Apple Says It Doesn't Approve of EU Porn App

[I7guy]

They are in favor of folks deciding for themselves what to do with their devices and how to live their lives

I'm a promoter of that sort of freedom as well

That’s illogical. The purchase of a consumer device whether or not it’s regulated or not regulated comes with restrictions. You can’t magically handwave those away. And if you don’t like thee restrictions I guess there are two options:
1. Petition the government to regulate the device or,
2. Buy the device that suits you best.

 

[Anaxarxes]

It's hardly unconstitutional since Apple is not the US Government.

Unconstitutionality is not only practicable by US Govt.

 

[Anaxarxes]

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? People choose a device and then decide they want the manufacturer to cater to their desires? They can do whatever they want, just don't expect Apple to do it for them. A si pointed out on MR, you can already side load on any iPhone, for example.

I realize the "No one is forced to buy an iPhone" is an unpopular stance but it is a true statement.

People should not depend on a company to control their exposure to certain content. Organizations should provide tools that allow users to personalize their content experience, rather than imposing broad restrictions or limiting access across their entire platform.

 

[harmonthe3rd]

Apple, this statement is not needed

If anything you're bringing more attention to the porn app and third party marketplaces that allow users more freedom on how they use their iOS devices

The statement is definitely needed. I think people tend to forget that companies are increasing being held liable for how their consumers use their products. The device is the users to do as they wish, the software isn't. For the extreme end of the argument, US car average a top speed of 120mph or more. You have the freedom to speed as much as you want. There are consequences if you do and you shouldn't, but you have the freedom to do so. For Apple, branding and image is everything. Anything that diminishes either needs to be addressed with the highest of priority. The iPhones success can directly be attributed to the creation of the App Store to allow third party developers to create apps they believe consumers will purchase. If any you download steals all your financial information, the first place you are going to directed you anger, frustration and any possible lawsuit is Apple, then the developer. That is simply because you have an expectation for Apple to not "allow" such an app in "their" App Store. Agree or disagree with Apples' statement, you can't deny that the iPhone wouldn't be what it is without the App Store.

 

[Anaxarxes]

kinda sad to see riley and gang promoting pornography.

It's much more than that—this is about the mass censorship of a specific type of content.

You can dislike or even despise pornography, and you have every right to hold that opinion. But at the end of the day, it remains just that—an opinion. No one’s personal beliefs or opinions should have the power to override someone else’s.

 

[surferfb]

Unconstitutionality is not only practicable by US Govt.

Literally, the first amendment only applies to the government.

You can dislike or even despise pornography, and you have every right to hold that opinion. But at the end of the day, it remains just that—an opinion. No one’s personal beliefs or opinions should have the power to override someone else’s.

Glad we agree that some users' personal desire to have a porn app should not override Apple's desire to not offer porn apps on the platform it owns. As you said, no one's personal beliefs or opinions should have the power to override someone else's.

 

[Flocke]

lol, its so funny to read these comments. It’s just a porn app, it’s like using safari to search for some naughty stuff, and everyone gets crazy. Girls and boys and every other gender, chill and watch more porn =) greetings from EU

 

[mentaluproar]

I don’t understand why porn needs its own app.

 

[thebarrkbyte]

It's much more than that—this is about the mass censorship of a specific type of content.

You can dislike or even despise pornography, and you have every right to hold that opinion. But at the end of the day, it remains just that—an opinion. No one’s personal beliefs or opinions should have the power to override someone else’s.

open up your browser. type porn. where is the censorship? please explain where it is.

 

[jlc1978]

Literally, the first amendment only applies to the government.

Exactly, it is a limit on government actions.

Glad we agree that some users' personal desire to have a porn app should not override Apple's desire to not offer porn apps on the platform it owns. As you said, no one's personal beliefs or opinions should have the power to override someone else's.

That point is what many overlook in the argument. Well said.

Apple, as a company, is free to decide what goes into their App Store, without governmental interference. If users don't like Apple's choices, they are free to go to Android.

To the 1st Amendment argument, part of taht is not being forced by the government to speak as well.

 

[Anaxarxes]

Literally, the first amendment only applies to the government.


Glad we agree that some users' personal desire to have a porn app should not override Apple's desire to not offer porn apps on the platform it owns. As you said, no one's personal beliefs or opinions should have the power to override someone else's.

Apple operates globally and wants to avoid legal issues, it takes a conservative approach, choosing to ban adult content outright rather than risk hosting material that could be deemed obscene in certain jurisdictions (U.S. obscenity laws). However, this is a corporate decision, not a legal obligation, since mainstream pornography is protected under U.S. free speech laws.

The key issue in this discussion is that Apple’s ban is a form of corporate censorship, not government enforcement. They are within their rights to curate their platform, but this decision limits individual choice, despite the fact that users can still access the same content through browsers or alternative app stores. So while obscenity laws set legal boundaries, Apple’s stance goes beyond them by enforcing a private, moral-based restriction rather than a strictly legal one.

 

[KevinN206]

Not if you actually take the time to set up child protection on the device. Protection that Apple can enforce in Safari or their App Store. But not in third party app stores or browsers. And this is exactly the point here!!!



If a kid starts driving a car then they are quickly arested. So there is an (external) protection here. Exactly what Apple wants in their devices.

iOS also allows you to setup Screen Time to block third-party apps from getting installed. Maybe Apple should think of the children more by offering a "Kids Mode" or "Guest Mode" like Android does. I can give my OnePlus 13 phone to another person in Kids Mode, and everything gets locked down until it's explicitly exited.

 

[Anaxarxes]

open up your browser. type porn. where is the censorship? please explain where it is.

THat's exactly what I've been telling just two posts above. Censorship is within a software marketplace.

 

[thebarrkbyte]

They are in favor of folks deciding for themselves what to do with their devices and how to live their lives

I'm a promoter of that sort of freedom as well

open browser. type porn. make decision for yourself.

 

[turbineseaplane]

open browser. type porn. make decision for yourself.

Same with ... "want some kind of non Apple approved App, go install 3rd party App Store"

Agreed

Freedom to do what I want with my phone, Apple objections and moral priorities aside

They made the phone and sold it to me .. they should not be getting to decide what's "ok" for "me" to do on "my phone"

 

[surferfb]

Apple operates globally and wants to avoid legal issues, it takes a conservative approach, choosing to ban adult content outright rather than risk hosting material that could be deemed obscene in certain jurisdictions (U.S. obscenity laws). However, this is a corporate decision, not a legal obligation, since mainstream pornography is protected under U.S. free speech laws.

The key issue in this discussion is that Apple’s ban is a form of corporate censorship, not government enforcement. They are within their rights to curate their platform, but this decision limits individual choice, despite the fact that users can still access the same content through browsers or alternative app stores. So while obscenity laws set legal boundaries, Apple’s stance goes beyond them by enforcing a private, moral-based restriction rather than a strictly legal one.

Agree 100% But I'd argue it absolutely should be Apple's right to decide what is or is not offered on its platform absent a compelling reason for the government to intervene. And, in the EU, "the platform with 25% market share isn't open" is not a compelling reason when the platform with 75% market share is open to alternate app stores and side loading.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Anyhow -- enjoy the discussion everyone - I said all I have on this topic yesterday, so I'm bowing out

Cheers

 

[thebarrkbyte]

Same with ... "want some kind of non Apple approved App, go install 3rd party App Store"

Agreed

Freedom to do what I want with my phone, Apple objections and moral priorities aside

They made the phone and sold it to me .. they should not be getting to decide what's "ok" for "me" to do on "my phone"

you have not been blocked from porn. having an app changes nothing. i am watching porn on my phone right now to prove a point. i dont need an app. its a middle finger to apple and thats all it is.

 

[thebarrkbyte]

THat's exactly what I've been telling just two posts above. Censorship is within a software marketplace.

i am on an adult website on my iphone 16 pm right now. i am watching a video just fine with no apple censorship. but if you need a porn app in a third party app store to feel good, then i guess some people will rally around any petty small winded idea

 

[Anaxarxes]

Agree 100% But I'd argue it absolutely should be Apple's right to decide what is or is not offered on its platform absent a compelling reason for the government to intervene. And, in the EU, "the platform with 25% market share isn't open" is not a compelling reason when the platform with 75% market share is open to alternate app stores and side loading.

I agree that Apple can legally defend its decision to restrict content within its own App Store, but this defense only holds if they allow other app stores on their platform that permit such content. Browser access is a given, but the real issue is app-based access within Apple’s ecosystem.

Monopoly status doesn’t just come from having the majority market share—it also depends on market control and restrictions. If Apple devices freely and openly ran Android, this wouldn’t be an issue in the EU. But because Apple has a significant market share, a locked ecosystem, and only allows its own marketplace, it fits the definition of a monopoly.

Think of Tesla: If they created a proprietary charger, restricted energy companies from selling electricity through it, and made their cars incompatible with all other charging stations, that would be monopolistic. However, in reality, Tesla reserves the Supercharger network for its cars but still allows other brands to use it (albeit with limitations), and Tesla vehicles remain compatible with third-party charging networks like Shell, BP, etc.

Apple, by contrast, has built an ecosystem where alternative app stores were previously blocked entirely, which is why the EU had to intervene. If Apple wants to maintain its walled garden, they can—but they must also allow other storefronts where different content policies apply. And eep their App Store policies as they wish.

 

[Anaxarxes]

i am on an adult website on my iphone 16 pm right now. i am watching a video just fine with no apple censorship. but if you need a porn app in a third party app store to feel good, then i guess some people will rally around any petty small winded idea

Yep - we established the browser access is there mate.

What we need to establish as well is the fact that Apple blocks certain content on their App store. This only is legal is they allow other marketplaces that would want to allow that. All that apple needs to do is to establish parental and content limitations that can block it and set everything free all content stores should have.

it's about who is doing the restriction. The user or the company on entirely on their ecosystem

 

[ProbablyDylan]

I can't believe how interested people are in how other people use their phones.

Let the people have dedicated porn software if they want dedicated porn software and stop clutching your pearls.

 

[millarj]

Do they approve of people typing in adult site URLs on Safari?

Nope, but then those adult sites don't say "Apple Approved" either. Or so I've heard.

 

[surferfb]

I agree that Apple can legally defend its decision to restrict content within its own App Store, but this defense only holds if they allow other app stores on their platform that permit such content. Browser access is a given, but the real issue is app-based access within Apple’s ecosystem.

Monopoly status doesn’t just come from having the majority market share—it also depends on market control and restrictions. If Apple devices freely and openly ran Android, this wouldn’t be an issue in the EU. But because Apple has a significant market share, a locked ecosystem, and only allows its own marketplace, it fits the definition of a monopoly.

No it's not a monopoly any more than McDonalds is a monopoly because it's the only place you can get a Big Mac. Other phones exist, other platforms exist. You can't keep saying "Apple is a monopoly" just because you want it to be true or you personally wouldn't consider using Android. Monopoly has a legal definition that iOS and Apple doesn't meet.

And, by the way, Apple doesn't prevent you from jailbreaking and side loading to your heart's content. They don't have to make it easy for you, or help you do it but they're not stopping you.

Think of Tesla: If they created a proprietary charger, restricted energy companies from selling electricity through it, and made their cars incompatible with all other charging stations, that would be monopolistic. However, in reality, Tesla reserves the Supercharger network for its cars but still allows other brands to use it (albeit with limitations), and Tesla vehicles remain compatible with third-party charging networks like Shell, BP, etc.

No, the hypothetical you described is not monopolistic. It's product differentiation. Again, words have meaning.

Apple, by contrast, has built an ecosystem where alternative app stores were previously blocked entirely, which is why the EU had to intervene. If Apple wants to maintain its walled garden, they can—but they must also allow other storefronts where different content policies apply. And eep their App Store policies as they wish.

Again, Android exists. The government coming in and saying "you're not allowed to offer a closed product - you have to give your IP to those who want to use it even if you don't want them to" is government overreach - picking the business model they want over those who prefer a different one.

 

[collin_]

This whole post reads like a psyop. 😭 Not suggesting that it actually is, but "the world’s 1st Apple-approved porn app!" seems almost too bold and egregious to be real.

Aside from that part, Apple comes off a bit melodramatic here. "We are deeply concerned about the safety risks [...]". Okay... Well, you do offer a browser. We're not operating heavy machinery or anything.