'GIF Finder' Pulled from App Store Over Copyright Issues With Disney Characters [Updated x2]

[MacRumors]

GIF Finder creator Matt Cheetham today announced that his popular GIF curating app will be pulled from the App Store following a lengthy back-and-forth with Apple (via iPhone Hacks). Cheetham faced stonewalling from the company thanks mostly to a few copyright issues of Disney-related characters within the app.

Begun by Cheetham as a side project a few summers ago, the app used Tumblr and Imgur's APIs to discover and curate a collection of GIFs and images and distill them into categories or as search results for users to browse. It launched in 2012 and had nearly 90,000 downloads in the years since.

Image via iDownloadBlog​

A recent update caused the app to crash on the iPad version when sharing a GIF, so Cheetham submitted an update to fix the issue. Instead of the usual okay from Apple, on January 25 he received a rejection notice for the update because the app "includes content or features that resemble various well-known, third-party marks, including Disney characters."

Thank you for your response. However, in order to proceed with your application, we require documentation demonstrating your right to use the images included in your app and/or metadata, specifically addressing your right to copyrighted images.

Otherwise, if you believe you can make the necessary changes to your application and/or metadata so that it does not infringe the rights of a third party, we encourage you to resubmit your revised application and/or metadata.

Cheetham pointed out that he doesn't directly own the images and proceeded to offer copyright, disclaimers, and links to the Tumblr and Imgur terms of service, but he admitted it "all has fallen on deaf ears." He ultimately relented, pulling the crash-prone app from the storefront upon Apple's repeated requests for documentary evidence of his ownership of the content.

At this point, I don't have the time or knowledge on how to fight this any further. I can't have an app in the store that I cannot support (and that crashes when attempting to use it's main function!), so today I am removing GIF Finder from sale and calling the project dead.

There's lots of other really great GIF Finding apps out there that are packed edge to edge with content from various API's. I wish them all the best with their next update and only hope they can continue to slip them in under the radar as I appear to have done for the last 3 years.

Apple and Disney's history is well-known, especially Steve Jobs' hand in the now Disney-owned Pixar Animation Studios, but Apple's crackdown on GIF Finder is unusual. GIF Finder has been in the App Store for three years without rousing attention and there are several other similar GIF apps in the App Store.

Apple has recently been enforcing App Store policies that it's been lenient about in the past, rejecting a number of apps that included screenshots of violence or guns, causing developers to modify the shots or remove the imagery all together before being able to update or release their apps at all.

Update 10:00 AM PT: Cheetham announced, via the GIF Finder Twitter page, that he has submitted an appeal to the App Store review board and is scheduling a call with Apple to go through the results of the appeal.

Update 11:04 AM PT: Cheetham now says his appeal has been heard and that GIF Finder will be returned to the App Store after he submits an update removing specific mentions of three image categories.

The rejection was largely due to the inclusion of 3 categories in the categories tab. "Doctor Who", "Nigel Thornberry" and "Star Trek" are the root of the problem. Apple has particular issue's with the copyright of these 3 categories which mean my app couldn't be approved. [...]

Richard was extremely polite and helpful and I'm very grateful for the speed at which this has all progressed. I've been assured that if I resubmit after removing these categories that my app will be approved and I can get it back into the store.

Cheetham also says he's been told any future rejections due to improper categories will include details on the issues rather than a simple form letter.

Article Link: 'GIF Finder' Pulled from App Store Over Copyright Issues With Disney Characters [Updated x2]

 

[sputnikv]

parody is fair use.

 

[Little Endian]

Excessive policing of the App Store and restrictions on stock ios is the reason why Jailbreaking still stays relevant.

 

[dejo]

If I was him, I'd try resubmitting with non-Disney GIFs in the screenshots and see if it would go through.

 

[Col4bin]

So basically these Disney gifs are readily available and can be shared anytime, anywhere, with anyone who has internet access? Yet, Matt Cheetham's app which happens to cultivate these gifs from the same web, gets pulled over copyright infringement.

I guess I could understand this if his app was only available via A) App Store payment, B) freemium model, or C) generated revenue from in-app ads. Having never downloaded it, I'm not sure.

 

[Smith288]

If I was him, I'd try resubmitting with non-Disney GIFs in the screenshots and see if it would go through.

He merely searches well known image services. So he actually doesn't have much control though he could try a rudimentary filter of some sort but that still doesn't make it 100%.

 

[oliversl]

Just stop including screenshots with Disney owned images on it to the iTunes store.

 

[dumastudetto]

Apple has a philadoocery responsibility to its shareholders to protect the value of the company from potential copyright infringement lawsuits. So I think most people will understand why they are taking such a sensible approach here.

 

[jettredmont]

parody is fair use.

First, this is not parody in a legal sense. Second, "fair use" is a legal argument to overturn copyright infringement lawsuits, and as such is not an absolute.

The author can make this argument to the individual rights-holders and attempt to get their permission for any such content, or the author can integrate a filter into their app which does a best attempt at filtering out all content which is contested as owned by others along with a mechanism for that filter to be expanded as further unlicensed content is found.

I'm sorry, but the author of the app is completely in the wrong, and Apple allowing his app through could be construed as Apple being party to copyright infringement. Pointing to his source (imgur, etc) is not a defense; imgur may well be in the wrong too, but that isn't pertinent to the author's case nor to Apple's concern about being pulled in as codefendant. Imgur may in fact have a claim-and-removal system in place, but the results are obviously not sufficient to avoid copyright infringement by unfiltered use of its stream.

Moreover, there is a way for such an app to exist. It just needs to effectively filter out copyrighted images, and provide a mechanism to continue filtering those out. This would be a substantial amount of work for the developer to undertake, but certainly not impossible.

 

[macduke]

I don't understand why Apple can't get their crap together when it comes to the App Store. How can their policies be so inconsistently applied over so many years? There was the whole issue with Today widgets a while back that brought a bunch of bad publicity. Then there's the whole gun blurring debacle, which is just idiotic. You can download the game and blow someone's head off, but you can't depict a gun in the screenshots? Complete madness. Any child can see a gun on an officer of the law, a soldier, in an open carry state, at a firing range, locked up in glass behind the counter at Walmart or Bass Pro. Yet they can watch someone get shot on TV just as easily. Our "culture" is really weird.

App Store issues are probably one of the biggest sources of bad publicity for Apple. It's amazing they haven't figured this thing out after almost 7 years. It seems like with iOS 8 they were opening up so much—but lately they seem as restrictive as ever. At least be consistent!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Just stop including screenshots with Disney owned images on it to the iTunes store.

Or hire a graphic artist to create fake images for the screenshots that aren't public domain. Then post those screenshots in the store. A "starving" digital artist could be engaged pretty cheaply and all of the screenshot "art" would then be original or public domain.

 

[maflynn]

If I was him, I'd try resubmitting with non-Disney GIFs in the screenshots and see if it would go through.

The issue though I suspect is that now they've flagged him and they may want to play hard ball.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

Apple must have some idiotic new employee with barely any knowledge or reasoning power approving these apps.
Under this criteria, the Google, Bing, etc., apps should also be banned.

 

[macslayer118]

My GIF-Keyboard has Disney in it. What's the difference?

 

[zepfhyr]

]

If I was him, I'd try resubmitting with non-Disney GIFs in the screenshots and see if it would go through.

He merely searches well known image services. So he actually doesn't have much control though he could try a rudimentary filter of some sort but that still doesn't make it 100%.

I believe the point dejo was trying to make is that Apple might simply be objecting to his use of Disney characters in his screenshots. He can generate new screenshots that don't infringe upon Disney characters.

However, at this point, it's probably too late, as this story will have gained traction and Apple will be unlikely to overturn this decision.

 

[HenryDJP]

Apple must have some idiotic new employee with barely any knowledge or reasoning power approving these apps.
Under this criteria, the Google, Bing, etc., apps should also be banned.

Or maybe Apple is tired of getting sued and wants to keep the App Store free of copyright infringement.

 

[ethanwa79]

My biggest problem with Apple's App Store policies is how they simply don't follow their own rules.

Example: Open Safari, go to google.com/images, and then type "Disney pictures".

So why does Safari get a pass when this GIF Finder is essentially the same thing; a search engine for images.

That's just ONE example. Another is how they let games like Grand Theft Auto in the store but then deny other less violent, less sexual games.

Apple is one of the biggest hypocrites when it comes to their App Store policies.

 

[AronDraws]

From the developer's blog:

If anyone at Tumblr, Imgur or Giphy reads this, I'd be interested in hearing how they get around this issue with their Apps, or if they simply haven't been pulled up on it yet.

As an artist who has created animated gifs, I was contacted by Tumblr and Giphy about permissions allowing my work to be viewed/shared, so I know both of them are making an effort, and I appreciate them.

 

[FasterQuieter]

This will mean more tedious discussions of this topic in all my favorite tech podcasts. I don't think I can take it again. For this reason alone Apple, I implore you to stop doing this!

 

[nagromme]

It's just a fancy web search. Surely Apple only cares about the screenshots in their App Store. So, mock those up to not show copyrighted stuff.

The appeal hasn't even happened yet--not sure why this is news (although it's a good chance for some PR). Thousands of apps get processed daily, and bad calls are made and then corrected all the time. Apple should have demanded different screenshots earlier, but it doesn't seem like a very mysterious situation to me.

 

[logicstudiouser]

Apple is in bed with Disney. I doubt the appeal will be successful.

 

[HenryDJP]

My biggest problem with Apple's App Store policies is how they simply don't follow their own rules.

Example: Open Safari, go to google.com/images, and then type "Disney pictures".

So why does Safari get a pass when this GIF Finder is essentially the same thing; a search engine for images.

Safari is not getting a "pass", you're just not understanding the point. Every single free or paid app on the App store (especially the free apps) is a means of projecting revenue for the developer. Whether it's used a way to expose the developer to a larger audience for other future products or in-app purchases. I highly doubt any developer is putting apps on the App store with zero intentions of it being some sort of revenue stream or a way to project revenue indirectly.

Safari is just web browser, plain and simple.

 

[dejo]

The issue though I suspect is that now they've flagged him and they may want to play hard ball.

Yeah, probably. But there's a slight chance he could get a different reviewer who's less "particular" and let it through.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Old advice:

Don't mess with the mouse.

 

[coolfactor]

Or maybe Apple is tired of getting sued and wants to keep the App Store free of copyright infringement.

Yes, because Apple profits from the sale of apps, they are legally responsible to ensure that they are not "selling" copyrighted materials without permission from the rightful owner. In this case, it appears that this app is making Disney artwork available at the cost of the app... so people need to pay for this app to get Disney artwork, yet none of that money flows back to Disney, only into the pockets of the app author and Apple. That's the concern, I suspect, and Apple has done the right thing. The author should change the screenshots.