NiN's Trent Reznor Speaks Out on Apple's App Store Rejection Policies

[beeh]

Apple could (and should) do the same with the app store.

I thought there were already age limits on Apps? When I uploaded mine I set it for 4+ and that's what it stayed ( check out Fridge Magnet Math ).

Seriously, is there a way to set the age limit on an iTunes account? If so, maybe Apple could have made the NIN App rating "17+" or "Explicit" or something.

I would hope they wouldn't leave it up to developers to set the age limits, maybe that will be the change to the App Store approval process? Just rate the App to a higher age limit instead of reject it?

 

[Stephen123]

Apple needs to implement parental controls for Apps (like they have for music) and catch up on the training of the people who review and reject or accept apps. The first part they can do. The second part is harder because of the growth rate of the App store. The parental controls group at Apple is good about giving parents control rather than censoring content themselves. They just haven't gotten to the App store yet. The App store is such a big deal, it's hard to remember that this is still it's first year.

 

[Melrose]

Trent who?

I can see his point to an extent, but his language impedes the very point he's trying to make. He just across as being arrogant and miserable.

 

[vipergts2207]

What's the point of having words taken out and replaced with ******* when u know exactly what they are. Same thing on TV when they beep over a bad word... Come on Apple and everyone else. We all curse and love it too....

Stop this ************ ********** ********** *********** nonsense...

Hey now. We can't just be cursing willy nilly, lest you want the knights of standards and practices roaming around.

 

[Nem Wan]

None of the following words that MacRumors blanked are profanity, but I'll list them alphabetically just in case: "asian", "explicit", "guys", "having", "hot", "sex", "teens", and "two". I'm leaving out one that would have been first on the list, but I guess we all have our limits.

 

[jaw04005]

Until applications can be marked "explicit" and filtered out using the iPhone's parental controls, more cases like this are going to happen.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple strikes a deal with a ratings bureau like the ESRB for iPhone applications soon.

 

[firewood]

Do educated persons really need to use expletives?

Only if they understand marketing and want to make money off of some very profitable market segments.

Do educated persons really need to listen to fart sounds? No, but kids with hundreds of thousands of dollars rattling around on their iTunes gift cards do! (and I wish I was educated enough to realize this early enough...

i

 

[ZiggyPastorius]

Trent who?

I can see his point to an extent, but his language impedes the very point he's trying to make. He just across as being arrogant and miserable.

Of course. The classic superstition of profanity. Tell me, have you ever used the word breast? Because that was a very offencive word in the early 1900s, and if you have, I have a feeling you are VERY arrogant and miserable.

Do educated persons really need to use expletives?

Based on what I read here, these persons would do well to proof-read what they write. It would make it easier for educated persons to understand what they are writing/saying.

Censorship is necessary when MY rights (not to have to read/view crap) are not taken into consideration by someone who is posting.

That is not a right. I would hope your post is satire, because what you are proposing is the blatant violation of the first amendment based on superstitious beliefs that certain words are inherently bad, or make people "uneducated," in favour of a system that vainly attempts to prevent people from creating or explicating material that could, somehow, somewhere, be offencive or objectionable to another person. The idea is absurd, and what is more absurd is the blatant myopia displayed in your post with regards to highlighting the words we don't use, rather than the words we do use, in an attempt to to make yourself seem more intelligent in a post where you are quite obviously more concerned with your own prejudice against people who use profanity, and your fierce desire to instill despotism on the Macrumors forums.

Furthermore, censorship is necessary with your post because it violated my "right" to believe that whoever thought the word "persons" was a good alternative to "people" was an imbecile who never existed. See how dumb that sounds?

 

[MrMclovin]

And he doesn't seem to understand Apple's goal with the App Store. It is specifically not an open desktop platform like the Mac, nor is it an open content platform like the Web. His comparisons to what he can see in Safari or what is showing up in his inbox are ridiculous.

I think the point is that Safari and Mail are two apps on the Iphone that provide access to similar content. For instance, he could use the Itunes app to download the exact song in question. Or use the Youtube app to view the video of the song. So, using the logic that Apple is implying, these apps should also be unavailable, because they provide access to the SAME thing. I don't see how that is so ridiculous...almost seems like a logical comparison.

 

[bbyrdhouse]

Yeah, But...

What about the Sling Mobile app ... Oh sorry, thats another thread ...

 

[JonHimself]

Of course. The classic superstition of profanity. Tell me, have you ever used the word breast? Because that was a very offencive word in the early 1900s, and if you have, I have a feeling you are VERY arrogant and miserable.

Words are what we make them. I would wager that if someone with enough power deemed the word 'love' to be offensive, and enough people went along with it, it too could become obscene (obviously an exageration, but I'm sure the point still stands). For instance, 'Keith Olberman' is not an offensive word/name but Bill O'Reilly regularly cuts people off if they mention his name and follows it up with "If you're going to call up and speak improperly or use offensive language, we will cut you off".

 

[ChrisA]

Trent Reznor doesn't have enough pull to actually sway Apple. If something changes, it won't be because of this little tantrum. If you believe that he does have this much power, you're just sucking on his ego like he wants you to.

Trent alone does not have that much "pull". You are right. But he has about 10,000 times more "pull" then you or I do. Also he may be leading other artists and software developer. They may see his example and publicly and vocally imitate him in asking Apple to re-think their position. I think Trent is hoping to start something. The best leader says "follow me" and then charges forward. If others follow him he will get what he wants. But you are right he alone does not have much pull at Apple

 

[Everlast]

Agreed. It's time for Apple to consider some sort parental control or a rating system.

 

[timseley]

app store approval process

I can understand his frustration, but at the same time I'm not sure if the app store process is as messed up as everyone says. Sure they can keep refining the process and the very nature of it is a bit ambiguous, but at the same time the process helps keep the app store a much more enjoyable and usable experience for everyone that uses it. It seems like most of the incidents that get people fired up are a very small number of cases. While its frustrating that Apple has so much subjective control on what is / isn't allowed I think overall its a good thing. Hopefully as time goes on we'll see fewer and fewer cases of snafus like this one.

 

[headfuzz]

Nice one Trent. Love him or hate him it's good someone prominent is standing up and bad mouthing Apple on their approval process. It really needs sorting out.

 

[1984]

I think the point is that Safari and Mail are two apps on the Iphone that provide access to similar content. For instance, he could use the Itunes app to download the exact song in question. Or use the Youtube app to view the video of the song. So, using the logic that Apple is implying, these apps should also be unavailable, because they provide access to the SAME thing. I don't see how that is so ridiculous...almost seems like a logical comparison.

Not if it's marked as explicit and parental controls are set. That's the whole point. You can't do that with apps yet. Also, the Safari and Mail apps are not laced with profanity. The internet is. It's about the content Apple is making available directly.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

but

I think the point is that Safari and Mail are two apps on the Iphone that provide access to similar content. For instance, he could use the Itunes app to download the exact song in question. Or use the Youtube app to view the video of the song. So, using the logic that Apple is implying, these apps should also be unavailable, because they provide access to the SAME thing. I don't see how that is so ridiculous...almost seems like a logical comparison.

But email and web browsing are long-established applications with expected behavior, regardless of the platform they're on. We would never expect an email application to censor email content, or a public outrage from moral busybodies for allowing such a non-filtering email app to exist.

I do agree that there is nothing fundamentally different in this case, however. But it is murkier territory - separating an app from content (even if it is in fact streaming from a server and not included with the code), when dealing with a terms of service that can specifically target the content of third party apps.

I'm actually on his side. I'm just not as quick to outrage over a system that trades fundamental flaws for tremendous advantages to developers, Apple, and consumers. There will be bumps along the way.

 

[yetanotherdave]

On the swearing: swear words are just as valid as any other words. Sometimes they're the word that most conveys what you mean. Anyone can use them, educated people use them properly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwelMWLBPik George Carlin Seven Dirty Words.
Can we all watch this, agree that any word can be offensive in context, that words themselves aren't evil, and get back OT.
The "objectionable content" is sold through iTunes, and is also "available" through v1 of the app which is currently on the app store. The update that was rejected fixes stability bugs and nothing else.

 

[rdowns]

Do educated persons really need to use expletives?

Based on what I read here, these persons would do well to proof-read what they write. It would make it easier for educated persons to understand what they are writing/saying.

Censorship is necessary when MY rights (not to have to read/view crap) are not taken into consideration by someone who is posting.

Please explain this 'right' to not read/view crap. Seems to me you want to take away other's rights by censoring them. They're just words.

 

[Masklinn]

I thought there were already age limits on Apps? When I uploaded mine I set it for 4+ and that's what it stayed ( check out Fridge Magnet Math ).

Seriously, is there a way to set the age limit on an iTunes account? If so, maybe Apple could have made the NIN App rating "17+" or "Explicit" or something.

Well there's a "restrict games to" setting (4+, 9+, 12+, 17+) and a "restrict explicit content" setting, but it's in an "iTunes Store" section, not an AppStore one, so it might only apply to iPod games. I don't think I've ever read anything about AppStore parental controls, so apparently they don't apply there.

Oh, and fun stuff: I just checked, The Downward Spiral is not flagged "explicit" on the iTunes store (in fact, only 2 NiN albums are, With Teeth and Every Day Is Exactly The Same)...

Not if it's marked as explicit and parental controls are set. That's the whole point. You can't do that with apps yet.

See above, it's not flagged explicit, no song on the album it's part of is flagged, and the album itself is not flagged.

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

Not if it's marked as explicit and parental controls are set. That's the whole point. You can't do that with apps yet. Also, the Safari and Mail apps are not laced with profanity. The internet is. It's about the content Apple is making available directly.

The song in question isn't built into the app, either.

 

[applecultvictim]

Trent Reznor is a a bozo and a clown, and musically he's very very mediocre...and I reply in that tone (much more toned down of course than ge did) because that's the level of discourse he is known for. Every has been wants to make a name for himself by attacking apple, it's the same old tired marketing tactics of record execs to show that they have something going for their artist, publicity, publicity, publicity. The app store issue is irrelevant, it's just that, free publicity and in most crass way by supposedly attacking the status quo by swearing. WOW, big deal Trent every 10 year old goes into youtube now and trashtalks even worse, as if you are trendsetting or something. Seems you are going senile at 50.

KIDS out there, don't bite, try seeing people for what they are not what they portray. Of course a lot of you will bite and idolize this guy, until you grow up and know better, I did too, with other folk.

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

I can understand his frustration, but at the same time I'm not sure if the app store process is as messed up as everyone says.

... Then you're not paying attention.

Sure they can keep refining the process and the very nature of it is a bit ambiguous, but at the same time the process helps keep the app store a much more enjoyable and usable experience for everyone that uses it.

What about a small startup that spends thousands of dollars (if not much, much more) to build an app and submit it to the store ... only to have it rejected for something that isn't really in the SDK TOS?

How is that fair? Or reasonable? Or responsible?

 

[ZiggyPastorius]

Not if it's marked as explicit and parental controls are set. That's the whole point. You can't do that with apps yet. Also, the Safari and Mail apps are not laced with profanity. The internet is. It's about the content Apple is making available directly.

I suppose I don't understand why this can't be fixed relatively easy. Why can Apple not send an email to all developers and post it on the developer page (or wherever), something that says:

"Greetings Developers, developers, developers, developers,
In 90 days, Apple will instill a policy to include a non-intrusive explicit and clean marking on App Store applications. The mark will be displayed as a small symbol in an inconspicuous location at the bottom of the iTunes page for your application, and within the iTunes and App Store applications for the purpose of being caught by our parental control filters. Our criteria shall be: [Specifically say what it will be, e.g. containing access to albums or other material with five or more expletives on it, et cetera]. We feel this is the best policy to instill, as it will allow material containing debatably objectionable material to be approved to the app store while protecting the whole-family atmosphere we hope to achieve with iTunes. In addition, we have revised the criteria for app-store acceptance, with more specifics added. Those revisions are as follows: [all the stuff]. Thank you for the understanding.

Sincerely,

Apple"


I guess I don't understand why something like that is completely out of the question. Note that I just made all that **** up, as I really don't know anything about coding or legalities and the like, but that is a generally idea.

Trent Reznor is a a bozo and a clown, and musically he's very very mediocre...and I reply in that tone (much more toned down of course than ge did) because that's the level of discourse he is known for. Every has been wants to make a name for himself by attacking apple, it's the same old tired marketing tactics of record execs to show that they have something going for their artist, publicity, publicity, publicity. The app store issue is irrelevant, it's just that, free publicity and in most crass way by supposedly attacking the status quo by swearing. WOW, big deal Trent every 10 year old goes into youtube now and trashtalks even worse, as if you are trendsetting or something. Seems you are going senile at 50.

KIDS out there, don't bite, try seeing people for what they are not what they portray. Of course a lot of you will bite and idolize this guy, until you grow up and know better, I did too, with other folk.

What are you talking about? He didn't go to Macrumors and say "I am pissed," he posted this on HIS forums on HIS website. He isn't a record executive, and he's an independent artist, meaning "record execs" (not even sure what that whole rant is even about) have nothing to do with this. I guess I don't get how you inferred that he meant to make a name for himself by swearing..? He swears in many different mediums, for many different reasons. He's also not 50, and well, your post as a whole just really doesn't make much sense.

 

[ph0rk]

Trent Reznor is a a bozo and a clown, and musically he's very very mediocre...and I reply in that tone (much more toned down of course than ge did) because that's the level of discourse he is known for. Every has been wants to make a name for himself by attacking apple, it's the same old tired marketing tactics of record execs to show that they have something going for their artist, publicity, publicity, publicity. The app store issue is irrelevant, it's just that, free publicity and in most crass way by supposedly attacking the status quo by swearing. WOW, big deal Trent every 10 year old goes into youtube now and trashtalks even worse, as if you are trendsetting or something. Seems you are going senile at 50.

KIDS out there, don't bite, try seeing people for what they are not what they portray. Of course a lot of you will bite and idolize this guy, until you grow up and know better, I did too, with other folk.

Spoken like someone who hasn't even read the article.