Apple Says It Doesn't Approve of EU Porn App

[surferfb]

Not this nonsense again. There are no "property rights" implicated in forbidding Apple from lockdown consumer devices.

Not nonsense. How exactly are these developers’ apps running on iOS without using Apple’s intellectual property?

They have not changed any "terms" under which people bought iOS devices. They created laws to expand user freedom.

Yes they have. I bought into a walled garden, and the EU has blown it open. And they created laws to give freebies to greedy developers and Apple’s competitors, not expand user freedom. That’s just what they say to get those not paying attention to support their theft.

 

[surferfb]

It would kill the Mac if they tried to only distribute through the MAS

Among MacRumors forums posters, absolutely. Among the general public, maybe, maybe not. I’m less convinced than you are. But as I said, I know I’m in the minority on being ok with the iOS model being put on Mac, and we both know it’s not going to happen, so it’s just a hypothetical.

They know this based upon all the exceptions they had to create for existing Mac software and concepts

Yes, given the Mac predates the internet, let alone software being easily and readily available on the internet, different rules are in place - it’s harder to take things away than to not give them in the first place. But I think everyone understands that if we were starting from scratch today, the “install software from anywhere without checks” would not be the default operating model - and not because Apple is greedy, but because it’s unsafe for most consumers.

At some point people want a computer that lets them do what they want and need, not just an Apple Revenue Generation Appliance

No arguments here. But again, that is for the market to decide, not the government. If Apple wants to shoot itself in the foot, it should be able to.

And I’d point out, the market has decided that model works wonderfully for iOS, so again I’m not sold it wouldn’t work out fine for Mac.

 

[turbineseaplane]

dupe

 

[turbineseaplane]

And I’d point out, the market has decided that model works wonderfully for iOS

It mostly works for iOS because there are Macs & PCs to get all the "other stuff" done

Like making all the things people do on iOS devices

They tried MAS and it just doesn't work due to all the different types of things people want and need to do from a software & hardware and connectivity perspective and at times deep access and driver/extensions too

Apple already backed away from this and settled on a good middle ground of sand boxing and notarization

It's a good compromise

 

[surferfb]

It only works for iOS because people have Macs & PCs to get all the "other stuff" done

Like making all the things people do on iOS devices

To be clear, I don’t think it’d be a good idea. But I also am vehemently opposed to the government telling a company they can’t do something except in very limited circumstances. And “I don’t want to use Android/Windows despite the fact that they do what I want” is not one of those limited circumstances. If Apple had 75-80% of the market, my opinions on that would change.

It’s a philosophical thing. Which is why me going back and forth arguing about this is really a waste of everyone’s time, but as I mentioned in the other thread, we recently cut all our streaming services, so I have to have something to do after the kid goes to bed 😂

 

[Melab]

Not nonsense. How exactly are these developers’ apps running on iOS without using Apple’s intellectual property?

Now what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

It has evetything to do with Apple's actions, not their IP.

Yes they have. I bought into a walled garden, and the EU has blown it open.

No, that's just your politically disagreeing with it.

And they created laws to give freebies to greedy developers and Apple’s competitors

That's a side effect.

not expand user freedom.

Well, it accomplishes the goal of expanding user freedom, so right thing, wrong reason.

That’s just what they say to get those not paying attention to support their theft.

"Theft", my ass. Nothing has been taken.

 

[Melab]

But I also am vehemently opposed to the government telling a company they can’t do something except in very limited circumstances.

No, you're not. You are fine with all sorts of rules telking businesses what they can abd can't do.

 

[laptech]

…which was sufficient for Apple to approve it for distribution in third-party stores.
Simple as that. They even called it “approved” themselves (though they may not approve of it).


Mental gymnastics.
If you “own” a term by defining it yourself at length how it suits you, anything an be “proven” or disproven.

Nobody has been able to provide evidence of where Apple states an app passing notarization means it is 'approved'. So until they can everyone that say's Apple approved the app is wrong.

 

[onlykingjoe]

everything the EU does is so annoying

What like forcing Apple to use USBc? And allowing adults to install whatever app they like on their iPhones?

How the heck is it "annoying" that EU forced more consumer freedoms onto Apple?

 

[onlykingjoe]

As a European citizen, this Porn app or the whole AltStore debacle makes me so sad. They sold us freedom of choice, but all we got is a crappy new store with a porn app and a game emulator. Is this the best developers can do when the walled garden is torn down? Don’t make me laugh.

Please, EU, give me a real choice. The choice to keep everything the way it was! Nobody is using it. Give it two years, and it will be completely dead.

You do have the choice to keep everything the way it was... but not opening the Alt Store.

And others have the choice to use the AltStore

Everyone has a choice now, thanks to this rule.

 

[onlykingjoe]

This sentence says it all. Because that's blatently not true.

It's true though... unless less you are being intentionally difficult by being OVER literal? If you are being literal, then there is something wrong with absolutely every single thing on this planet.

But if you are serious, then I defend his sentence. What is wrong with porn?

Addiction? Because I can say the same for pain killers
Trafficking / underage issues? This is a humanity issue, not a porn issue. It happens regardless.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Nobody has been able to provide evidence of where Apple states an app passing notarization means it is 'approved'

You may have missed that Apple literally stated so themselves:

I also thank you for providing the evidence yourself:

Notarization is a subset of these guidelines. They are a specific set of checks that must be passed before the app can move onto the next step in the review process. (…)
This subset of guidelines includes 5 checks https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#notarization-for-ios-apps

Exactly: There are a specific set of checks that must be passed in order to be approved.
If the checks are not successfully passed, approval for distribution will be denied.

That’s what “Approval” in the English language means: “to officially agree to or accept as satisfactory”

👉 Apple carried out the specific set of checks to their satisfaction and consequently approved the app for distribution.


Of course that doesn’t mean that Apple “likes”, “supports” or “approves of” the type of content served in that app.
But they nonetheless approved the app - according to the set of checks required for approval.

You may be of the opinion that the word “approved” is misunderstandable and could argue that AltStore used it for that very reason in their communication. But that doesn’t mean the word should be narrowly “redefined” its meaning just to fit yours (and Apple’s) argument and narrative.

 

[Rainbow Apple]

If Apple had 75-80% of the market, my opinions on that would change.

I'll agree that the closer a business is to a monopoly, the less leniency it should be granted.

It’s a dystopia when people (locals in the Apple “neighbourhood” or town) are forced to shop at Walmart and unable to shop anywhere else. And you’re dismissive by telling them to just “move somewhere else if you don’t like it”. Especially when there aren’t many other places to move to, let alone other supermarket chains to shop at (it’s a duopoly).

An excellent point! Yes, the walled garden system of iOS reminds me of a company town.

There is the argument that there are benefits to that walled garden (most notably, security benefits). However, after Apple banned the RT (a major international news network) and Gab (a social media network) apps for political reasons: I stopped giving Apple the benefit of the doubt over this walled garden! That's why I support this new EU rule as much as I do.

I bought into a walled garden, and the EU has blown it open.

Now I'm curious: What benefits did the iOS walled garden system give you? Let's put aside weather the EU's right to blow the garden open for a minute; I want to know why you personally prefer a walled garden.

 

[Anaxarxes]

You wrote the whole novel but didn’t respond to the direct question that was asked in the start of the post. Nice dodging.
I’ll ask again.

So whose call it would be about what’s allowed on App Store and what’s not.

I can suggest some possibilities for you.

a) a government entity
b) Apple
c) majority vote of iOS users
d) United Nation’s General Assembly
e) a cocktail of above four

Actually the novel started with answering the question - but maybe it should have been clearer for the average reader.

The answer if f) a new entity in the US system that is:

• Independent, non-partisan.
• Overseeing digital rights, content access, platform neutrality, and corporate influence over speech.
• Enforces laws against monopolistic control over digital ecosystems
• Ensures user rights to access information while balancing national security, privacy, and corporate interests.
• Has regulatory powers like the FTC but focuses exclusively on digital platforms, software ecosystems, and user rights.
• Works alongside Congress to propose legislation that ensures corporate digital policies don’t infringe on users' rights.

 

[Anaxarxes]

But Apple DOES NOT completely block access to legal content. There are plenty of alternative ways to access it within the platform. Safari, web apps, jailbroken apps, etc. They are just saying "we don't want to support an app that's sole intent and purpose is providing pornography". Hell, they allow the Onion browser on iOS, which provides access to a whole host of illegal content.

Again, they aren't blocking you from doing anything - they're just not making it easy for you. Which is their right, because iOS is their property.

The key issue here is the delivery of software and the legitimacy of how it's installed. The fact that jailbreaking is possible doesn’t serve as a legal defense for Apple, as they explicitly condemn the practice and refuse to support jailbroken devices.

Likewise, web apps and Safari are not true alternatives—they don’t offer the same seamless experience as native apps.

In short:​

Option 1: Stop blocking legal content under the guise of moral superiority for marketing purposes. Instead, provide enhanced parental controls so guardians can manage what they/their children access.

Option 2: Maintain current App Store restrictions, but allow alternative App Stores with the freedom to set their own content policies.

 

[AppliedMicro]

What benefits did the iOS walled garden system give you? Let's put aside weather the EU's right to blow the garden open for a minute; I want to know why you personally prefer a walled garden.

Simplicity.
Security.
Safety. Giving up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety.

I mean, having a single App Store that reviews apps is undeniably relatively simple and safe (certainly if you don’t want to spend your time doing due diligence on every app you download and install).

 

[Abazigal]

Now I'm curious: What benefits did the iOS walled garden system give you? Let's put aside weather the EU's right to blow the garden open for a minute; I want to know why you personally prefer a walled garden.

I am not the poster you quoted, but I would like to share what I like about Apple's walled garden approach. These are not new points for those who have been following me for a while, but I am willing to take the time to retype them for those willing to listen.

In summary, the walled garden gives Apple leverage over developers and suppliers, which in turn allows Apple to push through measures and initiatives that are generally to my best vested interests as an iOS user. Maybe that makes me selfish, but at least I am willing to be honest and upfront about it.

Here's a few.

1) Remember back when smartphones were largely bought on 2-year contracts via carriers and customers often complained about the lack of updates and the plethora of carrier bloatware (often unremovable) that came with android smartphones? Meanwhile, iPhones had none of these issues, and it comes, first and foremost, from the leverage that Apple had over carriers and the inability of the carriers to sideload their own apps onto iOS devices.

2) I believe that one of the key reasons why apps tend to be more profitable on iOS compared to android is because it's so much harder to pirate apps on iOS. You want an app on your iPhone or iPad, the fastest and most convenient way is to simply just pay for it. This results in a virtuous cycle where more money incentivises developers to code for iOS first or exclusively.

Most recently-released app I am currently eyeing - https://usetapestry.com/

No android version. So much for being "open".

3) Malware is a common sticking point on the Google Play Store. My bank actually updated their banking app to not work if it detects side loaded apps on an android device.

OCBC’s new anti-scam measure upsets some users; bank clarifies only apps with risky permission settings flagged

The bank's new security feature prevents users from logging onto their Internet banking and OCBC Digital app on their phone if it detects potentially risky apps downloaded from unofficial portals.

www.channelnewsasia.com

Android users in Singapore tried to install unverified apps nearly 900,000 times in past 6 months

These attempts were blocked by an enhanced security feature that was rolled out by Google in February, amid a spike in malware-enabled scams.

www.channelnewsasia.com

4) And let's not forget the most infamous example of them all.

What is your opinion on Epic Games' idea to sideload Fortnite instead of downloading it directly from the Play Store on Android?

Answer (1 of 3): I think it is pure greed. Sideloading comes with many risks, especially if their user base is largely comprised of children. All it takes is the wrong APK file, and suddenly some kid’s phone is under some control by a hacker. Yes, Google does take a 30% cut out of profits, but Ep...

www.quora.com

I can acknowledge that there are downsides in a curated App Store where certain categories of apps are simply flat out unavailable to me, and I just don't care that I can't download porn or gambling or even vaping-related apps. Heck, I haven't even downloaded an emulator since they became viable.

Thing is - I see this as a package deal. The iOS App Store does not give me enough rope to hang myself with, and these are the downsides I willingly accept in exchange for the benefits which matter even more to me. They are inexorably linked, and one does not exist without the other (the "there is good in bad, and bad in good" adage). The issue I have with a lot of the criticism surrounding the walled garden is that they seem to believe that they can have their cake and eat it too. That Apple can somehow open up and let users reap the benefits of having a more open ecosystem, while having absolutely zero downsides.

Which is ironic, because Android exists, we see the problems that come with an open platform, and I guess people just refuse to learn from history.

 

[arcite]

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

Whataminute.

Theres PORN….on the in-ter-net?

When did this happen?

 

[Melab]

And I’d point out, the market has decided that model works wonderfully for iOS, so again I’m not sold it wouldn’t work out fine for Mac.

"The market" doesn't decide ****.

 

[BlackSheepAz]

The answer if f) a new entity in the US system that is:

• Independent, non-partisan.
• Overseeing digital rights, content access, platform neutrality, and corporate influence over speech.
• Enforces laws against monopolistic control over digital ecosystems
• Ensures user rights to access information while balancing national security, privacy, and corporate interests.
• Has regulatory powers like the FTC but focuses exclusively on digital platforms, software ecosystems, and user rights.
• Works alongside Congress to propose legislation that ensures corporate digital policies don’t infringe on users' rights.

So effectively what you’re implying is that iOS and App Store are NOT Apple’s property anymore. And what happens in the App Store will be decided by this entity. Am I correct to assume that?
Also how this said entity will come to life? Via an executive order by the President of USA, a constitutional amendment, a simple majority members bill passed in both houses or what? Please elaborate.

And this end of private property only applies to Apple or it will apply to general public as well(like you and me).

 

[AppliedMicro]

So effectively what you’re implying is that iOS and App Store are NOT Apple’s property anymore

No. Requiring interoperability, access rights or non-discrimination does not mean that property is taken away.

Certain property rights may be limited, but that does not negate the concept of property.
Apple retain their property. But property rights are hardly ever limitless. Lots of companies and their products and properties are regulated by the government/regulatory authorities.

 

[Anaxarxes]

So effectively what you’re implying is that iOS and App Store are NOT Apple’s property anymore. And what happens in the App Store will be decided by this entity. Am I correct to assume that?
Also how this said entity will come to life? Via an executive order by the President of USA, a constitutional amendment, a simple majority members bill passed in both houses or what? Please elaborate.

And this end of private property only applies to Apple or it will apply to general public as well(like you and me).

*sigh* it really is not that hard to imagine an elected entity providing oversight and enforce new rules to pro profit companies where their sole purpose is increase shareholder value - not its users primary rights and the free flow of information. In your words, if the sole access to a walled garden exists this entity will provide security that it complies with basic rights of individuals.

I'm not sure how I can be in the position to draft a plan to how this entity will come to place but I assume a bill is introduced in either the House of Representatives or the Senate. The bill passes both chambers of Congress by a simple majority (50% + 1 vote in each) and president signs it into law, officially creating it. This is how agencies like the FTC and FCC were created in early 20th century.

 

[I7guy]

No. Requiring interoperability, access rights or non-discrimination does not mean that property is taken away.

That’s exactly what it means - property is taken away.

Certain property rights may be limited, but that does not negate the concept of property.
Apple retain their property. But property rights are hardly ever limitless. Lots of companies and their products and properties are regulated by the government/regulatory authorities.

Apples property rights were distributed to the wind. Free to anybody that wants them. No amount of spin will change that fact.

 

[I7guy]

No. Requiring interoperability, access rights or non-discrimination does not mean that property is taken away.

Certain property rights may be limited, but that does not negate the concept of property.
Apple retain their property. But property rights are hardly ever limitless. Lots of companies and their products and properties are regulated by the government/regulatory authorities.

Normally when a company is regulated their property rights aren’t distributed for free after they have been in operation for nearly 20 years. Or a company may enter into a space where this is known beforehand.

 

[I7guy]

[…]

While I understand that the First Amendment applies only to government restrictions, it’s concerning that a private company can impose such restrictions—especially given its market power and influence.

What power and influence? I can go buy a Samsung phone tomorrow and Apple has no reach into that.

The issue isn’t about holding a referendum for every App Store decision. It’s about ensuring that a walled garden doesn’t completely block access to legal content if there are no alternative ways to access it within the platform (like in iOS’s case in the EU).

There are alternatives and competition if one doesn’t like a walled garden. Don’t like the way the company does business do business with another company. Apple is a for profit company that manufacturers consumer discretionary products - for which there is competition aplenty. What the EU did is legalized theft.

If Apple allows alternative app stores where such content can exist, they’re free to impose whatever restrictions they want within their own store. But if they block both their store and any alternative means to access certain content, that’s effectively censorship—and that’s where the problem lies.

Don’t even know what the above means. Do you promote the idea that morally objectionable apps should be be allowed in the App Store?