backtop


Print 48 comment(s) - last by erple2.. on Jun 30 at 5:24 PM


Adult apps are finally coming to the iPhone thanks to parental controls. This almost-safe-for-work image is among the cleanest on the new app.  (Source: Gizmodo)
Censorship at Apple's App Store may finally be letting up

It took the Baby Boom generation to revolutionize America's views on sexuality, and it looks like it took three iPhone generations to accomplish a similar transformation.  In what some are hailing as the end of Apple App Store censorship, Apple has allowed a vibrator app and a pornographic app to enter the holy ground of its App Store.

Previous apps had offered softer content, showing somewhat provocative pictures of models in swimsuits.  The new app, though is the first to show nudity.  It definitely falls under the NSFW category.

The app is rate 17+ for "frequent/intense sexual content or nudity" and "frequent/intense mature/suggestive theme".  According to the developer, "We uploaded nude topless pics today. This is the first app to have nudity."

Apple decided to tolerate the new apps, reportedly, due to the new parental controls in the iPhone OS v3.0.  With the entrance of such apps into the App Store, many are predicting that Apple's censorship of such "offensive" adult applications such as the Me-So-Holy app and the South Park app will be forced to end.

Update 1 (Thu Jun 25, 1:23 PM):  It appears that Apple may have reversed its decision after the wave of popularity, though no official word has come yet.  The app is currently not available in the app store, according to users.

Update 2 (Thu Jun 25, 1:30 PM):  The developer's webpage states that the App wasn't whacked by Apple, but rather was temporarily taken down as the overwhelming popularity placing too much strain on the image server.  They promise the app will pop back up soon, complete with nudity.

Update 3 (Fri Jun 26, 8:27 AM):  Apple has baffled once again.  So, apparently it did actually pull the Hottest Girls app, which won't be returning.  States Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr:
Apple will not distribute applications that contain inappropriate content, such as pornography. The developer of this application added inappropriate content directly from their server after the application had been approved and distributed, and after the developer had subsequently been asked to remove some offensive content. This was a direct violation of the terms of the iPhone Developer Program. The application is no longer available on the App Store.

The real mystery now is why did they let it on in the first place?  And what's the point of parental controls if you disallow all adult content?




Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Removed?
By LorKha on 6/25/2009 1:19:48 PM , Rating: 2
I can't seem to get it. Looks like Apple won't allow it anymore.

LUCKY FOR THOSE WHO GOT IT!!!




RE: Removed?
By smackababy on 6/25/2009 1:28:11 PM , Rating: 5
It was taken down according to other reports. Sad Apple are such cencorship Nazis.


RE: Removed?
By TSS on 6/25/09, Rating: -1
RE: Removed?
By TomZ on 6/25/2009 1:52:05 PM , Rating: 5
Uh, banning an app based on its content is almost the exact definition of censorship.


RE: Removed?
By threepac3 on 6/25/2009 2:47:51 PM , Rating: 5
...and it's their right.


RE: Removed?
By Chocobollz on 6/26/2009 5:17:22 PM , Rating: 2
Yes it is, so what? Do we talking about the human rights here?


RE: Removed?
By mindless1 on 6/27/2009 1:34:03 AM , Rating: 2
... and it's ours to voice disapproval of it if/when we feel that way, though I too feel there is no need or point to pron on a small mobile device, that those interested in having it are probably pathetic perverts.


RE: Removed?
By xRyanCat on 6/28/2009 1:42:38 AM , Rating: 2
Actually... It might not be. If you can argue the iPhone has a monopoly, or a significant enough presence in their market (casual smartphone use) much like Microsoft has a monopoly in the Desktop market (the server market is more competitive), then the U.S. would charge them with anti-trust lawsuits as consumer welfare is an important part of U.S. antitrust law.

Of course there are alternatives, much like there are MANY alternatives to Windows, that doesn't mean Apply can't be treated like a monopoly just like Microsoft gets raped over.

Google cried foul and threw up a huge storm over Vista's search because Microsoft had an "unfair" advantage over Google Desktop.

Microsoft constantly gets trouble over their position while Apple gets to do pretty much whatever it wants.


RE: Removed?
By erple2 on 6/30/2009 5:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
Having a majority, or even a vast majority of market share is a necessary condition for having a Monopoly, but it is NOT a sufficient condition for having a Monopoly.


RE: Removed?
By smackababy on 6/25/2009 2:14:00 PM , Rating: 2
It isn't just this app, but many that have "questionable" content. Also, this is not the only app that does this slideshow of sexy women, it is just the first to have nudity. Before this update, it contained no nudity and was completely legal.

Also, as for the "good reason" to have this app on a phone part can be thrown out. The iPhone isn't a work phone, it is something to show off to your friends. It is a smart phone for people who don't need one.


RE: Removed?
By QueBert on 6/25/2009 2:23:28 PM , Rating: 3
How exactly isn't it a work phone? I know businesses that give their employees iPhones. I can VNC on mine, I can do push email, and I'm able to sync my contacts wirelessly. All I can do nativly is text message, which is about as un-business as you can get. I can do anything on my iPhone that I could do on my WinMo phone. Only most of it more efficiently. The VNC client I use is better of anything any WinMo user will find. And VNC'ing is an important part of my job. The fact my iPhone is also the best media player and had pretty cool games are just icing on an already delicious cake. Not a perfect phone by any stretch of the imagination, but it works exceptionally well as a business phone.


RE: Removed?
By QueBert on 6/25/2009 2:26:45 PM , Rating: 2
can do nativly = can't do natively


RE: Removed?
By plewis00 on 6/29/2009 12:26:13 PM , Rating: 2
You know businesses that give their employees iPhones? Well I work in the IT department for one of those companies and it is a nightmare to operate - I have to key in the same e-mail address 6 times (before the days of cut & paste) per account and there were 24 accounts to configure. There is no way of deploying settings or software out to all the company phones (that is a pretty big flaw) - if we buy iPhone software I can't give it to all staff without setting them up each an iTunes account and then telling them what to buy, if I sync it on there at my end, as soon as they connect it to their PC it erases and resyncs.

The 'push' capability is a joke and just remains connected to the server and never properly drops the link, meaning that our mail server which only likes 1 connection at a time per mailbox won't allow Outlook on the laptops to connect simultaneously and throws an error. The iPhone won't even tell you that it's still connected, you just have to guess.

I don't even need to really say much about the security (or complete lack of it).

I'm not denying it has a good media player (albeit with only MP4 videos) and some amazing games but that purely makes it a great consumer phone, a toy, if you will. As a business tool it is useless and claiming it is anything otherwise will get you laughed out of the room by people in the know...


RE: Removed?
By 67STANG on 6/26/2009 12:11:19 PM , Rating: 1
Seriously. I'm not sure how this is any more offensive than when one of my buddies picture messages me a dump he just took in the toilet.


RE: Removed?
By mindless1 on 6/27/2009 1:37:00 AM , Rating: 3
The "thats ok because there is something in this world even worse" argument is always silly. Perhaps it's offensive. Perhaps it's not. Either way it is totally irrelevant whether something else is even more offensive.

On a side note, if you find dump pics offensive then grow some balls and tell your buddies that, if they are really your buddies they'll stop doing it or if they're not, block them.


RE: Removed?
By theapparition on 6/27/2009 7:15:55 PM , Rating: 2
Well, Apple didn't allow MMS for the longest time either. Wouldn't surprise me if our Apple overlords decided to offer MMS and then remove that functionality shortly thereafter as well.


RE: Removed?
By FaaR on 6/26/2009 2:25:55 PM , Rating: 3
Query:
What possible use could you have of an app doing absolutely nothing whatsoever except showing pictures of naked ladies?

Like you can't find enough (as in: more than any sane person has time to consume in a lifetime), completely free porn on the internet, using the iphone's browser?

I think you have your priorities somewhat out of whack when you call Apple 'censorship nazis' over this matter.


RE: Removed?
By BikeDude on 6/29/2009 4:31:17 AM , Rating: 2
A nice looking woman is the most beautiful thing there is in this universe. It is surely better to watch nice-looking women than wasting time with a game or business type application?

Yes, you can find such pictures almost everywhere. The operative word here is 'almost'. :(


RE: Removed?
By walk2k on 6/25/2009 2:20:41 PM , Rating: 5
Topless? Oh gosh! Like you can't just open the browser and get all the nasty ultra-closeup hardcore pr0n jpegs off the web?


RE: Removed?
By ThePooBurner on 6/25/09, Rating: -1
RE: Removed?
By monomer on 6/25/2009 4:35:36 PM , Rating: 2
How is using an app as your porn delivery service at work any better than using the iPhone's built in Safari browser?


RE: Removed?
By ThePooBurner on 6/30/2009 3:35:06 PM , Rating: 2
Less work. Porn lookers will take the easiest root to get to their smut.


RE: Removed?
By Fenixgoon on 6/26/2009 9:13:30 AM , Rating: 4
Yeah but have you tried carrying around a desktop full of TB's of porn? NOT practical.

Now you can fit enough porn in one hand to conveniently leave the other free....


RE: Removed?
By Zaphod Beeblebrox on 6/26/2009 2:38:15 PM , Rating: 2
Ah, progress.


RE: Removed?
By mindless1 on 6/27/2009 1:39:06 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm. Are you proposing walking around in circles in your own home while jerking off or walking out into public to do so? Either seems a bit pointless and unproductive.


RE: Removed?
By AntiM on 6/25/2009 2:40:39 PM , Rating: 2
No, it wasn't "removed", it was YANKED. Maybe it was causing too much... yanking?


RE: Removed?
By cparka23 on 6/25/2009 2:42:56 PM , Rating: 2
iHeart iB00bs.


RE: Removed?
By Bender 123 on 6/26/2009 8:46:25 AM , Rating: 3
It has been taken down under the competing first party app clause, not due to censorship. Apple is planning on releasing the largest selling app in history, with the new iSteve.

iSteve is an app that will allow fanatics to view Steve Jobs in various states of undress, amidst iconic Apple Hardware scenes. Similar to, but less creepy than, the pic of Bill Gates DT keeps showing on Bill Gates stories.

They did, however censor and deny the release, of a similar app that was called iWoz...Thank God. (shudder...)


RE: Removed?
By sprockkets on 6/26/2009 5:10:12 PM , Rating: 2
Lucky for those who got it? You forgot that Apple can remote kill apps right?

I doubt they will since it isn't a malicious app, but if they did, I will add it to my stack of Apple BS/PR blunders/snottery/holier than thou's.


Whatever
By TheDiceman on 6/25/2009 1:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly, I think this whole censorship issues is ridiculous on both ends. The standards Apple uses to judge Apps does seem rather crude since it is little more than a basis of "we do/do not like this and you are stuck with whatever decision our possibly biased review staff may have". I find this especially applies to situations like the South Park App. When it comes to something like nudity/excess sexuality honestly I do not care. Same goes for stuff like the baby shaker App, yeah, it may be sick or otherwise inappropriate but who really gives a damn? At the same time I have to ask some of these people (especially with regards to nudity/sexuality), do you REALLY need to be able to look at this stuff on your phone?




RE: Whatever
By TomZ on 6/25/2009 1:51:14 PM , Rating: 3
The obvious solution is that Apple needs to design and implement a ratings system and stop censoring alltogether. That way, if someone only wants to look at "family-friendly" apps, they just see that subset. If they want sex/gross/violent/etc. apps, then they can have that too.

And it's not a question of "needing" to look at sexy stuff on your phone; instead, it's having the right to be able to choose that as an adult. Apple shouldn't treat all their customers like they are children.


UPDATE 3
By sprockkets on 6/26/2009 4:04:55 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Update: Okay, this gets weirder and weirder. Now a spokesperson for Apple tells CNN that it did remove the app. It is now gone from the store. Here’s the statement: Apple will not distribute applications that contain inappropriate content, such as pornography. The developer of this application added inappropriate content directly from their server after the application had been approved and distributed, and after the developer had subsequently been asked to remove some offensive content. This was a direct violation of the terms of the iPhone Developer Program. The application is no longer available on the App Store. So, apparently, Apple has a rating system that includes nudity, but it doesn’t plan to allow nudity in any app? And it’s letting apps in that both have nudity and claim to have nudity. I’m not sure Apple knows what is even going on at this point.


Source: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/25/iphone-porn-a...




What is so baffling?
By artemicion on 6/26/2009 10:42:01 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The real mystery now is why did they let it on in the first place? And what's the point of parental controls if you disallow all adult content?


Um, my reading of your very own reporting is that the developers submitted an application that did not feature pornography. After the application was accepted, they made content changes server-side that added porn. Apple, understandably annoyed at the developer's underhandedness, yanked the app.

Not sure what is so "baffling" about that.

Pretty sure there's nothing to see here (especially now that they pulled the porn). The market is legion with companies that distribute user-created content that place conditions on the kind of content that is allowed.

Pretty sure you can't post porn on facebook, myspace, etc. Facists!

Pretty sure you can't post porn on Youtube. Despots!

Pretty sure DailyTech automatically rates down comments that contain swear words. Swear words! WHERE'S DAILYTECH BASED, CHINA!?!?!? And I bet if I made an ASCII drawing of a penis in a comment, DailyTech would outright take it down. COMMIE NAZIS!

(sarcasm throughout)




RE: What is so baffling?
By Alexstarfire on 6/26/2009 3:02:31 PM , Rating: 3
Apples to oranges my friend. The reason you can't post porn on those sites is because the sites/servers are owned by them. They have the right to pull content off their own servers as they see fit. I suppose the same could be said of Apple hosting the apps since they do host it on their own servers, but the problem is that the App store is THE ONLY way to get apps. Upon implementation of parental controls it makes little sense for Apple to keep playing the parent role and filtering apps.

Anyway, once the app is downloaded Apple should no longer have control of it since it is no longer on any of their property. It is not the right of the software holder, in this case Apple on the iPhone, to dictate what one can or can not do on their software, provided it's not breaking the EULA. Which in this instance it's not, just merely breaking Apple's ethical/moral code which most people couldn't care less about. Apple does not own the phone that the software is running on, unless it's on display at an Apple store.


mystery
By omnicronx on 6/26/2009 11:29:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The real mystery now is why did they let it on in the first place? And what's the point of parental controls if you disallow all adult content?
I think its pretty obvious, he submitted the app with non nude photos of the 'hottest woman' and then flipped the switch to nude photos after being accepted. Whats funny is there is really no way for Apple to stop this, someone could label a game as made for kids, submit it, and then change the server side content after being accepted.




RE: mystery
By foolsgambit11 on 6/26/2009 4:26:19 PM , Rating: 2
Except that Apple had the program rated at 17+ for nudity and sexual content. And then yanked it for nudity and sexual content - and not even full frontal from what I understand.

I'm just curious exactly what 'terms of the Apple Developer Agreement' were violated. Anybody here an iPhone developer?


hummm...
By QueBert on 6/25/2009 1:41:58 PM , Rating: 2
We all know sex sells, better than anything else out there. Apple makes money on apps that sell, so if they allowed adult apps they would make a killing. I think it's dumb they don't allow them for the ones who actually want them. But they're losing tons of money for there stance, which I respect. Very few companies would say no to making money.




Won't last long
By Proxes on 6/25/2009 1:56:01 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think apps like this will last long unless they are producing their own images. They're probably grabbing them from the web and selling them. Only a matter of time before copyright issues pop up.




Image licensing
By Capsaicin on 6/25/2009 2:10:21 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder, did they acquire licensing for the images? Or just d/l whatever from the intertoobs and drop them in.




By mikefarinha on 6/25/2009 5:45:47 PM , Rating: 2
By psonice on 6/26/2009 9:17:26 AM , Rating: 2
So it seems that apple let the app in because it didn't feature nudity. Then, after it went live, the developer started pushing out porn. Not really surprising that they pulled it, is it?

The real questions here are what's actually going on with the age ratings system on the app store. With os3.0, all apps are age rated for stuff like violence, nudity etc. So presumably they're planning to allow more 'adult' stuff.

But.. are apple actually allowing adult apps yet? If not, then the adult ratings are probably still being tested.

Another question: what ratings did the app have? If it was using pretty tame images when it was submitted, they could easily have put a low score for nudity and got a low age rating. Do that and put porn in it, and you're suddenly selling porn to kids. Not a good plan.




iBoobs
By WackoNiko on 6/26/2009 2:56:02 PM , Rating: 2
mmmm...iBoobs




O rly?
By aj28 on 6/26/2009 6:09:49 PM , Rating: 2
This whole deal is pretty blown out of proportion, imo... Apple doesn't care whether you'd use the app to bypass company filters and jerk on the boss's dime, nor are they any kind of prude as some seem to think. Fact of the matter is, the idea of a large tech firm like Apple actually distributing an app specifically designed to funnel pornography onto one of their top-selling products is absolutely ludicrous, much like the idea that this is some form of medieval sexual censorship and/or Steve Jobs doesn't like boobies.

They can't publish this stuff because they control the app store. They control the app store to prevent malicious/bug-ridden apps from getting onto their product. A moral distaste for pornography is nowhere in Apple's agenda.




Apple accepts then whacks adult app
By Creig on 6/26/2009 7:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm... Isn't that what you're supposed to do after downloading an adult app? I don't see the problem.




Update 4
By crystal clear on 6/27/2009 3:33:49 AM , Rating: 2
Now read the update 4-

Apple has now removed all of our apps from the iTunes store without prior warning or reason. We have yet to hear back from them on this issue.

http://www.allenthegeek.com/index.html




Apple how could you??
By blueboy09 on 6/26/2009 7:32:51 PM , Rating: 1
You accept the adult app, then you don't, and what's the ordeal with this app if you have parental controls on the phone itself? Come on Apple! Wake up! What's the matter with you, are you brain-dead? As long as kids can be safe-guarded who gives a shit? Really!!! (end of rant) - BLUEBOY




Jason Mick, youre a hack.
By icanhascpu on 6/27/09, Rating: 0
Similarities
By crystal clear on 6/26/09, Rating: -1
"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007
Related Articles
Apple Vetos South Park iPhone App
February 18, 2009, 10:31 AM













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki