Phil Schiller responds to sex app purge

Late last week, Apple removed some 5,000 apps from the App Store for what it called "objectionable content." The story broke when Jon Atherton of Chillifresh, developer of the app Wobble iBoobs, sent an email to Techcrunch detailing his app's removal. Since then, Jon posted what is allegedly Apple's definition of "objectionable content"* to his site, which includes:

No images of women in bikinis
No images of men in bikinis
No skin
No silhouettes that indicate that Wobble can be used for wobbling boobs
No sexual connotations or innuendo: boobs, babes, booty, sex – all banned
Nothing that can be sexually arousing
No apps will be approved that in any way imply sexual content

Of course, that immediately raises the question about the Playboy app and Sports Illustrated (SI) Swimsuit app, which are both in the store as of this writing. Apple's head of worldwide product marketing Phil Schiller addressed this question and others in a New York Times article published today.

"It came to the point where we were getting customer complaints from women who found the content getting too degrading and objectionable, as well as parents who were upset with what their kids were able to see," Mr. Schiller said.

When asked why the SI and Playboy apps are still available, Mr. Schiller replied, "The difference is this is a well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format."

Now that Apple has put its foot down, they've got stick with it. In the meantime, developers who have been making decent money off of consenting adults who enjoy their apps cry foul. At the same time, developers like Wally Chang, founder of Donoma Games, welcome the change. "There just seems to be too many of these really simple applications that do nothing but show pictures of girls in bikinis or in suggestive, adult poses," he said. Some parents would agree.

Some have suggested that Apple could create a "red light district" area of the App Store that's disabled by default, while others suggest that parents simply monitor what their kids are downloading.

*This list has not been confirmed by Apple.

View Tags

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/technology/23apps.html?par…

Categories

Apple Corporate iPhone App Store iPod touch

Late last week, Apple removed some 5,000 apps from the App Store for what it called "objectionable content." The story broke when Jon...

Add a Comment

Sign in »

62 Comments

Filter by:

Pierre

Strange how it is a shame to upload games with naked skins, but not games that promote war.

February 26 2010 at 2:12 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

JimGramze

The point is this: Apple does not want to be perceived as a porn store. My local grocery stores carry a lot of magazines but do not have such magazines as Playboy. Apple is not forcing you to not have such content on your Apple devices since you can download porn in the form of pictures and videos and put them there yourself.

February 24 2010 at 9:14 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Ribisl

"Nothing that can be sexually arousing"

What if someone is aroused by ...mhhhhh...lets say... cars or shoes or football or donkey kong?

Why not simply ban everything? Or is it called censorship?

If apps are bad, people will not buy them. Simple as that.

February 24 2010 at 5:20 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

mrick

This issue is about censorship, money and laziness.

Parental controls are a feature of major OSs these days, and anyone would be silly to say that the iPhone does not represent a major OS platform.

Apple just doesn't want to bother with the engineering. And, why should they when they can easily shut down the small developers who are too small to make a lot of noise?

As for Apple protecting its business model . . .

I'm not going to place a value judgment that, but customers need to consider whether they can live with it or not.

I'm sure the majority of folks can live with Apple's restrictions, but it bugs me enough that I can't in good conscience shell out my cash for an iPad or a Mac.

FWIW, I've owned a Mac continuously since 1984 and all four members of my family have iPhones, so yes I am a good (former) customer.

February 23 2010 at 10:06 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

(01)

"Nothing that can be sexually arounsing"

Hey, I get off on calculating tips, can I cut a few apps out of the store?

February 23 2010 at 5:49 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

xxdesmusxx

Typical Apple bull***. If they really want to be all high and mighty all of a sudden then they need to remove Safari. It's the simplest and more direct path to porn on the iPhone. If they are going to remove all this indecent content then remove ALL OF IT. Remove Playboy, Sports Illustrative, FHM, ....I'm sure that'll go over well. Oh wait, instead Apple will do what they do best -- piss on the small developers instead. People wonder why many people hate the Apple brand? It's pathetic stunts like this.

February 23 2010 at 4:24 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Paulmi

Well I'm in a pickle!

I am about to submit my App; Photo Shootout to Apple. It's a unique CLASSY pro-photographer Sim game where the player shoots photography assignments for tear-sheets, in-game money and better camera equipment.
The first version's assignments are beauty shots of models and models in bathing suits. All of this is fashion magazine (supermarket checkout lane magazine rack) quality and I can't imagine it would be offensive.

So the question is will I get approved when I submit in the next two weeks or denied?

Check out my game trailer and let me know what your prediction is;

http://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoShootoutApp

February 23 2010 at 3:48 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

alansky

Heaven knows that there is no shortage of x-rated websites. Apple is under absolutely no obligation to make the iPhone a platform for this crap. Borders Books doesn't sell Hustler magazine, nor are they under any obligation to do so. Ditto for Apple.

February 23 2010 at 3:12 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Rot\'nApple

"When asked why the SI and Playboy apps are still available, Mr. Schiller replied, "The difference is this is a well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format.""...

so Mr. Schiller.... take 100 Playboys to your church next Sunday and hand them out to one and all, men, women, girls and boys and see where your 'well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format.' gets you!

Sexually overt content is sexually overt content... Apple! When you make your exceptions you defeat your argument, Apple! For the sake of the children, Apple, for the sake of the children!!! When is it gonna stop?!!!!

February 23 2010 at 3:03 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Devon

I remember when I was much younger than 18 and looking at nudie mags. Nothing bad happened and I'm a regular person. I don't see what parents are so worried about. They should be happy their kid is normal and wants to look at this stuff.

Also, sorry Phil, but your reasoning for allowing Playboy and Sports Illustrated is not logical.

February 23 2010 at 2:46 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply