Apple News appears to be opt-out not opt-in

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,370
Read the blog post below for the terms and agreements to be included in Apple News. It appears this is opt-out not opt-in. Just reading through some of the bullet points...how anyone at Apple could ever have approved it is beyond me.

https://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/i-do-not-agree-to-your-terms.html

When your RSS content is included in News, here are the terms that will apply:

  • You agree to let us use, display, store, and reproduce the content in your RSS feeds including placing advertising next to or near your content without compensation to you. Don’t worry, we will not put advertising inside your content without your permission.
  • You confirm that you have all necessary rights to publish your RSS content, and allow Apple to use it for News as we set forth here. You will be responsible for any payments that might be due to any contributors or other third parties for the creation and use of your RSS content.
  • If we receive a legal claim about your RSS content, we will tell you so that you can resolve the issue, including indemnifying Apple if Apple is included in the claim.
  • You can remove your RSS feed whenever you want by opting out or changing your settings in News Publisher.
I don't know about that. It's probably within Apple's rights to put advertising next to my content, but I don't really want them to. I definitely don't want to indemnify Apple. Oh well, I guess I'll just ignore this e-mail.

But wait, there's more!

If you do not want Apple to include your RSS feeds in News, reply NO to this email and we will remove your RSS feeds. [emphasis Apple's]

Let me get this straight, Apple: you send me an e-mail outlining the terms under which you will redistribute my content, and you will just assume that I agree to your terms unless I opt out?

This makes typical clickwrap EULA nonsense look downright reasonable by comparison. You're going to consider me bound to terms you just declared to me in an e-mail as long as I don't respond? That's completely crazy. You don't even know if I received the e-mail!
 

gsmornot

macrumors 68040
Sep 29, 2014
3,073
2,471
I had to read this a second time.

Apple is saying they will use your RSS feed unless you say no. Is that typical?
 

LordQ

Suspended
Sep 22, 2012
3,582
5,623
Still, three countries at launch mega sucks, I'll stick with Flipboard.
 

soy

macrumors member
Jan 25, 2012
93
75
Brooklyn
It's an RSS reader, if you provide an RSS feed you don't usually even get to choose to opt out of getting published in an individual reader.

A number of these apps are ad supported, so yes, it's normal for ads to appear next to the content.

At least they have the option to opt out here.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,370
So you are a creator of RSS feeds and want to opt in to be included in the Apple News feeds or you don't want your content to be included? What you posted is what a content creator would receive, not a user of the application.
Yes this was sent to content creators. But the way it's worded sounds sleazy. And I don't get the part about placing ads next to someone's content. I definitely won't be using this app if there are ads plastered all over the place.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,370
It's an RSS reader, if you provide an RSS feed you don't usually even get to choose to opt out of getting published in an individual reader.

A number of these apps are ad supported, so yes, it's normal for ads to appear next to the content.

At least they have the option to opt out here.
Hmm...when Apple was demoing this on stage I don't remember seeing a bunch of ads next to the content. And I don't remember the presenter saying the News app was ad supported.
 

soy

macrumors member
Jan 25, 2012
93
75
Brooklyn
Hmm...when Apple was demoing this on stage I don't remember seeing a bunch of ads next to the content. And I don't remember the presenter saying the News app was ad supported.
I remember reading somewhere that content creators can either keep including their own ads and keep all revenue, or get iAds and get the usual 70/30 revenue split.

They didn't include ads in the demo to make it look better. I feel like usually when they demo Safari they run an ad blocker as well so everything looks cleaner.

Edit: see apple.com/safari:



same website when loaded in actual safari:

 

VSMacOne

macrumors 601
Oct 18, 2008
4,584
1,275
I'm sure it will have some sort of iAds built in to the articles. The real difference will be HOW they make it look.
 

kmj2318

macrumors 68000
Aug 22, 2007
1,601
539
Naples, FL
I agree that this feels odd, but really, do people want the alternative? Do they want their content used without even being notified and not even given the option to opt-out? Apple's being transparent here.

First, I want everybody to know about the ridiculous stunt Apple is trying to pull here. I'd have been perfectly happy if they had just sent me an e-mail saying they were going to include my feed, and if I didn't like it I could e-mail to opt out. I'd even be happy if they didn't even give the option to opt out! After all, having an RSS feed in the first place is an implict opt-in to that sort of thing. But trying to dictate terms on top of that while telling me that I automatically agree to them unless I opt out is unacceptable, even if the terms themselves are relatively benign. They should stop doing this, and telling people about what they're doing is the only way I know that might help to make that happen.
It sounds like that's exactly what he wants. This "stunt" Apple is pulling is telling people exactly how they will use their feeds and giving people a way to opt out. Do the other aggregators do that?
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,370
I agree that this feels odd, but really, do people want the alternative? Do they want their content used without even being notified and not even given the option to opt-out? Apple's being transparent here.



It sounds like that's exactly what he wants. This "stunt" Apple is pulling is telling people exactly how they will use their feeds and giving people a way to opt out. Do the other aggregators do that?
From the blog post it seems like he's upset that Apple is dictating terms but the default is assuming you agree unless you say otherwise when really shouldn't it be the other way around? Otherwise don't send an email with specific terms, just use the RSS feed however the law allows.

First, I want everybody to know about the ridiculous stunt Apple is trying to pull here. I'd have been perfectly happy if they had just sent me an e-mail saying they were going to include my feed, and if I didn't like it I could e-mail to opt out. I'd even be happy if they didn't even give the option to opt out! After all, having an RSS feed in the first place is an implict opt-in to that sort of thing. But trying to dictate terms on top of that while telling me that I automatically agree to them unless I opt out is unacceptable, even if the terms themselves are relatively benign. They should stop doing this, and telling people about what they're doing is the only way I know that might help to make that happen.
 

lchlch

macrumors 6502a
Mar 12, 2015
506
152
  1. If a website has a RSS feed, than its safe to assume that they want to distribute that content.
  2. Isn't Google doing the same thing with search results. Eg you can op-out from being indexed; Permission is not needed for your website to be added into their search results.
 

Menel

macrumors 603
Aug 4, 2011
6,199
1,048
I remember reading somewhere that content creators can either keep including their own ads and keep all revenue, or get iAds and get the usual 70/30 revenue split.

They didn't include ads in the demo to make it look better. I feel like usually when they demo Safari they run an ad blocker as well so everything looks cleaner.

Edit: see apple.com/safari:



same website when loaded in actual safari:

I find it /mildlyinteresting when corporations use other brands, within their brands.
Someone high up at Apple likes the Outside publication or feels it aligns with their audience. They probably had a contract with Outside to use their brand, and to setup tweak the apperance. E.g. instead of their normal 3rd party ads (zippo) they had an internal subscribe ad.

So it did get me to clickind around. Outside probably counted on this... Noted that, Outside's Best Town of the year, http://www.outsideonline.com/1972941/best-towns-2015, Chattanooga has no Apple store.
 

Shirasaki

macrumors G3
May 16, 2015
9,426
3,441
I remember reading somewhere that content creators can either keep including their own ads and keep all revenue, or get iAds and get the usual 70/30 revenue split.

They didn't include ads in the demo to make it look better. I feel like usually when they demo Safari they run an ad blocker as well so everything looks cleaner.

Edit: see apple.com/safari:



same website when loaded in actual safari:

Apple is good at hiding something behind the scene, rendering it looks better than we may know on real product.
Same on their continuity demo, and now this time, proactive notification demo. Maybe, news, Apple music.
 

marvz

macrumors 6502a
Aug 27, 2012
999
384
Berlin
That's hilarious.
If you put a public RSS feed on your website everyone and every RSS reader can access it. It's just the way it works. They can be happy that Apple is informing them and that they are in Apple's News app.