Apple Bans RSS Reader Due To Bad Word In Feed Link 254
btempleton writes "It all started when I prepared yet another Downfall subtitle parody. In this one, Hitler is the studio head, upset at all the Downfall parodies, and he wants to do DMCA takedowns on them all. (If you're a DMCA/DRM fighting Slashdotter, you'll like it.) The EFF, which I chair, blogged it on Deeplinks, and hilarity ensued. That weekend, Exact Magic, an iPhone developer, had submitted a special RSS reader app to display EFF news on the iPhone. Apple's iPhone app store evaluators looked at the RSS reader, read the feed it pointed to, and then played the linked-to video. They saw the F-word flash in the subtitles of the video, and then rejected the RSS-reading tool from the App Store. We're up to several levels of meta here — Apple has banned an app over a parody about banning, and is now parodying itself. Bonus: TFA also has the story of just how hard it is to be fully legal in obtaining the famous clip for parody."
Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm an Apple fanboy and even I'm sick of this.
If they're not careful, pretty soon the PSP Go App Store is going to be the one making all the money. Hey Sony, PSPhone in the works?
Re: (Score:2)
You should have struck with string jokes, Brad. Look at the trouble you've caused. ...gryphon!richard
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Censorship is more indecent than any use of profanity ever can be.
Someone has to make a reality check.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Nokia N900 looks good enough for me to consider neither Apple, nor Sony. Thank you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah.. it's pretty easy, you default to "Adults Only" mode, but you provide a "Clean Feed" mode which people can opt-in to. All your effort goes into bringing the "Clean Feed" up to date and, as such, even the kids won't want to use it, so one day you take a look at the numbers and say "why are we putting so much effort into this 1% of the market?" and get rid of it.
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
How the fuck difficult is it to realize what an RSS reader does and to realize the app doesn't 'do' that content, it just gets it from the feed?
Does Apple have 5th graders reviewing this content?
Description: "This app downloads and displays pictures." It would be reasonable to assume that those pictures could be pornography. However that's not what the program does. Holy hell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Informative)
But you can block Safari, if you're a parent and you want control over what your child does with their iPhone. It's under Settings > General > Restrictions.
What you can't do, however, is allow/block each and every application that your child might download from the App Store. You can block the installation of applications altogether, but it's rather obvious that Apple doesn't want you to do that - it cuts off a potential revenue stream for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Parental controls/ratings are in iPhone OS 3.0
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, I'd rather see parents have the ability to block apps than Apple, which ends up blocking them for all of us.
The bigger question should be: "Why would you buy a child an iPhone?" Don't they have special phones for parents who don't trust or spend any time with their children?
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why ratings are coming in 3.0 next week. Clearly the current situation is as undesirable for Apple as it is for the rest of us.
We're talking about iPod Touches too, remember. The lack of a contract alone makes them
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't answer the question, though.
If you have a kid that's young enough and untrustworthy enough for this to be a big enough deal that it's on slashdot, FFS, then the question is WTF are you doing giving him a $400 pda?
Re: (Score:2)
The cheapest iPod Touch is $229, or $179 refurbished.
Besides, it's up to the parent to decide what to buy their child, what they should be allowed to do, and what kind of environment they should be brought up in.
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:4, Funny)
The cheapest iPod Touch is $229, or $179 refurbished.
Besides, it's up to the parent to decide what to buy their child, what they should be allowed to do, and what kind of environment they should be brought up in.
You mean it's NOT up to apple?
Shock of shocks...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And as for 'special' phones where internet access is restricted or prohibitively expensive, try just about every non-'smartphone' on the market.
In the US maybe. Elsewhere such as here in the UK, bog standard phones have had unrestricted Internet access for years. And at the same choice of rates as "smart" phones. To be honest, the "smart" distinction doesn't really apply anymore (except perhaps for Iphone shills, who want to hand pick an arbitrary market to greatly inflate Apple's market share).
Re: (Score:2)
So, problem solved. Apple needs to get out of the iPhone app approving business.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So, problem solved. Apple needs to get out of the iPhone app approving business.
Too complicated. It's easier sitting on your ass while the web/iphone/Xbox babysits your children and then loudly complaining when they see something you didn't want them to.
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
How the fuck difficult is it to realize what an RSS reader does and to realize the app doesn't 'do' that content, it just gets it from the feed?
In fact, what's up with all that parental content bullshit? Is it going to scar children for life if they see a bad word? It's not like they don't hear enough in the television, their browser, their teacher ferchrissake.
Not to mention every other kid they come in contact with. Should we ban those too? Just lock them in a box or something.
Those are the heavy seven. Those are the ones that'll infect your soul,
curve your spine, and keep the country from winning the war.
"Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, CockSucker, MotherFucker, and Tits"
Re: (Score:2)
As always, The Onion is right on the money.
Teen Exposed To Violence, Profanity, Adult Situations By Family [theonion.com]
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:4, Informative)
Should parents not have the choice as to whether to allow their kids to be exposed to bad language, or are you advocating removing that responsibility from the parents?
Parents may believe they have that choice, and in certain domains (e.g. the dinner table) they do. However children are great at finding stuff they aren't allowed to access, and the internet is full of things they shouldn't see, but they will, whether you want them to or not.
As with their exposure to the rest of the outside world, the best thing you can do is to guide them, and indicate what is acceptable, and what is not. Personally I wouldn't let my kids just go and purchase apps on the store themselves till they were old enough to be responsible about it, but that's just me. By the time you allow them to purchase apps with your credit card I think you really have to let go of controlling their decisions.
Quite apart from the futility of parental controls, Apple don't even have parental controls in place for apps - if they did, this sort of thing would not be an issue, as they'd allow some parents to attempt to control what their children can see, and everyone else would ignore them. As it is, they're trying to ban apps for allowing access to the internet or literature. This isn't hard-core porn or something, it's simply swear-words.
By those standards, this page would be adult-only, most sites which young people frequent would be adult-only, in fact most of the internet would be adult-only.
The approvals process is a joke, which in turn makes Apple look like a joke. Really this sort of nonsense should at least wait till they have some 'Adult' rating systems in place, and then they can mark most of the internet as indecent, or adult, or evil, or whatever they want to call them, and any app that access the internet as the same.
Re: (Score:2)
most of the internet would be adult-only.
I'm pretty sure it is, and has been for over a decade..
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
They already have the choice of whether to buy their kids an iPhone.
I think Fisher-Price makes a colorful little phone that only lets kids phone home.
Apple does us no favors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Enough already, Apple (Score:5, Funny)
You are using a privately owned store...
not if you're shopping for a car in the US these days...
Re: (Score:2)
Such apps are available, at least in theory, to a jailbroken iPhone or iPod Touch. It's not illegal, but it's certainly similar to your example in that you have to go outside normal channels to get them.
Re:5th Graders (Score:2)
Nope. They'd love that word.
It's parents wringing their hands at the thought their 5th grader might see it and be corrupted. It's like that twilight zone episode, something like (horribly paraphrased) "Oh yeah? Well, when *I* was a kid, Chestnut Street was THE lion's roar, yesirree!!!". (He later finds out, he was making it up, because he used to get his a$$ kicked.)
I agree, but... (Score:2)
it's not quite clear cut in this case. If they rejected general purpose RSS reader it would be atrocious. But they didn't. They rejected special purpose RSS reader that is used to view content that contains "obscene" words/content (what ever that is).
It would be the same as if I modified Firefox code and made "porn" browser that knows all about juicy links only.
Now, we could argue about where does one draw the line, but that's something else completely that most people here are not discussing.
iPhone is used
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has their hands pretty full with checking every app and rating it for the (coming) Parental Control System.
Look, they just need to start hiring Highschool Graduates. The GED programs aren't working.
Seriously, how can an app reviewer be so astoundingly dumb that they can not distinguish web content from the tool they are reviewing.
Their own Safari browser would have failed the prude test on some days. I swear they go looking for porn.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as an Apple fanboi ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... I can think of two possibilities here.
1. Someone high up in the App Store hierarchy is completely batshit insane. They're a fundie wacko, or they're deathly afraid of the Think Of The Chiiildren wackos, or something like that. I really just can't believe that the orders to ban anything that can get dirty words from anywhere on the internet came down from upper management; they can't be that ignorant. So it's someone on a personal crusade who has just enough pull to make it work.
2. Apple basically wants to own every internet-enabled app on the iPhone, and they're using these dumb excuses to get rid of any competition. Sooner or later, they think, everything you do on the iPhone that isn't strictly local will go through an app bearing the Apple logo.
Either way, it's a dumb move. I'm one of those irritating smug Mac users everyone loves to whine about. The last five computers I've bought have been Macs, and the next five probably will be as well. Whenever anyone asks me about what to do with their malware-ridden PCs, I say, "get a Mac." And I was seriously considering getting an iPhone to go with my iPod and iEverythingElse ... but I'm not going to even think about it until Apple fixes whatever the hell is going on with the App Store. I really doubt I'm the only one.
Re:Speaking as an Apple fanboi ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking as an Apple critic, I think there's a possibility you missed:
3. Apple's system of approving apps has no objective guidelines, no oversight, and no accountability; the result is total fucking chaos. Individual testers are allowed to make decisions based on "offensiveness" criteria they make up themselves, and this particular app happened to be tested by an uptight moron who went to great lengths to find some reason to ban it.
Based on the stories I've heard about rejected apps being approved simply by resubmitting them, this might even be true. If so, Apple needs to fire a bunch of people, and then write a real set of guidelines so everyone inside and outside the company is on the same page.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is happening often enough, and in a similar enough way each time, that it seems likely to me that someone's doing it as a matter of policy. If it's just individual actions on the part of low-level employees, I'd expect those people to be discovered and fired fairly quickly.
Re:Speaking as an Apple fanboi ... (Score:5, Interesting)
4. They have an automated script that launches the app, greps the text on screen for naughty words, checks it doesn't crash/access things it shouldn't/leak memory etc. and rejects apps before a human even looks at them.
I wonder if this is the right answer?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd believe the first half, but Apple obviously doesn't make sure the apps don't crahs, leak memory or access things they shouldn't. Several apps break the API and use hidden API calls (Google's apps) and I haven't yet met an iPhone app that won't crash if you look at it funny.
Re:Speaking as an Apple fanboi ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
5. The App Store is primarily a fence, not a farm. Its purpose is to make the iPhone safe as a mass market device. So long as there are _enough_ apps to keep iPhone users giggly with delight as they finger their toy -- and there are plenty -- Apple will choose to err on the side of over-censoring. Better to block an app that might offend than make the iPhone seem threatening or risque.
This totalitarianism has been so successful for Apple that we should expect it to grow upwards as Apple introduces its next
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
5) John Gruber supplies #5 [daringfireball.net]
Hypocritical Apple? (Score:2, Insightful)
Doesn't iTunes sell songs that have cuss words in them?
Seems a little hypocritical. Apple will sell songs with cuss words for money, but won't let free apps with cuss words be put on their app store? (I am assuming the RSS feed app was free)
note: I am not an iPhone user, I don't know how all that works, just guessing here
Re:Hypocritical Apple? (Score:4, Informative)
iTunes music store has explicit warnings for naughty words and parents can block access to those.
The App store doesn't yet have them for anything but games (age ratings are coming for all apps in 3.0) so they are assuming all ages have access to all content. A number of apps have been rejected with the advisory that they are resubmitted when 3.0 is live as they can then be flagged as R rated or similar.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yeah, that was what I meant when I said "deathly afraid of the Think Of The Chiiildren wackos." I still think the "fundie on a crusade" possibility is a little more likely, though, because anyone who is capable of using a web browser knows how much potentially offensive material is easily available; someone who's that afraid of getting sued would be well advised not to work for a company that distributes any internet-enabled applications of any kind, which of course Apple does.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're right, but still that seems pretty damn stupid considering that the same parent can buy their kid an iMac which doesn't have any of these restrictions on what can be installed. What makes the iPhone so different from the iMac? I can't say I see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You see, the App Store is the whole problem. Indeed, the App Store would be a violation of anti-trust law if Apple had any market share.
This is why (Score:2, Insightful)
.. I am actually happy that Microsoft dominates the market over Apple. Microsoft is bad enough, but Apple is a control-freak of a company :/
Of course, when the year of linux-on-the-desktop-comes, it will all be better. Right?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
poor resluts
There's a joke in here somewhere... but I'm far too sober to find it.
Re: (Score:2)
poor resluts
Resluts?
Sluts who were reformed and then went back to the gig?
Some kind of quantum double slut?
Sexy, trashy fans of the CGI cartoon Reboot?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, when the year of linux-on-the-desktop-comes, it will all be better. Right?
Apparently it has [theage.com.au], but according to The Age it isn't Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
.. I am actually happy that Microsoft dominates the market over Apple. Microsoft is bad enough, but Apple is a control-freak of a company :/
Of course, when the year of linux-on-the-desktop-comes, it will all be better. Right?
I'd be happy if neither dominated the market. Let everyone have to worry about screw-ups like this leading to real damage to the bottom line. Companies who dominate markets tend to get a buffer from these kinds of mistakes / actions.
That's what makes Linux interesting. It's not about Linux domination so much as Linux being ubiquitous. Market domination with Linux won't come along AS "Linux." It'll be something like RedHat, Ubuntu, or Android. It will be a company name and a company's product line.
Re: (Score:2)
All I know is any time I wanted to try out apps I wrote myself on my PocketPC or give them to someone to install, I never had any trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that we've already seen Android phones hacked to run Debian alongside Android, enabling the installation and operation of essentially arbitrary programs, Tivos hacked to have larger disks and to eliminate other restrictions, Linksys (and most everyone else's) routers reinstalled to have vastly more functionality and more correct operation, and of course the ability to turn most personal computers into a Free/free-softwared workstation powerhouse with the literally dozens to hundreds of Linux distribut
Re: (Score:2)
FYI - Agnosticism is the lack of presumptuousness.
Same thing, really :P
Modus operandi (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple tries to suppress something it doesn't like, in a way sure to show everyone what a bunch of pricks they are, and yet no one will do a thing about it. News at 11.
Re: (Score:2)
You are just showing your lack of understanding (and ironically you are voted insightful). If you were trying to develop and popularize a cell phone platform that is trying to appeal to kids and young teenagers, would you not try to also have some sort of content rating or control so that parents of those kids (who are actually buying the devices for their kids) will have a peace of mind knowing that their "precious (or is that special) little ones" are not viewing obscene content, but can continue to live
Hear, hear... (Score:2)
There ARE other options out there.
Apple == Nazis (Score:2, Funny)
Fuck apple!
Re:Apple == Nazis (Score:4, Funny)
I tried on red delicious, but all I accomplished was hurting my penis. Should I try drilling a hole in it first ?
Re:Apple == Nazis (Score:5, Funny)
It's feeling like a trap (Score:5, Insightful)
Lesson I've learned? Always buy IP-violating, unregulated, cheap Chinese knockoffs.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't discount iTunes because of the iTunes Store nonsense. It's a great music manager, especially because it exports an XML file with all songs that can be read by other applications.
Nice music management app. I have 28GB of music in my iTunes collection, not one of them bought from the iTunes music store.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You know what else makes a good media manager?
A filesystem.
You know, a system that manages files? Like media files?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Really? You have a file system that allows me to group together songs that I have previously rated at 4 stars and I haven't listened to for 3-4 weeks and have it order them by the year their respective album was released? Wow.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't use OS X? If you do, then yes, your filessystem (coupled with spotlight and a few metadata entries) will do all those things and more.
I guess different people are getting different value out of their OS X investment.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
how can I make my playlists so I only see my Dance music albums and I'd like my Jazz playlists to only show those by Monk and Coltrane and ignore the rest
Oh, that's easy. First thing you do is learn how to make playlists, genius. [wikipedia.org]
Oh..where do I press to sync my music player with all these files?
COPY. PASTE. Let me know if I'm going too fast for you.
I also can;t see how to subscribe to my podcasts, where do I do that on this filesysyetm you talk of?
It's right next to the button where it wipes your ass for
Why? (Score:2)
Why do people seem to be willing to accept abusive behaviour from technology companies that they would not accept from any other provider of goods or services?
I got tired of being ignored, and even antagonized, by Apple when it came to the iPod. So I sold mine on Ebay and bought something that works with Linux without having to wait for somebody to crack the asinine encryption the controls freaks at Apple insist in throwing at us,
Honestly, there are many music managers out there, why give Apple the satisfac
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Don't discount iTunes because of the iTunes Store nonsense. It's a great music manager, especially because it exports an XML file with all songs that can be read by other applications.
M3U files have a trivially simple format, and were standard a long time before itunes came on the scene. What benefits does itunes XML file offer over and above this format?
And while we're at it, what's the deal with ipods needing a database of files (in a non-obvious format that's difficult to work with) in order to be able
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it is a trap. Thank gawd for Rockbox.
Communists (Score:2)
"We might as well all become communists... Like Stallman!"
ROFLMAO!
Easy fix (Score:2)
I suppose this could all be fixed by having more than one app reviewer look at each app before approval/denial. That could raise costs a little but at the same time apple faces a bigger risk should any single employee approve something truly objectionable. I can't imagine 2 random apple app reviewers would both find these silly reasons to reject apps, so it seems to me the easiest solution to have multiple internal reviewers, I can't believe they don't do this already...
I have an idea to avoid this kind of fiasco (Score:4, Funny)
Publish all your contents under a license that says "you are not allowed to read/view/listen to this for purposes of reviewing or censorship", then sue their ass off when they do censor it. That would put the DMCA to good use, for once.
Re: (Score:2)
Your understanding of copyright law could benefit from a good RTFA.
And here we go again. (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple rejects an app for stupid reasons.
This will spread across the web.
Apple will looks bad.
Apple will "reconsider" and accept the app.
Lots of people will completely miss the point and think it's all okay.
Apple will then reject another app for stupid reasons.
goto loop_point;
In other news, Apple i-sunglasses (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In other news, Apple i-sunglasses (Score:5, Insightful)
because, unlike in the US, the sight of European topless girls doesn't cause anguish, disgust and general trauma.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially those girls from Poland.. yowzer...
Don't ridicule the Führer ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Fucking Morons (Score:3, Funny)
And every one of those fucking idiots uses the word fuck on a fucking hourly basis and the hypocritical fucks can't stand to see the word fuck in a fucking RSS feed?
FUCK 'EM IF THEY CAN'T TAKE A FUCKING JOKE!
Re: (Score:2)
FUCK 'EM IF THEY CAN'T TAKE A FUCKING JOKE!
If you can't take a joke from Brad Templeton [netfunny.com] you've definitely got issues ...
rhf - the net's oldest blog (at least if you buy into Brad's theory ;) CmdrTaco might object...
--Q
What a terrible business model (Score:3)
Apple is pushing this as a way for companies to invest in some software effort and gain some practical results, but how can you expect a company to commit resources to developing an iPhone app if it can be denied for such petty and silly reasons? The best-laid plans of an entire corporation can be wrecked by the petty actions of someone outside of their control? Really not a sound business strategy. Why not just develop for the Google phone where you don't need permission or clearance from anyone?
why can't people admit, the word "fuck" exists? (Score:2)
Making kids believe this word didn't exist seems to be the life-task for too many people there... you even feel pressured not to use it in online discussions although everyone uses it all the time in offline discussions...
Diary of an App Store Reviewer (Score:2, Interesting)
I think this is appropriate.
http://daringfireball.net/2009/05/diary_of_an_app_store_reviewer [daringfireball.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Or in this case, sees the swear word if they watch the Hitler video.
Though, another possible explanation is that whoever review the app hates either the EFF or the Downfall subtitle meme.
Re:Bad words? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's slightly more to it than that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BcdY_wSklo [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyNmGHpL11Q [youtube.com]
Re:Bad words? (Score:4, Informative)
Well, a lot of people HAVE been trained to be offended by them.
It's time to realize that swearing is only "bad" due to religious baggage, nothing else.
True, although I'd say it's cultural baggage that was influenced by religion. The crucial point is that swearing is also only "good" due to that baggage. If nobody cared about a particular swear word, it would soon fall out of favor for something that would be more offensive.
In other words, if there was no taboo against saying 'fuck', there would be no reason for Hitler to be saying 'fuck' in the first place. (Except maybe to his dear wife.)
Re:Bad words? (Score:5, Funny)
In other words, if there was no taboo against saying 'fuck', there would be no reason for Hitler to be saying 'fuck' in the first place. (Except maybe to his dear wife.)
Would a pissed-off Hitler saying
"My dear Himmler, I am thoroughly bothered by those irksome developments on the eastern front"
sound better to you than
"Fuck those damn Russians" ?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You say, "it would soon fall out of favor for something that would be more offensive." That's technically true, but I think that looking at the way it would happen is revealing. The new word, Belgium, for example, wouldn't be intrinsically offensive. Some words were created offensive because somebody wanted a word that was "filthy." Consider fornication versus fucking or feces versus shit.
Some other words are offensive because of religious objections, but in fairness, the ideas behind the words wouldn't
Re: (Score:2)
The new word, Belgium, for example, wouldn't be intrinsically offensive.
hehe.. ya know, in France, Belgium is a perfectly good swear word. No patriotic french man wants to think about Belgium so you yell it at him is an affront.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No, it's subtitle advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple didn't feel the need to control absolutely everything that goes on on the iPhone with its iron fist, then there wouldnt be a problem. As long as you try to block apps based on subjective criteria like 'obscenity', you will have reviewers that will mis-classify them, whether they're average joes, or experienced, technically-minded people who just happen to be prudes.
The solution is to stop trying to babysit your customers, and let them make up their own minds about what to run on their iPhones. If y
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly, but their actions can and do effect Apple's reputation. For this reason it is important for their employees to to be trained to do the job right. If their are any doubts about the system, then they should be having two separate people verifying the same application and if differences in opinion come up, t
Re: (Score:2)
This was only an example RSS feed shipped with the app for checking, and I presume that the actual app would have been empty of pre-installed feeds. The reviewer had no way of knowing that though.
A feed reader isn't exactly a kid-friendly app, so this is a "whoopsie" along the same kind of lines as, say, an adult-targeted podcast about fishing or video games saying "f*ck" and then forgetting to set the "explicit" flat. A technical slipup, nowhere near as bad as accidentally putting porn links on an XO.
I don