Over 5000 'Overtly Sexual' Apps Pulled from App Store (And Counting)

[PJT]

The real question is why these apps and why now? If people want to d/l this stuff, and pay for the privilege, that's up to them. What concerns me is that Apple is working on the basis of complaints from prudes who would rather have things banned than avert their eyes.

If the apps contain copyright material, fair enough they should be pulled...but then they shouldn't really have been approved in the first place! But wobble seems fairly innocuous in a puerile kind of way.

I guess my concern is over who dictates what we can and cannot see*, and where this takes us.

* outside Apples normal operating rules for the appstore

Why these apps, Apple already answered, because they consider them to be overtly sexual. Why now, that's a good question. As an adult, you are correct, I can avert my eyes. (Usually...) But for my four children, who are becoming more interested in the net and I want to be net savvy, as a parent, I have a responsibility to seek safe areas for them. While I did not petition Apple to remove these apps, I think it is great that they did and I will support that with my wallet. I don't think I am being a prude for wanting to provide a safe place for my kids. I know that you were not calling me that, but I would hope that people understand that some parents are thinking about their children in this matter. I also respect that for some parents, they are fine with their kids being exposed to these apps, and that is their choice. For me, I surf the web with my kids and provide guidance.

It has been pointed out that these apps are not porn. I think this might be one of those gray areas that people need to decide about on their own. I find it hard to believe that these overtly sexual apps are not in some way geared towards getting people to consume porn, which makes them a link in the chain in my book. I may be wrong, but isn't almost every app is in some way trying to get people to buy something, whether it is the functionality of the app or some sort of ad?

Whether or not anyone would like to consume porn is their own decision. I have no desire to remove that freedom. I guess I do not have a problem going to my local MyCal cinema knowing that they will never show porn (soft or hard) there, and don't feel like they are dictating to me what I can and can not see. Yes, there are movies that are shown there, including graphic violence, that I choose not to see. I choose to avert my eyes. And if they did start showing adult movies, I would once again vote with my wallet.

I encourage everyone who thinks Apple made the wrong decision to voice your displeasure to Apple. Vote with your wallet. Also, check out Windows Mobile 7, perhaps they will have an app for it.

 

[Reed Rothchild]

The real question is why these apps and why now? If people want to d/l this stuff, and pay for the privilege, that's up to them. What concerns me is that Apple is working on the basis of complaints from prudes who would rather have things banned than avert their eyes.

If the apps contain copyright material, fair enough they should be pulled...but then they shouldn't really have been approved in the first place! But wobble seems fairly innocuous in a puerile kind of way.

I guess my concern is over who dictates what we can and cannot see*, and where this takes us.

* outside Apples normal operating rules for the appstore

I think the reason is obvious. The iPad is nearing launch date and Apple have decided to do a bit of spring cleaning before it hits the shelves. Heaven forbid that some poor unsuspecting consumer should come across life sized images of a penis while holding such a huge thing in their hands. Apple are simply saving you from yourself. God bless St Jobs. With this and the blacklists run by most 3G providers we can finally be free of seeing nekkid people doing consenting things to each other. Now if he can just encourage the ISPs to do the same thing, we'll stem the flood via wi-fi too...

Alternatively, I would suggest boycotting any device or service that tries to impose their moral authority on you. I know I will.

 

[ksgant]

First off, I don't own an iPhone so none of this directly effects me at all.

But I'm more concerned that they just pulled everything off, to apps they previously had been okay with, without any recourse or even any warning to their developers, and it appears they bowed to pressure from a censorship group.

Plus, they've gone a tad overboard. No bathing suits? WTF? They're being way too heavy handed with this.

 

[g3powerbook boy]

damn i guess i wont be able to look for my studbois on my iphone any more and on my iphone i could find the best studs around

 

[PJT]

Alternatively, I would suggest boycotting any device or service that tries to impose their moral authority on you. I know I will.

Very cool. Stand up for what you believe. Think different.

I guess I just don't understand how Apple choosing not to sell these apps equates to imposing moral authority on you. Don't they have the freedom to chose what they will sell and not sell? They are a business that has made a business decision. That's all. We are all still free to do what we want.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

...it appears they bowed to pressure from a censorship group.

Link please -- preferably from the group calling for Apple to remove the apps. Just curious if there is any truth to it or just another unsubstantiated Internet rumor. You'd think a major pressure group calling for Apple to remove immature, but mild, girly apps would get major press, especially with the iPad release weeks away. It usually does.

Ultimately, it's Apple's store and they have the right to sell the apps they want to sell and form the image they want to people to see. It's not a legal issue. It's not even a "principle of the matter" issue. It's nothing more than a business issue. People that don't like the decision can go over to Android and create some competition.

Me? I'll have an iPad on Day One. Guaranteed.

 

[Takeo]

This is so simple. It's Apple's store. They're a private company. Not the government. They have the right to carry or not carry whatever product they want. I don't get angry at Home Depot and cry censorship because they don't stock whips and ball gags. It's their store. It's not censorship. They're not selling modified product. They're just choosing not to carry it at all. So simple.

The only problem is the closed system itself. Again... Apple can sell or not sell whatever it wants. The problem is that they are the ONLY place that sells apps for their mobile devices. Going back to my brick and mortar analogy... even though Home Depot doesn't sell push up bras... or whatever... I know I can just go to a store that does. Not the case with an iPhone/iPad. The internet offers some options in terms of media, web sites and cloud applications... but there's no where else to get actual apps. Unless you have a jail broken phone I guess.

Of course... this closed system is a huge part of what makes the iPhone/iPad so user-friendly and crash/virus resistant.... which is perfect for the mass consumer market. But as with everything, there are pros and cons.

 

[tatonka]

Well it is not censorship (not in the law/legal way at least) but it sure is Apple telling people once again what they can and can't do with there phone.

To make that point clear, the applications banned where not pornographic, they feature women in bikinis. Something entirely legal to look at for every age group (legal .. not necessarily advised). No frontal nudity was shown or the apps would have never made it to the app store in the first place.

I guess what bugs me and other people the most is the seemingly arbitrariness of that new ruling.
I am protesting this move because I am afraid that Apple may decide to go after something I acutally care for next .. like music streaming services or eReaders (which actually would start making sense with the iPad coming up) or you name it.

Finally a word to that "remove clutter" argument .. Apple constantly tries to trick people into believing that 140k apps is something good. Well turns out the vast majority is bogus applications duplicating the functionality of a dozen other .. so few truly innovative apps out there and many of then lost in the bulk of BS apps.
Apple should not remove clutter .. it should come up with a better system/search/overview for the appstore. And if the want to remove clutter .. at least allow me to do the same and kick those freaking stocks and weather & Co. apps of my phone to.

T.

 

[Takeo]

Removing people's right to access to contents that the authority deemed as "problematic" is censorship. Period.

You're right!!! I'm going to start a boycott of Disney right now for refusing to sell pornography!!! I refuse to live in the the authoritative thumb of the mouse!!! Who's with me!!! Down with the mouse!!!

 

[Takeo]

Well it is not censorship (not in the law/legal way at least) but it sure is Apple telling people once again what they can and can't do with there phone.

When you buy an XBox you have to buy XBox games. If you buy in iPhone you have to accept that you can only run iPhone apps. Don't like it? Buy something else. So simple. It's NOT censorship. It's a choice. It's your choice. There are millions of choices for where to get porn or whatever. Apple just isn't one of them. And that's their prerogative.

 

[Takeo]

To make that point clear, the applications banned where not pornographic, they feature women in bikinis.

It doesn't matter if the 'banned' applications were pictures of home baked apple pies... it's Apple's store. They are a private company. Private companies sell what they want. I'm not saying we have to LIKE it. I personally LOVE women in bikinis! Who doesn't? I'm just saying that Apple has every right and are doing absolutely 100% nothing wrong.

 

[az431]

What is this apple?? a fundamental Muslim revolution? Soon: all women pictured in applications must be covered from head to toe.

You are a moron

 

[az431]

You're right!!! I'm going to start a boycott of Disney right now for refusing to sell pornography!!! I refuse to live in the the authoritative thumb of the mouse!!! Who's with me!!! Down with the mouse!!!

Lets boycott Barnes & Noble too!!!! Who are they to decide not to carry my favorite horse on girl porn!

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Well it is not censorship (not in the law/legal way at least) but it sure is Apple telling people once again what they can and can't do with there phone.

Not entirely. Apple determines which apps are sold in the store. Any of the apps that are now banned could be turned into web apps and Apple would have zero to say about it. This is exactly what Google did with the Google Voice app.

I do agree with you in part on Apple telling people how they can use the iPhone but it has nothing to do with the App store, and everything to do with being able to unlock it after the subscription is over. If there is something to be annoyed about that would be it. That is much more consequential. Really if you want to jiggle boobs get a girlfriend. Of course it will cost more than .99, but dems da breaks.

 

[Feek]

Maybe they're pulling them because they're going to introduce their own range of apps.

iCome?

iJizz?

 

[ugp]

I wonder if Apple is going to allow sexually explicit books. There are lots of big selling romance books that get real dirty.

Also note... Look at the videos you can watch on YouTube. To be realistic Apple should remove the YouTube App if they want that kind of content removed from the devices. You can watch all kinds of girls shaking their ass in a tiny thong.

 

[calderone]

I find it hard to believe that there are still folks claiming this is censorship. Tell you what though, before writing to your congressman about this one, be sure to send one about Walmart and anything other store that refuses to sell certain material.

When you get done with that go ahead and send that letter about Apple to your congressman or senator.

 

[mccldwll]

A dude over at TUAW has spoken to Apple with the following commandments spoken on 'girlie' apps...
"I have spoken with Apple, and the following are the new rules:
.......

Wrong. TUAW was quoting the developer of wobble boobs (or whatever it's called). The developer, along with techcrunch, are pushing this. Self interest?

 

[ugp]

I find it hard to believe that there are still folks claiming this is censorship. Tell you what though, before writing to your congressman about this one, be sure to send one about Walmart and anything other store that refuses to sell certain material.

When you get done with that go ahead and send that letter about Apple to your congressman or senator.

Walmart bans anyone that says bad stuff about them. Didn't they ban Cheryl Crow?

 

[mccldwll]

So what exactly is your definition of censorship? I'd be curious to know how you define it because from where I stand, this is censorship clear and simple.

I'm assuming you're one of those people who thinks it's only true censorship if the government does it or it's somehow implemented in a way that involves the law. Well, sorry, but that's the connotation but not the denotation of the word. We can split hairs over whether Apple is justified in censoring these apps, but you cannot have your own definition of the word "censorship."

What is beyond argument is that Apple is engaging in censorship. I find it repulsive and unnecessary.

It is not censorship. Apple is only restricting the apps it sells, which use its SDK, on its app store. Kids are arguing that since the app store is the only place to get iPhone apps, then its censorship not to allow them. 100% wrong. Curiously, if the apps were generally, legally available elsewhere but apple modified the iPhone to not run them, that might be censorship.

 

[CactusHawk]

When you buy an XBox you have to buy XBox games. If you buy in iPhone you have to accept that you can only run iPhone apps. Don't like it? Buy something else. So simple. It's NOT censorship. It's a choice. It's your choice. There are millions of choices for where to get porn or whatever. Apple just isn't one of them. And that's their prerogative.

Umm...when I bouthgt my iPhone 6 months ago I could choose to wiggle anything I wanted or choose to view women in beach wear. Now I cant...give me my money back??

 

[SBlue1]

can the games with mindless killing and raw violance also be pulled? ah, wait, this is american prude standards only, so these apps are safe i guess...

 

[guzhogi]

I find it odd that Apple is pulling all these "overtly sexual" apps, yet still keeps the Playboy app & all those violent games. It would make sense to me is an all or nothing thing: either keep all of these apps or get rid of all of them. I'll admit, I'm a lover, not a fighter so I'd like to see Apple keep these apps. Maybe Apple can move these apps to a new "Adult" section & not include them in the overall list of highest downloaded apps. Just thinking out loud.

 

[QCassidy352]

I am in favor of pulling apps from useless spammers (20 apps per day for some of these guys) regardless of sexual content ot not.

As for the sexual content debate, I'll say the same thing I said in the original thread. This has nothing to do with censorship or apple telling you what you can look at. It's a business decision - customers were getting upset by te offerings, so they pulled those offerings to appease those customers. If you disagree with that decision, either complain like those customers did (to apple, not here) or go to another platform. If apple thinks it is in their business interest to reverse course on this, they will. If not, they won't. It's not about values or morals, it's about appeasing customers.

To those who think this is about freedom or censorship, let me ask you this - did you take the same position with regard to hardcore porn apps prior to this decision? Because if not, I don't see that you have a leg to stand on. One may be more extreme, but the principle is exactly the same.

 

[ugp]

Violence sells.