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 Rejects eBook App Over Access to Kama Sutra
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ah, the first Apple Apologist response. Just as you are getting sick of reading developers complaining about their rejected apps, don't you think people are a bit sick of the "the Apple approval process is not flawless" response? Why not just fix it already and you won't have to actively make the decision to click and read such threads.
I bet once iPhone 3.0 ships these types of apps will get approval as iPhone 3.0 has parental controls built in. Apple is only trying to cover their arse. These days any one and everyone is looking for a stupid reason to sue Apple.
What does this have to do with the Mac? As far as the Mac goes, its extremely open. Apple doesn't control what you do and don't do with your Mac or the OS. Don't confuse the iPhone OS and Mac OS X. Two different animals.
What does this have to do with the Mac? As far as the Mac goes, its extremely open. Apple doesn't control what you do and don't do with your Mac or the OS. Don't confuse the iPhone OS and Mac OS X. Two different animals.
As a fellow developer, all I can say is this: Good for James! This kind of rejection is like winning the publicity lottery. 
It's the Internet Stupid
Doesn't Steve Jobs have a bastard child himself that he ignored and didn't support for like over a decade?
Kinda both ironic & funny, when ya think about it, the content craziness on iPhone apps.
It's the internet stupid.
Why should a device block it ???
That's what PARENTS are FOR!
PS: I hope i don't get banned again by MacRumors for this post.
Doesn't Steve Jobs have a bastard child himself that he ignored and didn't support for like over a decade?
Kinda both ironic & funny, when ya think about it, the content craziness on iPhone apps.
It's the internet stupid.
Why should a device block it ???
That's what PARENTS are FOR!
PS: I hope i don't get banned again by MacRumors for this post.
Among other songs...If the Kama Sutra is banned, then the Song of Solomon should be banned too.
Interesting perspective.As a fellow developer, all I can say is this: Good for James! This kind of rejection is like winning the publicity lottery.
Mr Montgomerie just needs to take a page out of the Trent Reznor playbook and write another post flippin' cursing and s**t. I'm sure apple will then have a change of heart.
Anyone on Twitter want to start some noise about this, get Apple's attention? I think this is stunningly idiotic behavior on Apple's part, especially considering how tame the Kama Sutra is by today's standards. And you know, since I can access porn via Safari, shouldn't Apple ban Safari too? Isn't that pretty much the same as what this app is doing, giving access to third-party content?
I just posted a link to the story with the #applepornfail hash tag on Twitter. Anyone else game? Spread the word.
I just posted a link to the story with the #applepornfail hash tag on Twitter. Anyone else game? Spread the word.
Why the xenophobia, Apple?
We all knew they lacked the confidence in OSX to release it into the wild (general PC hardware wild, that is).
But who knew that they're also lacking confidence in the common sense of their customers (iPhone users)?!
That's a serious trust issue there Apple!
Considering the strong popularity of the iPhone, I don't see why they don't they just acknowledge in their user agreement that they can't control the content that users may encounter during normal use of their products.
Are they REALLY that afraid that some idiot user is going to sue them for content they neither created nor can control?
I mean, if anyone clues them in that the internet has porn, will they stop bundling Safari with their OSs?
Why is Apple so xenophobic!?
We all knew they lacked the confidence in OSX to release it into the wild (general PC hardware wild, that is).
But who knew that they're also lacking confidence in the common sense of their customers (iPhone users)?!
That's a serious trust issue there Apple!
Considering the strong popularity of the iPhone, I don't see why they don't they just acknowledge in their user agreement that they can't control the content that users may encounter during normal use of their products.
Are they REALLY that afraid that some idiot user is going to sue them for content they neither created nor can control?
I mean, if anyone clues them in that the internet has porn, will they stop bundling Safari with their OSs?
Why is Apple so xenophobic!?
PS: I hope i don't get banned again by MacRumors for this post.
Censoring for an opposing view or for content they don't like?
Is that an Apple trend MacRumors is trying to emulate?
I seriously hope not!
I object to the racism, incest, murder, rape, slavery, violence, and mysogyny in the Bible so Apple should not approve any app that accesses the Bible. To whom at Apple should I direct my outrage?
No kidding, I'm with you. I thought they were going to stop doing this. iGirl is ok but the Karma Sutra is not? What the hell?
I believe this comes back to the same argument that Metallica and numerous other App makers have made ... iPhone users can access any of this using the Safari browser. All this is is simply an piece of software that allows them to access it slighly more efficiently than using Safari. The people will have access to the content one way or another. Why hinder efficiency by forcing them to use Safari ?
LOL, most likely another example of the increasing religious idiocy taking over the country....
But then, didn't naked Eve make Adam bite into the forbidden fruit, which many think was an Apple...
But then, didn't naked Eve make Adam bite into the forbidden fruit, which many think was an Apple...
What would be your natural response if you'd worked hard during your time off work, wrote an app that you thought would generate some revenue, and to have Apple say, "too bad, sucks for you"? I'm sure you'd be pretty pissed, and would want to bitch about it.
LOL, most likely another example of the increasing religious idiocy taking over the country....
But then, didn't naked Eve make Adam bite into the forbidden fruit, which many think was an Apple...
I agree. You would think that apple is being run by Pat Robertson. The parental controls on 3.0 are essentially broken because of this. How do you slap a mature rating on a book reading app? It's amazing how the app store rewards violence and censors a natural biological function. Not only that but this book is a classic and is hundreds of years old.
So I guess naked Greek statues and Renaissance artwork of bare-chested women deserve a mature rating? This is censorship at it's worst. Why doesn't apple just sponsor a bill in Congress to burn books!
This app store process is such garbage. How do they let Baby Shaker though and say no to a book app? This is so much worse because it is potentially the best book reading app now. How many gun apps are there on the store?
... seriously though, here's what I think is wrong with the app store submission process: It's not that Apple is xenophobic, ivory-tower, or otherwise stupid. They just lack staff, they've always lacked staff, and they're in constant damage control mode. So they never get around to both establish and check effectively for compliance with any kind of reasonable standard with regard to these non-technical issues. (They tend to be very good at finding bugs and pointing you towards interface guidelines violations.)
So if the engineer who's reviewing your app doesn't like it, you have a problem. If only you had submitted it six hours later, you'd be selling it by now.
So if the engineer who's reviewing your app doesn't like it, you have a problem. If only you had submitted it six hours later, you'd be selling it by now.
Not to mention they perpetuate mental illness by encouraging people over 5 to have an imaginary friend.
Wise | Respectful of the Rights of Parents and Children
Apple is prudent to reject this app. This holds true even though the same material can be accessed via other means through the iPod Touch and iPhone.
By approving this app without providing parents a means of protecting their children (i.e. the ability to block access to this kind of content), Apple would have been taking a position that both erodes parental rights and exposes children to sexually inappropriate material.
Thank you, Apple, for being respectful of the rights and responsibilities of parents, and the right of children not to be exposed to age-inappropriate sexual material.
I applaud your decision!
Apple is prudent to reject this app. This holds true even though the same material can be accessed via other means through the iPod Touch and iPhone.
By approving this app without providing parents a means of protecting their children (i.e. the ability to block access to this kind of content), Apple would have been taking a position that both erodes parental rights and exposes children to sexually inappropriate material.
Thank you, Apple, for being respectful of the rights and responsibilities of parents, and the right of children not to be exposed to age-inappropriate sexual material.
I applaud your decision!
If this is true for you, then they should block all access to any type of literature. The fact of the matter is, if a kid has access to the internet or say even a library, they will have access to anything with explicit reference, gore, and violence. Saying that they should block all The Bible apps is lunacy, it is the #1 Best Seller of all time.