toggle

AAPL Stock: 102.47 ( 0 )

Printed from http://www.macnn.com

'Sexual' App Store purge affecting over 5,000 titles?

updated 11:50 am EST, Mon February 22, 2010

Innocuous apps may be caught in crossfire

Apple's cleansing of "overtly sexual" apps from the App Store has taken over 5,000 titles offline, claims ChilliFresh. Responsible for one of the first apps to be banned, Wobble iBoobs, the developer says that it has learned the information in discussing the situation with Apple. The figure may be backed by data from AppShopper, which said that 4,000 apps had been culled as of last Friday.

The new rules are said to be extremely strict, preventing images of women in bikinis, or any form of sexual innuendo, such as references to "boobs," "babes," "booty" or simply sex. No apps will be allowed that could in any manner imply sexual content, an Apple representative is said to have informed.

The measure would appear to be hypocritical, or at least not yet fully enforced, as App Store shoppers can for instance continue to download the official Playboy magazine app. Beyond this, it may also be affecting innocent parties. Simply Beach, a UK swimwear retailer, says its shopping app has been removed for "overtly sexual content" despite merely showing women modeling the clothing for sale. The app is being resubmitted with an age restriction, though even if it fails Simply Beach notes that its products can still be found through Amazon's iPhone app.




by MacNN Staff

toggle

Comments

  1. nat

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +14

    the problem is

    4000 + apps. one developer had put up over 500 apps along these lines.

    how many times can you search for something and get a handful of these apps in the results where they clearly don't belong, before enough is enough?

    that's the trouble with p*** (even soft). once they start they will never ever stop. soon you would have jiggling jagumbas #3012 all new girls!

    apple may be getting some grief about this but down the road i highly doubt that a google sponsored app store or a ms sponsored app store will allow them. if you don't stop them they will simply take over.

    i don't see any jiggling jagumbas ads on macnn. or pcworld. or newsweek. you simply have to draw the line.

  1. ff11

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +11

    Fair enough

    But we need clarity and consistency in policies. App designers shouldn't have to worry if tomorrow their genre will be banned and their work go down the drain.

  1. nat

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +6

    agree

    they shouldn't have allowed them in the first place. on the other hand there was a developer awhile back that was pulled because his hundreds of "apps" were nothing but redirecting to the web to get the info it promised. no s**, no s***, just misrepresentation. so if you're going to be a s****** or going to inundate the app store then be prepared to get pulled.

    i'm guessing that's why playboy and penthouse are still there. there's one app for each and they're probably not going to show up in any number of searches that have nothing to do with them.

  1. nat

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +10

    odd

    it just filtered the words s*x and sm*t and schm*ck

  1. WiseWeasel

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +1

    Bleh

    It's a good thing Apple is here to protect me from myself. Otherwise, I might have to show some personal restraint. Close call!

    Damn prudes!

  1. nat

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +4

    well wise

    unless the bigger picture is all about you and only you then you're missing it.

  1. jgarbers

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +5

    What about SI Swimsuit?

    After all the hubbub about the 5000 apps being removed, the SI Swimsuit 2010 app is still listed on the front page of the App Store. Wonder if that one will be pulled too?

  1. testudo

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -5

    Wasting time

    Maybe if Apple didn't waste their time when reviewing apps for things like "OMG! He used the name Johnny Appleseed in a screen shot!" or making sure they couldn't find a naughty word or who knows what else they waste their time looking at, maybe they could have spent some time actually using an app and determining a valid age restriction, rather than let it go, then much later complain that it is 'inappropriate'.

    And I sure hope Apple will then go through all their videos and music on line and make sure that no inappropriate material is ever sold there, esp. to a minor. And don't go by those MPAA ratings, either. They're getting more lax and, in some cases, allow boobies in pg-13 movies.

  1. testudo

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +1

    Re: well wise


    unless the bigger picture is all about you and only you then you're missing it.


    What is the big picture then? To pretend s** doesn't exist? To make the iPad and iPhone a safe place for people of all ages? To turn Apple into a content police force?

    Or maybe if adults weren't so lazy as to their parenting responsibilities, then companies like Apple wouldn't be wasting their time making sure they keep little bobby safe from himself.

  1. nat

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +7

    oh dear

    the old parenting argument. tsk tsk.
    and why doesn't netflix rent p***? are they policing content as well? are they parenting?
    who says apple has to have this stuff? you?
    the big picture... well, read my first post ok pumpkin?

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Kenu Airframe Plus

Simple, stylish and effective, the Kenu Airframe + portable car mount is the latest addition to Kenu's lineup. Released earlier this ...

Plantronics Rig Surround 7.1 headset

Trying to capture the true soundscape of video games can be a daunting task. Looking to surround-sound home theater options, users hav ...

Adesso Compagno X Bluetooth keyboard

The shift from typing on physical keyboards to digital versions on smartphones and tablets hasn't been an easy for many consumers. Fr ...

toggle

Most Commented