More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
Downside of Apple App Store? Censorship
August 26, 2008 | 8:08 pm
|
By David Rothman
Comic Reader is an iPhone app. Murderdome is a comic book series, apparently about a murderous, gladiator competition set in the future.
Now, because Infurious Comics is using Murderdome to show off its app, Apple has banned the software.
Fair? Couldn’t a compromise have been reached? Infurious seems open to a ratings system. Beyond that, remember that Apple’s iTune store offers such sedate fare as Reservoir Dogs. What do you think of Apple’s actions and the restrictions that I’ll reproduce later in this post?
‘Apple Forfeits eBooks’?
Mike Cane, until now a constant booster of the iPhone as an e-book reader, is furious enough to have just blogged a post headlined Apple Forfeits eBooks by Banning a Comic. Give it a good, close read. I wouldn’t have used so melodramatic a headline. But I totally agree with Mike’s concerns. If this were just another bookstore on the Net, that would be one thing. But Apple has linked itself to the content.
Looking beyond Apple, such situations are a perfect reason why the e-book world shouldn’t build itself around one particular company—not Amazon, not Google, not anyone. And it’s also a reason for e-book standards. Please. The closer you link content to particular companies, the more potential choke holds for governments and pressure groups to use.
Filtering
If Apple is to follow a model, one possibility would be to imitate Google and allow sexual or violent content but help users filter it out. Google’s approach isn’t perfect. But it’s far, far preferable to censorship.
Meanwhile here’s Apple policy:
Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, etc.), or other content or materials that in Apple’s reasonable judgement may be found objectionable by iPhone or iPod touch users.
|
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
So in the ongoing throwdown between Bezos and Jobs to see who’s more evil it looks like Jobs has just won the latest set of the match?
Seriously though, Apple’s action does kind of suck – at least at first glance.
I have no problem with Jobs or Bezos setting policy on what they will sell through their stores – they’re their stores they make the rules. If they feel that some content such as “Murderdome” is too risque then they can properly just say “no sale”.
What isn’t clear to me though is this – are they banning Comic Reader just because it came with Murderdome? If Comic Reader was sold with something more G-rated would Apple be OK with selling the Comic Reader app via iTunes?
I’m not quite clear on what’s going on, from this article. They rejected the comic reader app based on the comic book? Or they rejected the comic book? From the writeup, it sounds like they might have done one, the other, or both.
I’m not even clear on the purpose of this app. Are these comics appbooks, like the one I reviewed in my post, where the comic is the app? Or are they separate?
If the latter, it would seem they could get around this by putting just the reader on the Apple store and selling the comics for it through their own site.
Chris, the censored folks apparent want to keep Murderdome as a demo. BUT if that’s the case, Apple could at least let the app-comic mix be there with an R rating or whatever. A Good Idea! I think it’s clear the article is calling for a compromise like that, as opposed to outright censorship.
Thanks,
David
Interesting. I heard a rumor the iPhone will display JPEGs. I hope no one tells Jobs about all the evil folks on the Intertubes who store their pron as JPEGs.
Oh noes, a graphic comic book with graphic graphics. Probably banned by some moron at Apple who thinks comix=Betty & Veronica.
Let’s be a little fair here.
1) They’re not being “censored.” Nobody’s preventing them from posting their comic on their website (as they did), nor from replacing the version bundled with their app with some comic featuring happy bunnies and resubmitting it then selling their more violent comics through their own site. “Refusal to publish” is not censorship; otherwise you could say anyone whose manuscript is rejected by a publisher has been “censored.”
2) In the absence of a rating system for books sold through the store, Apple has to cater to the least common denominator and not tick anybody off. Not everybody would be delighted with a comic book that features people’s heads getting chopped off.
They already let a number of objectionable things slip through accidentally (such as the “slasher” app which looks like you’re stabbing someone—really bright, considering the recent rash of knife murders in Britain), so it’s not at all surprising that they might start to turn more of a jaundiced eye on things.
3) This sort of thing was bound to happen sooner or later, given how some people insist on pushing the edge in all things. Let’s see how Apple responds before we get too ticked off.
Also, funny thing is, looking at the interview linked on their site, the Infurious people are being considerably more philosophical about this than most of the people here.
@Chris: If Apple isn’t ready to do a rating system in general, then it should simply insert informal warnings for this particular item and others. I doubt the number is huge at this point. While this isn’t my mind of entertainment, I am concerned about other kinds of censorship, bowdlerization, etc., that could affect text-heavy books including the literary variety.
That said, I recognize these choices are difficult. If Apple wants to try out some kind of filter for parents to use, that’s one possibility. But do we really want all books and other items to be at the level of a juvenile reading room?
Thanks, meanwhile, for sharing your views even if we disagree. – David
So I guess the killer iPhone App to track all the sordid details of my numerous sexual conquests (including pictures!) will be a long time arriving…
In the case of eReader/Stanza this isn’t an issue as the content for these applications comes from other sites, not the App Store.
So for the purposes of iPhone as eBook reader it seems to me to be a non issue. The bundled content seems to cause the problem here, and as it is their store, i guess they can police it as they see fit. This doesn’t stop me consuming ebooks, music, movies etc from other places on my iPhone.
Thanks, Christo. But do keep in mind that Apple-sold content could be the most heavily promoted. What if hundreds of thousands of books end up sold through an iTune arrangement? David
Hi David
That is true, but at the moment there is no sign that Apple have any intention of selling content on iTunes other than the existing music & movies. Even if they do, they would still be just one possible source of eBooks. I rarely buy music from iTunes, unless it is DRM-free, preferring to get it from CDs mostly.
However, if Apple blocked you consuming content that they hadn’t provided, the Interwebs would be in a revolt, to be sure!
“That said, I recognize these choices are difficult. If Apple wants to try out some kind of filter for parents to use, that’s one possibility. But do we really want all books and other items to be at the level of a juvenile reading room?”
Indeed. Can you imagine if Amazon only sold books for the Kindle that were suitable for children 12 or younger?
And, again, this gets to the issue of DRM and the problems when the device you bought is really controlled by the company you bought it from rather than you.
http://jeremyricketts.com/dear-mr-jobs/