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

[JayLenochiniMac]

Apple will cave in as usual, once the obligatory publicity spreads.

 

[coolfactor]

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.

I suspect it's around the marketing of the app... the author has chosen several Disney characters to help sell this app, and yet those images have not been licensed from Disney. They may be freely available elsewhere, but that's not the point. It's how the author has chosen his marketing image. If I was Disney, and someone used my artwork to sell their app, but never shared the profits with me, I would be upset, as well.

 

[2457282]

If I undertand the article and the responses posted, the issue is not that the app searches GIFs or that it returns any particular GIF. The issue is soley that they are using Disney GIFs in the screen shots? If that is true why would the creator say that he could not fix it? I get the feeling there is more going on, otherwise, I am just confused

 

[69Mustang]

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.

So for the past three years they didn't have a fiduciary responsibility?

Can you help me with the highlighted text please. Can’t find a dcitionary with it in.

What you see there is the result of Siri and Autocorrect living in a mobil home cooking meth while surrounded by powerlines.

 

[coolfactor]

So the whole "Goodbye GIF Finder" was a knee-jerk reaction, without allowing sufficient opportunity for the entire process to be seen through. Well it seems that Apple has stepped up and done the right thing, and very quickly, too!

This goes to show that we, as users of services provided by companies, need to keep our cool. Companies don't always make all of the best choices, and our feedback can contribute to their operations in a positive way. I recently contacted my bank to express my dissatisfaction with their mobile banking app and changes recently made to their website. In both cases, my feedback will be passed along to the appropriate departments for review. I could've just posted my complaints to the inter-web and stomped off in a huff, but I chose to contact "the company" directly. I received a favourable response that helped to retain my confidence in my relationship with that company. It's all about how we choose to respond. For Matt to say "Goodbye GIF Finder" was a short-sighted and premature response.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

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

By Disney???

 

[sputnikv]

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.

Parody

A parody is a work that ridicules another, usually well-known work, by imitating it in a comic way. Judges understand that, by its nature, parody demands some taking from the original work being parodied. Unlike other forms of fair use, a fairly extensive use of the original work is permitted in a parody in order to “conjure up” the original.

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/

 

[Smith288]

Should be "fiduciary", I think.

----------









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.

Ah, gotcha. They ever stipulate that in their take down notice? Easy fix if they had.

 

[onigami]

Doctor Who? That doesn't make sense. Star Trek and the Thornberries, sure. But Doctor Who has a very weird situaish with copyright (which is why there is an unwritten rule around it stating that everything is canon for nothing is canon). Dunno the dealio there...

 

[MikhailT]

So the big problem Apple has right now is they need more properly trained reviewers for the initial review process.

These canned responses need to be banned in the first place. If the developer knew about the categories issue in the first place, the whole situation would've gone well.

It feels like Apple's using canned responses for the initial reviews and whatever is required of a human response will come from the appeal process. So, I'm guessing Apple doesn't have enough trained reviewers for the first phase and putting their best ones on the appeal phase instead. It makes sense but not really acceptable for Apple's size.

Seeing's Apple reasons later, I do agree with the issues of using categories that are based on copyrights.

 

[Robert.Walter]

If Apple is really "on the side of developers", then they have to help them in their efforts for compliance.

Nobody wins (not customers, developers, nor apple) if Apple rejects an app without a clear lust of remediations needed for approval.

 

[dejo]

Richard was extremely polite and helpful and I'm very grateful for the speed at which this has all progressed.

I wonder if this was Richard Chipman, who I had the pleasure of dealing with years ago when trying to get (our-now-defunct) CraigsHarvest app approved. Apple's concern then was that our app was pulling data from craigslist and, since we couldn't guarantee that content was not potentially "adult" in nature, we would have to give it a 17+ rating.

 

[Tech198]

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

I wondered why they were even their to begin with....... If it was against copyright, then why was it even approved in the first place?

 

[liavman]

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.

Apple can pull off iPad, Apple Pay, Apple Watch in the last 4 years but it needed 6 years to figure this out. #WhatIsTheStoryApple

 

[Derekuda]

With all of Apple's Appstore rules, it's amazing people haven't jumped ship to Android or Windows Phone sooner. I recently switched to an Android just to try something new and the their are apps covering just about everything.

 

[macsrcool1234]

Copyright laws are the bane of our existence. I once got **** from a store when trying to print my Disney vacation photos because it had 'copyrighted content.' Of course I just laughed at them and went over to the self-print station and got them form there.

 

[MikhailT]

With all of Apple's Appstore rules, it's amazing people haven't jumped ship to Android or Windows Phone sooner. I recently switched to an Android just to try something new and the their are apps covering just about everything.

You do realize majority of people could care less about what the developers are going through? As long there is an app for what they want, they're not going to jump platforms just because a few apps didn't make through the app store.

Also, other platform have their own app stores with their own rules. If you want to be on Google or Microsoft's app stores, you have to follow their rules.

Side-loading is possible on Android but I don't know if it is on WP. Side-loading is something that most folks won't do on their own and/or it is a major security risk for those who doesn't know what they're doing.