Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Now Blocking 'Overtly Sexual' Apps from App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
and after an hour using it - you know where the extra money went.
slick OS and and a multi touch trackpad that works
You own a LICENCE to USE the software.
Like you can own a car and a licence to drive - but you can't drive the wrong way drunk down the freeway.
If you want to whack off - maybe you need another tablet.
I think Apple tire of catering to the wanking dollar - "they have no taste"
We cannot live our lives with this attitude. There will be always be poor countries and sadly - even within our societies - poverty is still widespread. Do I do my part to cure the situation? I think I do my bit. And now, I WANT MY PORN ON MY iPAD!
The point was complaints here are petty .
I bought my MacBook years ago and I still don't know where the extra money went
Well, maybe the multiple replacements, since Apple's build quality is the worst in the industry and their contracted repair companies are even worse at fixing things than Apple is at building them. I'm on my third MacBook now, second replacement, and I just got it back from repair since the firmware update in December killed my optical drive. But even the repair techs couldn't handle that and sent it back scratched. Now I have to make a 70 mile round trip run to an Apple store to get the parts they scratched replaced. A slick OS that requires me to install the other guys OS to get full use out of my hardware. I don't use the "multi-touch" features of the touchpad.
No, I own the software. I was never presented with a license agreement to sign at purchase of my iPhone or any of my iPods, nor was I ever presented with any sort of software license agreement during the activation process or following software updates.
On top of that, Apple sells the entire device. They don't sell the software and hardware independent of each other, and I can't use the hardware without the software. If Apple thinks an EULA applies to the software on the iPhone or iPod touch then they need to make it available in a manner that will allow me to use the hardware with alternative software. If I buy a Mac right now I never have to boot into OS X if I don't want to. But the iPhone and iPod touch are tied to the software. Therefore, I OWN the software.
That is one of the most ridiculous comparisons I've ever heard. A driver license is granted to someone who has proven they have met all legal requirements to be able to drive. Someone who has not but still drives a car can KILL. When you're driving, your own life as well as the lives of other passengers in your car as well as other people on and off the road are in your hands. If you don't know what you're doing you can end up killing every one of them.
Can you kill someone by not knowing how to use an iPod touch?
A software license is just an unenforceable attempt by the software developer trying to tell the BUYER how they can or cannot use the software product they just PURCHASED. Two totally different things.
On that note, don't bring up Psystar. What they were doing was modifying OS X and then selling it as their own product. Completely different than the breach of EULA people tried to make it out to be.
The rest of the post is not worth quoting, but just another typical Apple defender, missing the point that it is NOT Apple's place to tell people what they can or cannot do with the device they PURCHASED.
The commenter you're talking about had a well reasoned argument. It had nothing to do with a sense of entitlement. And, as noted later on, the poster is not a teen. You should take a moment to calm down before jumping to conclusions about someone you do not know. If anyone has some maturing to do, I suggest you look in the mirror.
Please stop trying so hard to sound witty, it's only coming across as the opposite.
Again with being critical about people you don't know. Well, I went to an American law school and I did pass the Bar, and I also believe that Apple is treading a dangerous path here. Microsoft has already gotten itself in trouble with anti-trust law, both in the US and abroad, and this type of censorship (that's what it is) may indeed be against the law. Also, please relax a little.
+1 That's why I went android. I love Apple's hardware and software, but I can't support these practices. Vote with your dollar.
+1, and congrats on the grad degree.
Sure - if you want to try running a ferrari on chip oil or moonshine you can.
Feel free to tinker all you like.
May not run properly but go ahead.
Really - go ahead. the world is full of competing tech and if you don't like a restricted control on what runs on what - then god speed, apple is not for you no more.
Better still - set up your own tech corp and make stuff we all want - that'll show em.
let me know when you are up and running.
Apple could solve all the problems with the app store by doing one thing.
Allow 3rd party app stores/ non approved apps to be installed.
If they did that then their would not be a issue with apple own app store being so limited. Apple app store would be apple approved apps only and they would take zero liability for any software from a non apple app store.
Allow 3rd party app stores/ non approved apps to be installed.
If they did that then their would not be a issue with apple own app store being so limited. Apple app store would be apple approved apps only and they would take zero liability for any software from a non apple app store.
Al long as the content itself is not illegal and it is properly labeled as Mature/Adult Content/18+ or whatever and can be blocked by a parent using parental controls then it should be allowed in the app store, either that or apple could open up for third party app stores or other ways of adding apps outside the app store without having to jailbreak
1) There is no requirement that a contract be signed to be enforceable (absent specific exceptions usually called the Statute of Frauds).
2) Software licenses are enforceable, and have repeatedly been held as such by courts throughout the USA.
3) even if there were no software license, you still wouldn't own the software. You would only own the copy, and you would only be entitled to do with it those things not prevented by Title 17 of the US Code.
Why? He is right... There are many developers that put lots of time into their applications. If Apple can tell people their application is "wrong" and decide not to put it into the App Store, they should not make the App Store the only place one can get Apps... Even still, I don't understand how blocking "offensive" apps is any different than blocking "offensive" songs or movies from the iTunes Store.Way to take things to the extreme.
Calm down and step away from the computer. It will be OK.
Apple could at least have an option to hide "distasteful" and lowly-rated apps.
Censorship sucks.
Oh by the way, I love your signature yg17! Although it should say "get" and not "buy" considering it is free.
That's what I'm talkin' about
I agree! Thank you Apple for maintaining some class in this environment where ignorance is glorified. I also wish apple would provide even a 2-4 hr trial period or maybe 4 free uses for apps before charging the customer.
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
I agree! Thank you Apple for maintaining some class in this environment where ignorance is glorified. I also wish apple would provide even a 2-4 hr trial period or maybe 4 free uses for apps before charging the customer.
Most Dogmatic Republican don't. Even when they look it up.
Now where is my porn, if for nothing else than to bother every sex scare Conservative, there I go, making the same mistake
Oh my flesh, think of the children, or is it more think of the adults naked flesh bad very bad.
Even apple can't make most parents smart.
Apple takes the simple road, censorship it and lets see who takes us to court over it. What I really don't get is why the top management even care about adult content.
I have to wonder how bad this will get in the next 10 years if more and more companies decide they want to lock in hardware like apple corp. Imagine a world where even the OS of desktops is made to behave like this on all types of platforms.
Love those straw man argument. I don't need to create or go to another provider to own someone hardware. But considering that its possible that in the future this apple style of business will be the dominate way to do business I wonder how your tune will be. Still for now I am sure someone will come up with Jailbreak for the apple maxipad where I will get the best of both worlds.
Not sure about the other person but sure, I want my iBoobs, what wrong with it, is naked flesh so scary to you
its ok it will not bite back unless you wanted it to, that extra money.Mom, dad, boss? Now when did these people start running your life? I think by the time your 18 your pretty much free to do what ever you want, just don't get caught, that the American model. Honey, sure I like lots of honey showing off their hardware on my iShake-it till you drop app.
Has the Supreme Court ruled on this?
For a contract to be enforceable, It has to be presented prior to money changing hands, agreed upon, and signed. No matter what some judges may have falsely ruled in the past. If someone tries to tell me I'm subject to a contract that was never presented to me prior to money changing hands, they're out of their mind and I will take it up to the Supreme Court. Theres no way any sane person would agree to a contract post purchase, and no right minded judge will uphold such a contract.
Imagine going to a car mechanic, getting the estimate, paying for the service, then after everything is done and you're ready to take your keys back, the mechanic says "by the way, you have to agree to these terms to be able to drive your car again…" and won't give you your keys back. You know how long that would stand up in court? Exactly.
Only in certain instances, like the Psystar case, and they were incorrectly upheld. In other instances, they haven't held up so well. Not too long ago Microsoft was told that EULA have to be made available prior to purchase, thanks to a woman suing Best Buy and Microsoft over EULAs.
I DO own the software. I can't modify it and sell it as my own, the way Psystar was doing. But I DO own that copy. And I can do with it what I please as long as I don't try to pass it off as my own creation, copy it illegally, or anything like that. No one is in any place to tell me what I can or cannot do with it as long as I don't try to pass it off as my own creation or modify it and sell it.
In the end, Apple canNOT tell me what I can or cannot do with my devices that I PURCHASED with MY money.
Maybe apple should introduce a second app store for mature content?
Oh hang on, they already HAVE one.
Looks like they need a store for IMMATURE content.
Can see the windows 7 tablet ads now:
"HP Tablet PC - It just wanks"
That is how warranties work though.
The machine is is yours, but if you break the conditions - and the machine - then the manufacturer has every right to ignore your complaints.
By only supplying apps through the store, they CAN tell you.
If you don't like it then go elsewhere or break the warranty.
In Britain we have a similar argument about television.
Everyone must buy a licence every year to fund the BBC.
There are loads of other channels that are ad supported, but you still need the licence even if you never watch the BBC.
This obviously upsets people, but you know what?
The results are usually better. Without having to pander to the advertisers, the overall quality is higher and there is less dumbing down to the lowest buck.
Plus you can watch a sports match uninterrupted, or see the intersting bits in boxing matches between the bouts.
Sometimes strict quality control is a good thing.
Monty python or Benny Hill?
I wonder how much of this decision was informed by the weight of applications from other juvenile appplications?
If this is the device jobs wants to change the world - he probably wants to sell it to actual grown ups instead of just adolescent gadget geeks (of all ages)
Have I downloaded any horny apps?
Yes.
Have I deleted them because I like handing my phone to colleagues and family to show them what the future looks like?
Yes.
Today is an excellent day to grow the heck up.
If this is the device jobs wants to change the world - he probably wants to sell it to actual grown ups instead of just adolescent gadget geeks (of all ages)
Have I downloaded any horny apps?
Yes.
Have I deleted them because I like handing my phone to colleagues and family to show them what the future looks like?
Yes.
Today is an excellent day to grow the heck up.
Wow, point one and your argument already left the rails. FWIW, I see the iPhone as a get-out-of-jail-free card and believe you should be able to disregard speed limits while carrying one. That doesn't mean that's what it is, mind you, but it comforts me to think so.
Apple sees it as a platform. Their platform. Their platform to deliver a well orchestrated user experience. Remember how much of a struggle it was to get them to even open up the APIs? Now people are shocked, shocked!, that Apple continues to exert control over their brand.
People complaining that they bought a open device with no expectation of restrictions simply didn't do their research before buying.
Yes, Apple exercised their prerogative to stop selling cheesy booby apps, but people focusing on what type of apps they chose are missing the point. This isn't about boobies. It's about whether Apple has the right to exercise control over their inventory and, independently I believe, whether they should be exercising that control.
I, for example, strongly believe they have the right to control what they sell. I'm conflicted on whether that's a good idea. Others seem to think there's some sort of Constitutional ban on free enterprise. Yet others think pruning these apps is a good idea. Very little of what I'm reading in this thread is specifically about boobies, and to the extent that people are discussing them it's essentially an orthogonal issue.
Again personally, I like boobies, I hate having the App Store littered with low quality boobies, and I'd rather go into the world and look at real wobbly boobies than CGI boobies but I don't think anyone is going to hell or going to grow up twisted because they look at boobies on their phone.
With that out of the way, can we get past the "if you don't agree with me, you're a communist prude" arguments?
I can only assume you meant those as independent clauses... While it is possible for them to be simultaneously true, I've seen plenty of evidence that one doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
Well stated. This is probably the most cleanly worded argument I've seen on the unlimited content side of this debate, and it has its merits.
Small issues first: they aren't censoring the users of iPhone, they're arguably censoring developers. Small difference in wording, but I think the implications are big.
Second, while Apple has gained a lot of success with this device, I think there will always be room for multiple devices. The way the world appears to be evolving, there are likely to be at least three camps-- whoever wins the RIM/MS contest will likely own the business users, Apple will probably own the general consumers, and Android will probably dominate among the more price conscious consumers and those with particularly free spirits. I'm not convinced that there will be a place for RIM/MS in the end, but whatever-- you see my point. There are going to be multiple providers, each catering to a different segment of the market. I tend to think the Android market will me much slower to reject content. It goes against their mindset. Apple's success will probably continue to grow, but they'll never be in a position to control what 100% of people see, and people will eventually start making decisions based on the whole experience.
Third, though largely related to the last point, is that people see some forms of quality control as a benefit. I really don't think Apple is at risk of losing a lot of their market share because people can't access the content we're discussing here. Given the choice between an App Store like we have now, and another provider offering an App Store without the crap, I'd probably choose the other provider. There are some limited tricks Apple could use such as tagging mature content, but frankly I'd rather use a store where I could keep mature content visible and not have to deal with the crap. On the flip side, when Blockbuster stopped offering certain titles or specially edited versions, because of their religious beliefs, I simply stopped going to their stores.
I tend to agree that there is value to society in exposing people to many different ideas, but the truth is that every business you can name exerts some control over their customer experience. People choose bars based on what's on the jukebox, and adding more variety would probably alienate the regulars. Plenty of businesses have more market share than iPhone and exert control over their inventory. Sometimes that's limiting and sometimes it's desirable.
So I don't think it's a conflict to believe in free speech and believe in the freedom to control your business. The point of the 1st Amendment, for example, isn't to insist that everyone has to have access to all forms of expression-- it is to prevent the repression of ideas by the Government. Capitalism has exactly the opposite goal-- the repression of ideas by the marketplace is seen as a natural competitive outcome. GM dealers aren't forced to sell horse-drawn carriages, even if there are Quakers out there who wish they would.
In the US, at least, I think the market will favor a more open App Store, but also favor one that exhibits some sanity in controlling content.
whats the obsession over seeing some boobies???
I'm quite sure that there will be at least a bit of beaching here [intentionally misspelled] regarding my response, I just had to voice my opinion about how people are so opposed to porn related stuff yet flood the internet, tv, music, everything in life with disgusting bingeing and getting drunk.
Personally, I would rather be exposed to a pair of boobies from time-to-time rather than to be constantly overloaded with alcohol app after app after app. It seems like every other iPhone app has something to do with alcoholic bingeing, trashy behavior and the high-quality life of the iFart apps, seeing this really drives home the fact of what americans are obsessed with which is truly a shame. I for one, believe that we need to focus less on an occasional tittie and spend more of that valuable time instilling some intelligence in society and get everyone to realize that there is so much more to life than "iDrink, iFart and iF--k.
Just by conducting a very quick [and unscientific] test search on iTunes, I found the following results:
alcohol apps - at least 250+ apps that show and push the use of alcohol [including: beer, wine, hard-liquor, etc]
boobie apps - at least 300+ apps that show graphic sexual materials and other inappropriate images.
= it is obvious that Apple's approval process is lacking in many ways, there is really no reason for that many disgusting apps be available without any kind of protective cover over them for those that do not want that crap shoved down their throats each & every time they visit the iTunes store. I have decided to flag & report as many of the offensive apps as I can over the next few months, Apple really should have already had these kinds of offensive materials covered up such as an entry-page like: "My age is ____ and I do wish to continue on viewing this material" beyond the welcome page, otherwise, you can close the offensive pages without viewing something that would have upset you.
That way, everybody is happy and no one needs to be offended by indecent materials being thrown at them page after page. It is definitely a right of passage and well respected in america to drink to excess, yet sexual addiction is frowned upon. Just does not make any sense...
----------------------
I'm quite sure that there will be at least a bit of beaching here [intentionally misspelled] regarding my response, I just had to voice my opinion about how people are so opposed to porn related stuff yet flood the internet, tv, music, everything in life with disgusting bingeing and getting drunk.
Personally, I would rather be exposed to a pair of boobies from time-to-time rather than to be constantly overloaded with alcohol app after app after app. It seems like every other iPhone app has something to do with alcoholic bingeing, trashy behavior and the high-quality life of the iFart apps, seeing this really drives home the fact of what americans are obsessed with which is truly a shame. I for one, believe that we need to focus less on an occasional tittie and spend more of that valuable time instilling some intelligence in society and get everyone to realize that there is so much more to life than "iDrink, iFart and iF--k.
Just by conducting a very quick [and unscientific] test search on iTunes, I found the following results:
alcohol apps - at least 250+ apps that show and push the use of alcohol [including: beer, wine, hard-liquor, etc]
boobie apps - at least 300+ apps that show graphic sexual materials and other inappropriate images.
= it is obvious that Apple's approval process is lacking in many ways, there is really no reason for that many disgusting apps be available without any kind of protective cover over them for those that do not want that crap shoved down their throats each & every time they visit the iTunes store. I have decided to flag & report as many of the offensive apps as I can over the next few months, Apple really should have already had these kinds of offensive materials covered up such as an entry-page like: "My age is ____ and I do wish to continue on viewing this material" beyond the welcome page, otherwise, you can close the offensive pages without viewing something that would have upset you.
That way, everybody is happy and no one needs to be offended by indecent materials being thrown at them page after page. It is definitely a right of passage and well respected in america to drink to excess, yet sexual addiction is frowned upon. Just does not make any sense...
----------------------
So you didn't get what I said.
Basically, nobody can have you pay for a service or product and then, after money has changed hands, say "oh, well, by the way…". No, sorry, things don't work that way.
No, they can't. And, with time, they're going to learn the hard way. Because more and more competitors are going to make equal devices and sell them on the platform that they don't restrict what you do with YOUR device.
Too bad Apple and quality don't go hand in hand. People just like to believe that because they generally end up paying 2-3x more than a product should have cost. Just like the current MacBook "Pro" line and every single one of the iMacs all costing about 3x more than they should cost.
And as others have pointed out, this is a huge double standard on Apple's part. Somehow the human body is evil, but overly violent videogames and movies sold on iTunes are okay? What about all of the R rated films Apple sells on iTunes that include nudity? Right now on the iTunes store, the movie "Genius" recommendations for me include American Gangster and The Devil's Advocate. Two movies that do include full frontal female nudity. 300 is 44 on the top seller list. That movie includes nudity and sex. Braveheart is 99. A movie that includes male and female nudity as well as graphic violence. Fight Club is on the list. Another movie that shows sex, male and female nudity, as well as graphic violence. Rambo is on the list. Another movie with extreme graphic violence. A movie which happens to show women and children getting killed. American Pie Presents: Beta House, a movie thats basically all about nudity is on that list as well.
I could go on all night pointing out movies that show graphic violence, nudity, and sex. And every single one would be a movie for sale or rent on iTunes
Why does Apple get to control what people can buy? It is "their" store, but why not let the customers make the choice? As I said before, make "adult" content available only to verified adults. As for everything else below that, its the parents JOB to monitor what their children are doing and raise them properly. It's time for parents to step up and raise their children and not depend on the world to do their job for them.
It's also not right for Apple to just pull apps like this. As others have pointed out, people have essentially lost their income because of this. It's not Apple's place to decide who, outside of their company, loses their job and who doesn't. Just because some immature parent can't raise their child right and complained about something they saw and could have hidden from view anyway if they were doing their job as a parent to begin with.