brick and mortar retail stores, (I agree that if they agree to sell violent games then that is an unfortunate irony) so I totally understand why they won't allow it on iTunes. However, on a regular desktop/laptop computer, users can always find "other" types of software from sources other than an Apple retail store. This isn't true of the iPod/iPhone/iPad. Apple's closed i-ecosystem may have the best intentions, but it is inherently going to be censored. It is unfortunate- if you could obtain apps from other sources than iTunes/App store, then there would be no problem. Maybe someday. It certainly makes the case stronger for jailbreaking though.
     
  16. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    #16
    Good for Apple

    I'm glad to hear that Apple is willing to draw lines, and re-draw them as well. People who want sleaze can use Safari, or get an Android or Palm or "Windows Phone 7 (take breath) Series."
     
  17. macrumors 68040

    MrSmith

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    #17
    In the same vein, shouldn't they get rid of all these games that involve shooting people? Or are these decisions based on complaints from the US only...where violence is a way of life but suggestive/naked body parts are evil?
     
  18. zim
    macrumors 65816

    zim

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    #18
    Better option....

    By default make all iPod Touch and iPhone devices set to only display non Mature/Adult apps. Allow the user to enable the options, similar to Google's search. I like that there are parental settings for blocking the purchase of inappropriate apps but always thought it was odd that you could still see them (I do realize that it removes the preview images).

    This options allows everyone to be at peace.
     
  19. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2009
    #19
    After blocking this, and then that, Apple will soon try to block our brains and try to turn us into dribbling religiously possessed droids who cant see, feel, experience, enjoy anything that it isn't blessed by Steve...

    Enough of bullcrap already! >_<
     
  20. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2006
    #20
    First they came for my jiggly boobs, and I did not speak out, because jiggly boobs are juvenile.

    Then they came for the icons, because they resembled Apple's; the healthcare app, because it was political; P2P apps or front ends, because they might be used for piracy; lame apps, because of limited utility; diagnostic apps, just because; podcasting and music apps and google voice, because that's Apple's turf; the whole jailbroken world, because personalization=brings down the cell network; and a million other apps (besides web browsers) because they let you access the 90% of the internet that is porn.
    And I did not speak out because hey, it's Apple's device, they can do what they want with it.

    And then they threw the killswitch on "my" device -- but by then, it was too late to post a bitchy tweet about it.
     
  21. macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #21
    What? :confused:
     
  22. macrumors 68030

    Snowy_River

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Corvallis, OR
    #22
    In whose opinion are they useless apps? Yours? What if one of those apps is something that I find quite useful or entertaining? Then what? Who are you to decide for everyone what is useful?

    Now, if you want to argue for a better organization mechanism for the app store so that you can avoid seeing most of these "useless" apps, while I can choose to see them, that's different...

    Uh... they've already done that. But it's up to the developers to implement it.

    Well put. Thanks.
     
  23. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    #23
    Fixed those for you.

    You're right, it's damn near impossible to navigate the App Store with all the junk in it. Apple should apply some of their usability knowledge and fix it so that it's easy to find what you're looking for and not see what you don't want to see.
     
  24. macrumors 68040

    MrSmith

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    #24
    It's not confusing. Why can't Apple allow us to do what we want with their products as long as it's inside the law?
     
  25. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    #25
    This is censorship. I mean where do you draw the line? If the Metropolitan Museum put out an app which contains Edward Weston nude photographs or Nan Goldin's photos, would they be considered inappropriate to sell? When exactly does a nude body move from art to pornography and how can Apple make that decision? Why can't they simply create a section for adult content for 18+ customers?
     

Share This Page