

Apple Now Blocking 'Overtly Sexual' Apps from App Store - aschobel
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/19/apple-now-blocking-overtly-sexual-apps-from-app-store/

======
plinkplonk
Why is anyone surprised? Anyone choosing to develop for the AppStore is in the
position of a sharecropper iin APple's Orchard. (Reg Brathwaite wrote an
awsome article on this at [http://weblog.raganwald.com/2004/11/sharecropping-
in-orchard...](http://weblog.raganwald.com/2004/11/sharecropping-in-
orchard.html)) The owner reserves the right to be as much of a dick as he
wants to be, wrt how his land is used by the sharecroppers. That's how
sharecropping works.

There is nothing in wrong in being a sharecropper if that is what someone
wants to do, but I don't get the angst. When the owner says "jump" the correct
response from a sharecropper is "How high"?

~~~
colinplamondon
From the beginning, Apple's said 'No Porn'.

That was never rescinded, they just eased the acceptance a bit as people poked
and prodded the boundaries. People were looking to make a quick buck by
skirting the rules.

This isn't a matter of Apple being dickish, this is a matter of folks taking
known risks and getting whacked on the head for it.

~~~
silencio
Apple first disapproved of adult content. Then they added rather draconian
ratings for apps and of course, parental controls. Then borderline-adult
content started being really popular on the store. If Apple really really
really didn't want this content on the app store, they shouldn't've approved
it in the first place.

Can we really expect any other situation? And why couldn't Apple go one step
further with ratings/controls and provide an adults-only app store area?

My biggest concern (other than the lack of adult content available to me) is
that Apple can first approve and be okay with selling such content, and then
turn around and remove them all from the app store because other people
supposedly complained too much about a specific group of apps. It was bad
enough dealing with their arbitrarily defined and enforced restrictions and
approval guidelines. Okay, they're the gatekeepers, and they can do whatever
they want, but that makes it a lot harder for me to work as I really don't
know what Apple's whims will be like when it comes to an app idea I'm
considering.

------
stuartjmoore
I wrote two apps for the SuicideGirls[NSFW], and one has since been removed.

SG is sexual, but not out right porn. Apple can do what it wants, but it kind
of sucks that an entire company's branding is essentially banned or "in
review" for 3 months.

Yes, they have Safari, but that harkens back to the web vs native app debate.

If only Android was the popular one...

------
tlrobinson
App Store review process: the TSA of technology.

------
andrewljohnson
This definitely seems capricious, and it certainly must have some chilling
effect on anyone considering building an app for the iPhone. From my limited
perspective as a lefty computer geek, this seems like a real blunder.

On the other hand, half the country lives in "fly over" America, and doesn't
want to see smut or have their children subjected to smut on the iPod. So, I
can see how this decision was made.

~~~
jgrahamc
_This definitely seems capricious, and it certainly must have some chilling
effect on anyone considering building an app for the iPhone._

It'll have a chilling effect on people who want to build an application with
wobbling tits in it, but I don't see that as a bad thing. It's not just people
in the mid-West who don't want smut in the App Store.

I can easily find smut on the Internet via my iPhone if I want it. I don't
need it to be in the App Store.

~~~
andrewcooke
but do you need it not to be in the app store?

i don't need anything to be in the app store myself, but luckily for you "i
don't need anything to be in the app store" is not the same as "i need the app
store to be empty".

is that clear? there's a difference between not caring and forcing your
opinions on others.

~~~
jleyank
I have always thought that those truly secure in themselves find it easy to
live and let live. Those with doubts seem (have?) to go overboard to enforce
their world view on others. Maybe it lessens their insecurity, maybe they're
trying to remove temptations on themselves, ...

And Apple's just a business. Getting points with (potential) customers is all
well and good until there's a noticeable impact on the bottom line for doing
so. Nobility's gotta pay the bills, too.

