Apple Will Not Distribute 'Porn' and Other Inappropriate Content

[corinhorn]

With some of the comments on this thread I'm beginning to seriously worry about people's mental states. This isn't hard core porn being discussed, it's a few pictures of topless girls.

I don't get it. There wasn't any porn. The "Hottest Girls" app only had women in bikinis with a few topless pics mixed in. Where is the porn?

From Apple's viewpoint, they had to draw the line somewhere. Once they allow nips, it becomes a slippery slope. If they allow a nipple, why not a few pubes, and if they allow that, why not carpet eating?

Apple has the freedom to regulate the apps anyway they want. They decided to draw the line at boobies. Get over it. They aren't forcing their values on anyone, they are exercising their freedom—at least until the lovely court system legislates against it.

 

[Sparrows]

Again, how is okay to sell sexually explicit music, movies with nudity and audio books with sex scenes but it's not okay to sell an app with it? Does the Taliban run the app censorship department?

This is hypocrisy at it's worst. Please Apple, could you please define what is considered 'porn'?
Is a woman posing topless porn?
Is a painting of a topless woman porn?
Is a text description of a fully nude woman porn?
Is an audio recording of a woman moaning suggestively porn?
Is a woman in a tiny bikini porn?

It's a fact of life that people have sex. If you are so messed up that sex has somehow become filth for you maybe you should worry less about what is being sold on the Apple App Store and worry more about your own mental health.

 

[PBUser167]

This is dumb

Why would anyone buy an application for porn?

Just dump all of your porn in iTunes (pictures and videos) and sync it to your iPhone / iPod.

Need to spank your monkey? There's an app for that!

 

[HyperZboy]

Ahh, censorship in the morning... gotta love it.

Seriously, if I, as an adult, are allowed to listen to explicit e-books, podcasts, music, and videos, all on my iPhone, why is an application so much worse?

Seriously, if I can go to Wal*Mart and buy a gun and go shoot a deer, which I then cook and eat for dinner, why aren't I allowed to buy a porn application too?

Thank you, I think you just summed up my feelings completely on this and the reasons why it's a mistake by Apple.

It's censorship, plain and simple, nothing more.​

And I noticed no one has tackled my VHS vs BETA format war and the impact of PORN in it. Few people remember that the PORN industry settled on VHS as its only format of distribution and the Sony created BETA format quickly faded after that. Porn is widely considered to be the reason for the downfall of BETA because most video stores had twice as many titles in VHS format when you added in all the Porn on VHS, therefor VHS got favorable placement near the front of most video rental stores and was more popular with consumers.

I realize its not a perfect analogy & yes there were other factors, but Apple better be careful.
This is a golden opportunity for competitors and I bet, knowing history, they take advantage of it.
We shall see.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

No, you don't even get what I'm talking about

You really don't get it do you? You seem to think that freedom is something America invented. Porn is not an example of freedom but rather an artifact of a sexually repressed society. It is a self destructive outlet for sexual interest which leads ultimately towards shame, self-destructive behavior and objectification of the gender in question. It is really no different than alcoholism, drug use, glue sniffing or over eating. People try to console their loneliness with pictures of strangers instead of reaching out to people in the real world.

I'm not even talking about porn. I have removed porn from the equation and replaced it with X (not XXX, just X, like in algebra). The second someone says that a person or company should be forced to sell X, or that they're against freedom because they don't want to sell X, that's where I stop.

For all you know, I'm a huge porn monger with fat stacks of magazines and DVDs all over my house. It would not change the fact that I love freedom more than I hate Apple's decision not to become porn peddlers.

 

[quagmire]

Although I agree that Apple has the right to decide what to sell in the app store, the concept of boobs=porn is ridiculous. For freaking sake, boobs is a reproduction organ turned sexual by humans( hey don't get me wrong I love them ). What people need to learn is that porn is doing something sexually explicit. Posing naked is not doing something sexually explicit. So it isn't porn.

 

[casik]

BAH it is happening already!

People are so confused about what lust actually is that they think when they are turned on by there wife or something that they are lusting after them!

Lust is not just a sexual desire. Lust is wanting what is not rightfully yours.

If you are married and you are attracted to your wife, it isn't lust!

Lust is a desire that is never satisfied.

It is bizzare to me how much a sexual appetite is no longer something that is special or sacred, but something that is selfish and a "need" that must be fulfilled like we are dogs or something.

Yes the world would still procreate, but it would be out of a intimacy brought on by love and sexual desire. Not a Lust for every woman who walks by with a hot face and nice body.

I realize this is very idealistic and does come from the unheard of concept as sexuality being sacred, so spare me the "religious" comments.

Lust is what makes a man leave his wife. Wanting something he doesn't have.

Lust is what creates porn. A desire for sexuality without conesequence.

I am glad none the less that Apple realizes that they take a cut of the App profit and isn't in the business of selling sexuality.

Unless you are talking about their sexy products... lol

 

[corinhorn]

How many parents would buy an iPod where you could download porn apps.

Apparently, lots of European parents.

 

[Queso]

From Apple's viewpoint, they had to draw the line somewhere. Once they allow nips, it becomes a slippery slope. If they allow a nipple, why not a few pubes, and if they allow that, why not carpet eating?

Apple has the freedom to regulate the apps anyway they want. They decided to draw the line at boobies. Get over it. They aren't forcing their values on anyone, they are exercising their freedom—at least until the lovely court system legislates against it.

My comment wasn't directed at Apple. As has been repeatedly pointed out, they are free to sell what they choose. My comment was on the overreaction some in this thread seem to have towards topless nudity, especially all that "Porn is a trap" nonsense. Why are so many people scared of the sight of a nipple? It's not even genitalia

 

[Stewie]

This is so stupid. I can listen to inappropriate content on albums I buy in the iTunes store. I can rent/buy movies with inappropriate content from iTunes store. god knows I can view stuff that is way beyond inappropriate on mobile safari. Why shouldn't I be able to buy the same software from the iTunes store? I am an adult and should be able to buy and view what I want without apple telling me I can't.

But what about the kids you might say? What about them. They can surf to youporn on even a google search will bring up anything worse then what may sneak through in the app store. If you are that concerned, don't let the kids use the iphone, they can get on their computer and view.

Apple needs to be less controlling. They need to stop censoring apps just because they can.

 

[fishballer]

forget porn.

can we get some gambling apps ?!?!?
i'm sick and tired of using mobile safari to access gambling sites!!!!

 

[WestonHarvey1]

No

A freedom fanboy only for the companies

No, for everyone. Everyone equally. Consumers have no power to force a company to give them a product they want. They have influence. They can express their concerns and they can vote with their dollars or euros. But I can no more force Apple to sell porn, a front facing camera, or a PowerBook G5 than they can force you to get a haircut.

 

[3NV7]

And yet they'll promote "Gay month" or somesuch on iTunes and the apple.com start page.

 

[know-it-all5]

I don't really have a problem with this decision. My question is just, why bother having nudity and strong sexual content as part of the 17+ rating, if it wouldn't ever be allowed. All that app had was nudity, not pornography, so why wouldn't it be allowed? I am a developer, that had to fill out that rating sheet for my applications, and I guess I am at a loss on what Apple will and won't allow. Has anybody, developer or not, got ahold of anyone at Apple to ask what their terms "really" are?

 

[swissmann]

The right for freedom.

Apple has the freedom to censor or not censor the app store. Why should they have to forfeit their right to freedom so that we can have the freedom of using the iPhone for porn?

If you need/want porn and you feel the iPhone doesn't provide that - use something else.

Apple has the right of freedom in many other things like choosing not to offer Blu-ray support for example. I can't force Apple to support it but I may choose to buy something that does offer it.

Please don't cry out for freedom when it means that someone else must forfeit their freedom.

(By the way I support Apple's decision on this.)

 

[corinhorn]

It's a fact of life that people have sex. If you are so messed up that sex has somehow become filth for you maybe you should worry less about what is being sold on the Apple App Store and worry more about your own mental health.

I love sex, but don't love porn. The two are not equal. Porn feeds lustful appetites that are never quenched. Sex is an act of love and commitment.

 

[quagmire]

No, for everyone. Everyone equally. Consumers have no power to force a company to give them a product they want. They have influence. They can express their concerns and they can vote with their dollars or euros. But I can no more force Apple to sell porn, a front facing camera, or a PowerBook G5 than they can force you to get a haircut.

Man that was fast. I deleted your quote maybe about 30 seconds after posting. Although I did see you chose to edit out the smilie that indicated I was being sarcastic.

 

[winterspan]

This is another idiotic move in Apple's directionless App store policies...
Now that it has controls on the device, all they have to do is simply place all "adult" content into an "adult" section on the iTunes App store that is not accessible by devices with the appropriate controls set

The application in question was as far from "porn" as possible. it was a photo gallery of topless woman. The only reason Apple responded to this so quickly is they know a certain minority in the United States especially would immediately cause a huge PR nightmare. I'm sick of the conservative religious zealots in America trying to force their false "morals" on the rest of society with constantly pushing censorship of adult content ! I'm not even interested in porn, but I am interested in the principle of individual liberty and keeping the government and a noisy minority out of personal decisions.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

up

The right for freedom.

Apple has the freedom to censor or not censor the app store. Why should they have to forfeit their right to freedom so that we can have the freedom of using the iPhone for porn?

If you need/want porn and you feel the iPhone doesn't provide that - use something else.

Apple has the right of freedom in many other things like choosing not to offer Blu-ray support for example. I can't force Apple to support it but I may choose to buy something that does offer it.

Please don't cry out for freedom when it means that someone else must forfeit their freedom.

(By the way I support Apple's decision on this.)

Glad someone else gets it. I was feeling very alone.

 

[Nym]

The main point here should be:

The app in question was not featuring porn, it was just pictures of top-less women. Is that really something to be shocked? Breasts?!

(sorry for mentioning again but people are talking like the app was iBestiality which it clearly wasn't)

However, I think this has got nothing to do with being "prude". I think that this has to do with Apple being afraid of losing their "brand" image.

One of Apple's main pillars of success is the name and culture associated with their brand and they are reluctant on the possibility that pornographic material could taint it.

I seriously don't agree with their decision but this is Apple we're talking about, what were you expecting? They basically like to control everything that carries their logo.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

.

Man that was fast. I deleted your quote maybe about 30 seconds after posting. Although I did see you chose to edit out the smilie that indicated I was being sarcastic.

Sorry.. tried to Quote, but the auto quote only picked up the first block and I tried to cut and paste the other bit from the rendered message and it didn't pick up the graphic.

 

[mr.steevo]

I don't really have a problem with this decision. My question is just, why bother having nudity and strong sexual content as part of the 17+ rating, if it wouldn't ever be allowed. All that app had was nudity, not pornography, so why wouldn't it be allowed? I am a developer, that had to fill out that rating sheet for my applications, and I guess I am at a loss on what Apple will and won't allow. Has anybody, developer or not, got ahold of anyone at Apple to ask what their terms "really" are?

Exactly.

Too many mixed messages with the App Store.

s.

 

[quagmire]

Sorry.. tried to Quote, but the auto quote only picked up the first block and I tried to cut and paste the other bit from the rendered message and it didn't pick up the graphic.

No problem. I agree with you that it is Apple's right to decide what to sell on there App store. Just arguing over that boobs does not equal porn( and full nudity doesn't equal porn either).

 

[akutz]

Content Rating

I don't really care if the app is there or not. My question is simply this: What is the point of Content Control based on Ratings if not to allow for sex, violence, adult themed applications? Just curious.

 

[corinhorn]

They basically like to control everything that carries their logo.

What's wrong with that? They want to protect their own business. I think everyone would.