Apple decides iPhone public will forgo choice of adult content
As we reported earlier, Apple has been removing any iPhone application from the App Store that contains in their view, adult content. Apple apparently stated that apps with ‘overtly sexual content’ will be removed; now one would presume this would mean bordering on ‘soft porn’ however this doesn’t seem to be the case.
According to an article over on tech crunch, they are hearing from numerous iPhone app developers that the new rule covers anything which could be deemed slightly titillating and includes such things as swimsuits, fitness outfits, anything showing skin and the like.
If your iPhone app comes in this wide ranging category then you are probably going to find your app has been give the order of the boot by Apple.
Jon Atherton, the developer of Wobble Boobs that was recently kicked from the App Store has now published a list of Apple’s new rules to his blog and it covers…no images of women in bikinis, no images of men in bikinis, no skin, no silhouettes which can use wobble boobs feature, no sexual innuendo including sex, booty, babes, boobs as they are all banned, and nothing that can be deemed sexually arousing.
Has Apple taken up a religious order with this draconian set of regulations, have they become the ‘Big Brother’ of righteousness and piety that they can simply ban anything that they feel is sexually orientated?
Perhaps it is time Apple stepped into the same era as their iPhone tech and stopped being so bloody prudish when it comes to iPhone apps, after all I’m sure if a person doesn’t like sexual content then all they need to do is not download the app, right? It would appear that Apple feels the iPhone public can’t make a decision for themselves.
Comments
8 thoughts on “Apple decides iPhone public will forgo choice of adult content”
So you want your children to get exposed to sex and sexiness early? Go ahead, it’s your future problem. Or do you plan on banning them from getting their hands on an iPhone or iPod Touch? Do you think you’ll ever manage that?
Well done apple. If people need this kind of titillation then they can buy magazines, browse the web or find another method to make them feel whole.
These apps should not have been allowed, but I understand that some may want them, most whom do have their devices jail broken so I am sure they will still get their needs filled.
I am not of any religious following, just a normal respectable member of society.
I love your “WTF”! Nice! Anyway, this is no different than going into say Target! You won’t find magazines of “Bikini Babes” but you will find Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition. You won’t find porn but you will find CD’s with “Mature Lyrics”, and games with “Mature Content”.
Look, the fact is this stuff has NEVER made sense from the movie ratings system to the situation at 7-Eleven to the above at Target. But that’s just the way it is! Get over it!
The issue is worse for Apple in that unlike 7-Eleven or Target there is no cashier that can verify, or is supposed to verify, age. So you give your kid an iPhone and then what?
What’s really sad is all these people that I guess can’t meet a real girl in a bikini and have to get an app to see them. Here’s a free clue! Go on line, download all the bikini girls you want, thousands if you like, load them into iPhoto and sync! There! You have more bikini girls than you ever imagined!
Problem solved…and I didn’t even charge you 99 cents!
There’s a really simple solution for this: Make a category for NC 17 apps. For adults only requiring some kind of certification via credit card or something like that.
Everyone wins and the racy is stuff get to compete in its own category.
I agree with Apple.
Removing overtly sexual apps improves the quality and taste level of the App store. And it greatly improves Apple’s competitive edge over its competitors.
It makes it easier for parents to allow their children to use the App store without supervision.
It makes it easier for school districts to purchase the iPad in massive quantities compared to Apple’s competition.
It makes it easier for parents to purchase the iPod Touch for their children (which doubles the market for Apps compared to any of Apple’s competition).
It makes it more acceptable for people in other countries to purchase the iPod Touch, iPad, and iPhone is massive quantities (e.g. China and Middle Eastern Countries – lands of the even more prude).
The removal of overtly sexual apps will accelerate the purchases of the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad for Apple’s next generation – the children. Then as these children become adults, they will stay in the Apple fold.
Certainly, an alternative route would be for Apple to create an Adults only category – which is by default unaccessible. The only way it can be accessible is through certification via a second credit card (which is different from what was given to the iTunes account) and driver’s license or something like that. This makes it much more difficult for children – such as kindergardeners – to access.
To those bringing up a “think of the children!!11!” argument, the app store already had a robust rating system; and it was easy for parents to allow their children to only access content up to a certain rating. The setting was right on the particular iPod, and could be locked down with a password.
If parents refuse to even learn the most rudimentary details about their child’s devices, it is their own fault if their child gets access to adult content.
@James Katt –
“It makes it easier for school districts to purchase the iPad in massive quantities compared to Apple’s competition.”
– Why would schools allow application purchases on school iPads at all? They should be centrally managed by the IT department. It’s already very easy to block all application installation through parental controls; or (if you insist students be allowed to purchase applications for the school) use the existing parental age-blocks.
– Most of your other points relate to already-addressed parental controls
“It makes it more acceptable for people in other countries to purchase the iPod Touch, iPad, and iPhone is massive quantities (e.g. China and Middle Eastern Countries – lands of the even more prude).”
– Apple maintains country-specific App stores; as a Canadian there are many applications that I can’t even get because they are US-Only. If Apple wants to cater to the “even more prude” they can do it in that country’s app store.
“Certainly, an alternative route would be for Apple to create an Adults only category – which is by default unaccessible. The only way it can be accessible is through certification via a second credit card (which is different from what was given to the iTunes account) and driver’s license or something like that. This makes it much more difficult for children – such as kindergardeners – to access.”
– Again, when Mom and Dad buy the device for their kid and set up the child’s app store access, the PARENT should use the existing controls to determine what the child has access to – categories include 4+, 9+, 12+ and 17+. You seem to think “if it doesn’t show skin, it’s OK for my kindergardener”. I disagree, I think there’s lots of other stuff out there that small children shouldn’t have access to in the app store, and just throwing the doors open to a child is inappropriate.
The problem is that even as I have my 9 year old child’s ipod touch set to restrict content to four year old appropriate materials, at present they present sex position apps to him for download. I have no other option than to completely turn off the apps section. That should not be necessary.
phil
I can see that being a problem. My kid isn't going to have a phone until she's 25…and shes only 7 months old now.