WOW-Apple really knows how to screw things up

[Chem7]

Tech Crunch reported on the new Apple rules after Jon Atherton of Wobble fame, spoke to Apple directly. The link is at the bottom of this but here are the cliff notes:

1. No images of women in bikinis (Ice skating tights are not OK either)

2. No images of men in bikinis! (I didn’t ask about Ice Skating tights for men)

3. No skin (he seriously said this) (I asked if a Burqa was OK, and the Apple guy got angry)

4. No silhouettes that indicate that Wobble can be used for wobbling boobs (yes – I am serious, we have to remove the silhouette in this pic)

5. No sexual connotations or innuendo: boobs, babes, booty, sex – all banned

6. Nothing that can be sexually arousing!! (I doubt many people could get aroused with the pic above but those puritanical guys at Apple must get off on pretty mundane things to find Wobble “overtly sexual!)

7. No apps will be approved that in any way imply sexual content (not sure how Playboy is still in the store, but …)

---------------------------------------

This is going to completely screw up about 7 of my clients games. One of which is Duke Nuke'em, anyone that gets sexually aroused by Duke is going to need lots of therapy.

I am a big fan of IUGO, but does Apple honestly think that I go into the bathroom with my iPhone fully loaded with Daisy M and a bunch of wet wipes? Sorry Apple, but if that is what gets you off then you are pretty screwed up.

I am simply stunned that Apple goes from their recent form of drastically improving the developer experience i.e. four hour approval times etc to this stuff.

Honestly, this makes me as crazy as bat shit.

Let's break the rules down:

1. No images of women in bikinis (Ice skating tights are not OK either)

Apple are not even following ESRB guidelines on this one. Ice Skating pants? Really?

2. No images of men in bikinis! (I didn’t ask about Ice Skating tights for men)

OK I am fine with this one, the last thing I personally want to see is a dude in a bikini, thong or banana hammock.

3. No skin (he seriously said this) (I asked if a Burqa was OK, and the Apple guy got angry)


I love Jon's comment on this one. So no skin, can we please, pretty please with sugar on top define what skin is? Like hand skin, neck skin? OK Foreskin I am fine with banning.

4. No silhouettes that indicate that Wobble can be used for wobbling boobs (yes – I am serious, we have to remove the silhouette in this pic)

@Steve Jobs, I would like to introduce you to other like minded individuals:

Quakers meet Steve

Steve meet Quakers

In fairness the Quaker community is a huge demographic for Apple.

5. No sexual connotations or innuendo: boobs, babes, booty, sex – all banned

OK the work around here is that you build ugly chick models with the bodies of a thirteen year old gymnast wearing a snuggie.

6. Nothing that can be sexually arousing!! (I doubt many people could get aroused with the pic above but those puritanical guys at Apple must get off on pretty mundane things to find Wobble “overtly sexual!)

OK I know you guys don't like swearing on this board but WTF, ok some of the crazy shit that people get turned on with is stunning:

Battle Bears is SCREWED guys!

Plushophilia

Perhaps liking one of your stuffed animals a little too much as a child can lead to this fetish. It is being sexually attracted to stuffed animals or people dressed in animal costumes. Some plushophiles like to masturbate using small stuffed animals, and some like to dress up in costumes and have sex with others wearing costumes. Someone who is into bestiality, but doesn't want to actually have sex with animals could also enjoy this fetish.

Resident evil, yep that is toast also:

Vorarephilia

This is arousal by the thought of being eaten by someone, eating someone else, or watching someone eat somebody else. It is called "vore" for short. Perhaps this is related to cannibalism, but how someone develops a fetish like this, I really could not even speculate upon. It involves pure fantasy (at least hopefully it does), since it would be very difficult to make any of the aforementioned situations reality.

/Chem stops working on his inflatable sheep game:

Inflatophilia

This fetish can vary in what the inflatophile enjoys. It can be an attraction to inflatable animals and toys, deriving sexual pleasure from wearing inflatable suits, or just being aroused from the thought of people inflating like balloons. Perhaps an inflatophile could enjoy the company of a blow-up doll a little too much. This is another fetish that any psychologist would probably have a hard time explaining.

@IUGO Yo Toy Bot Diaries is screwed:

Robot fetishism

This is a fantasy that involves the thought of having sex with a robot, having sex dressed as robots, or having sex with a person who is transformed into a robot. I'm sure that there are many geeks out there who fantasize about having sex with a perfect android woman, but this fetish can also involve fantasizing about having sex with a non-humanoid robot. I guess someone who really loves technology or science fiction could be into this.

OK now this last one has just eradicated 95.3438985% of the entire gaming category on the app store:

Bonnie and Clyde Syndrome

It is a sexual attraction to someone who has committed a gruesome crime. Many inmates who are imprisoned for outrageous crimes receive love letters from women. It's a very odd phenomenon. I guess the average bad boy isn't enough for women who are hybristophiles.

Again my point is, is that the amount of crazy crap people find arousing is nuts. OK in fairness wanting to hump "patch" my stuffed bear is perfectly normal and healthy.........it is......shut up....no really.

7. No apps will be approved that in any way imply sexual content (not sure how Playboy is still in the store, but …)

Imply is a lawyers word, they use it when they want to be as vague as humanly possible.

This is just a stunning stupid piece of work by Apple.

@Digigala

Sources:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/703251/top_10_weird_sexual_fetishes_and_paraphilias.html? cat=7


http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/20/app-store-rules-sexy/

[mehware]

Sorry to hear it affects you... but I am actually glad they are cracking down. Some of those bikini apps and what not are ridiculous.. and sadly they sell and take up valuable spots.

They got away with it while they can.. Thanks apple for cleaning up the App Store !

My 2 cents.

- Matt
mehware

[EssentialParadox]

Robot fetishism seems a good idea for a replacement, and it would get around all those rules as well, particularly the 'no skin' one! :p

[lazypeon]

Bad move by Apple. I don't download these types of apps, but come on: we're not 10 years old. This is why we have parental controls.

These types of apps sell because -- surprise -- people want them. If access needs to be more tightly controlled, so be it. But don't ban them. This is a good way to cause people to seek out platforms with less control (such as Android).

[mehware]

How is those age ratings going to stop a 10 year old with an iPod Touch from downloading those apps to their device?

[Lonan]

i agree with mehware. it was making an already crowded appstore even more crowded. and most of the apps was spam apps. same as all the emails and popups we see everyday.

on the other hand there are apps and games that are just aimed at a more mature audience. the best solution would be to create a section on the appstore for these apps and games and restrict access to them for the underage(something along those lines).

reminds me a lot about the way Australia is handeling the whole game banning issue.

[Chem7]

Bad move by Apple. I don't download these types of apps, but come on: we're not 10 years old. This is why we have parental controls.

These types of apps sell because -- surprise -- people want them. If access needs to be more tightly controlled, so be it. But don't ban them. This is a good way to cause people to seek out platforms with less control (such as Android).


I am fine with banning the bikini app's but Daisy Mae? I mean come on!

[bravetarget]

I'm a victim of the mass removals, but heres the thing: Apple is trying to bring in a strong customer base for us, if this is the best method, then whats to complain about?

It says "Boobs" right in Wobbles title, of course they are going to remove it with this wave.

Also, Daisy Mae's boobs jiggled -- way too explicit

[Stroffolino]

"What's to complain about?"

How about changing app store policy again with no advance warning whatsoever to the actual developers... for games that were already approved and with rules are vague and ripe for inconsistent application. There are tons of apps much worse than anything in Daisy Mae that have not yet been pulled.

Apple's within their rights to do this - the developer's agreement gives them the right to pull stunts like this at their whim. But it should make people think twice about how they're going to build a business with a partner that doesn't keep them in the loop. The affected developers, even if they resubmit quickly, are going to have a tough time rebuilding momentum.

I have not yet personally been affected, but wouldn't be surprised to see Pocket Boxer get yanked for having the audacity to include a ringgirl.

I'm a victim of the mass removals, but heres the thing: Apple is trying to bring in a strong customer base for us, if this is the best method, then whats to complain about?

It says "Boobs" right in Wobbles title, of course they are going to remove it with this wave.

Also, Daisy Mae's boobs jiggled -- way too explicit

[Chem7]

I'm a victim of the mass removals, but heres the thing: Apple is trying to bring in a strong customer base for us, if this is the best method, then whats to complain about?

It says "Boobs" right in Wobbles title, of course they are going to remove it with this wave.

Also, Daisy Mae's boobs jiggled -- way too explicit

Great news, I just sent a mail to apple and also tweeted to my followers on twiiter that I found the app "water on my body" sexually arousing, seriously; I literally just came all over the place.

According to the new apple rules "water on my body" is history!

Once again, thank you for playing "name that rule, hosted by your friend and mine steve jobs".

All joking aside, you actually looked at Daisy may's boobs jiggling?

OK tell ya what, please post a video capture of which part of Daisy's boobs jiggling you found offensive. If you could also post a pic of your ejaculation on your mac book pro, I will be 1000% convinced that Daisy broke the rules lol

I am only messing with ya man, listen; you are trying to earn some coin with your stellar app and so are a bunch of people. I talk to Apple on a daily basis and eerrr not under this tag.

The bottomline is, is that I have had a number of my clients titles pulled down since Saturday, it aint really that bad because most of them are going to reuse the art to port over to Android for Verizon and the Pre Plus -for disclosure purposes, my clients are generally publishing on several platforms and are 23 person plus studios. Also for full disclosure, I do not work with IUGO, I just think they make tight games and I want to see more tight games published by indie devs- and the iPhone OS is just one platform. It is an important platform, but it is not the only platform.

I just think it is a bit dumb to pull this crap after a loyal studio like IUGO put in time, effort and money into supporting the iPhone OS. OK "wather on my body" or whatever is not really that expensive to produce. but 3D models cost a fortune to do.

[schplurg]

Sex = bad!!! Thanks for protecting us, Apple!

Running over innocent people in Gangstar = hey, no problem!!!

Welcome to America!

[Coops58]

Honestly I sidn't care about this, but I just saw that SI Swimsuit edition is still on the AppStore, and is on the front page featured by apple!! No bikini's huh? It's just unfair to indie devs.....

[mobile1up]

Honestly I sidn't care about this, but I just saw that SI Swimsuit edition is still on the AppStore, and is on the front page featured by apple!! No bikini's huh? It's just unfair to indie devs.....

there is a moral issue around developing applications that can be offensive to anyone; there are so many zealots focusing on religion, equal opportunity, feminism et al - just stay clear of all that junk. sure; there is money with these things; but just as opportunities arrive; they can also be stripped away in a flash. that's life :)

[crimson.]

Oh no. What will I do now.
*opens Safari*

[NickFalk]

there is a moral issue around developing applications that can be offensive to anyone;
Part of the problem is that if you remove everything that someone might find offensive you probably won't have a whole lot of apps to sell. I would for instance imagine that the iPhone itself is fairly offensive to The Amish...

[mobile1up]

Part of the problem is that if you remove everything that someone might find offensive you probably won't have a whole lot of apps to sell. I would for instance imagine that the iPhone itself is fairly offensive to The Amish...

they would need a computer with itunes or be willing to use a mobile phone - so since they are probably not even going to access it, they wont be able to complain about it :) not relevant from apple's point of view i guess :P

[EssentialParadox]

Sex = bad!!! Thanks for protecting us, Apple!
No no, Women = bad.

People shouldn't be able to look at a girl wearing small shorts, or a woman wearing a bikini, because it's completely unnatural. It's not as if you'd ever see these things in real life, simply walking down the street, or on a trip to the beach, so why should they be in the App store?

Are Apple going to remove all the medical apps that include biological images too? Yunno, educational software? Makes sense… I should send a complaint.

[bravetarget]

I said this before, but don't blame Apple, blame the army of whiny and complaining mothers.

Apple tried to push the limits with their sexual apps, but they realized it was doing a lot of damage to allow those, so they changed it. Keep us in the loop or not it was something that had to be done.

[Intruder_qcc]

Its seems Apple will be quite busy for the upcoming months...

I was curious to see how much of those they were (well I never search on the AppStore for those specifically, I just saw a few of them that pop up in one of the game section).

I type in the following keyword in my search in the AppStore directly on my iPod touch : "sexy"

Ohhh I was greeted with pages and pages of stuff. Of course I saw more famous app from FHM, Maxim which of course are magazine quite well known to have those pretty girl in small sexy swimsuit. Find a ton of those sex positions apps.

As for games I saw a beach volleyball, a sexy poker game, etc...

But I wont be surprised we again get in the same situation as many other kind of acceptance of the AppStore. Some people get lucky with a reviewer and its approved, while other get unlucky and get refused and removed from the AppStore.

And like other have mentioned, I was also under the impression that the age rating that allowed developer to rate 17+ was exactly for those kind of apps.

I guess we have to wait and see what is exactly the Apple new policy as right now the guideline aren't so cleared as they are still a ton of those "sexy" floating around.

I am glad I have no plan to do those kind of apps, but who knows, maybe my upcoming puzzle game that let you move block and use your memory will offended some people :D:p

[Chem7]

Yeah, but Daisy Mae is just a good game with a well designed avatar, there is nothing sexual about it.

[EssentialParadox]

I said this before, but don't blame Apple, blame the army of whiny and complaining mothers.

Apple tried to push the limits with their sexual apps, but they realized it was doing a lot of damage to allow those, so they changed it. Keep us in the loop or not it was something that had to be done.

I disagree. Apple didn't *have* to abide to complaining mothers. What Apple *should* have done is tell those whining mothers how to set up parental controls in iTunes.

[klicktock]

The real danger is if they kept this stuff in, countries might want to censor the app store themselves. That's bad for absolutely everyone.

I agree with Apple that they need to play it safe. I'm not sure I agree with all of the rules, but - there's very little they could do here.

[Chem7]

The real danger is if they kept this stuff in, countries might want to censor the app store themselves. That's bad for absolutely everyone.

I agree with Apple that they need to play it safe. I'm not sure I agree with all of the rules, but - there's very little they could do here.


my fingers are crossed you get featured this week :)

[schplurg]

I disagree. Apple didn't *have* to abide to complaining mothers. What Apple *should* have done is tell those whining mothers how to set up parental controls in iTunes.

Agreed! 100,000%

[monoRAIL]

I've been developing a strategy game for iPad that happens to feature illustrations of anime-style girls. I have no way of knowing if these illustrations will be considered too sexy for the App store - they're not nude, but they're attractive girls in tight clothes. At this stage I have to seriously consider switching to another platform, or scrapping my existing art and starting again.

What is more annoying than the arbitrary and contradictory rules, is the fact that Apple is willing to change the rules at any time without notice. How can I establish a business based on the App store when there is no guarantee that my games will be sold in future?

This is a serious blunder by Apple. They need to clarify the guidelines on what is appropriate for the App Store and apply these guidelines consistently or they will lose developers.

[spacefrog]

......or they will lose developers.

There has been many many examples in the past already when this argument was valid too. And the past experience proofs that Apple does'nt give a sh*t.
They drag the AppDevs arround like some cleaning rag to wipe the floor with....
They don't care, they simply love the power they got here, and they want to make use of it from time to time......
It would not be to much effort to contact the appdevs in question, a week or two before the pull, but they don't. Same was back in November when the suddenly stopped approving any Game using the Unity Engine, because of a Systemcall which got miss-used by an other (non-Unity) App. But Apple had approved the same Syscall since the introduction of the iPhone Devkit....
They could have contacted Unity to solve this issue, but they did'nt- so Unity Engine Devs had to fight a furious battle against time to be able to provide a patch for the engine ASAP....

[RevolvingDoor]

I think a lot of developers are taking the wrong approach when it comes to this.

Apple is big business. The decisions it makes as a business are business decisions, not moral decisions. Why has Apple made the decisions that it has made with the app store? Because a number of people must have weighed their options, and decided that these decisions would ultimately result in more profit.

That may seem a bit harsh, but the app store is breaking new ground in mobile software development. As mobile platforms become more powerful and gain new capabilities, some of the people who started here, trying to figure out how to put a game together, will be able to put their experience into growing a successful business. This means of development and distribution is still fairly new. Of course the app store is going to experience some growing pains.

The people who have had great games pulled for no reason have every right to be upset. But Apple is so big that they're not going to lose any sleep over a few indie devs leaving them. I think the solution here is to try to communicate with Apple instead of lashing out at them. Let's do whatever we can to make it known that we want to put great games in the app store, and that we need fair rules to do that.

[LBG]

Well it looks like Apple "missed" this one.
Something tells me that the fact that the game hasn't been removed isn't a mistake

http://forums.toucharcade.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14992&d=1266881251

[Chem7]

I think a lot of developers are taking the wrong approach when it comes to this.

Apple is big business. The decisions it makes as a business are business decisions, not moral decisions. Why has Apple made the decisions that it has made with the app store? Because a number of people must have weighed their options, and decided that these decisions would ultimately result in more profit.

That may seem a bit harsh, but the app store is breaking new ground in mobile software development. As mobile platforms become more powerful and gain new capabilities, some of the people who started here, trying to figure out how to put a game together, will be able to put their experience into growing a successful business. This means of development and distribution is still fairly new. Of course the app store is going to experience some growing pains.

The people who have had great games pulled for no reason have every right to be upset. But Apple is so big that they're not going to lose any sleep over a few indie devs leaving them. I think the solution here is to try to communicate with Apple instead of lashing out at them. Let's do whatever we can to make it known that we want to put great games in the app store, and that we need fair rules to do that.

Spoken like someone that has never dev'd a game before. Just saying.

[EssentialParadox]

Well it looks like Apple "missed" this one.
Something tells me that the fact that the game hasn't been removed isn't a mistake

http://forums.toucharcade.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14992&d=1266881251

Well of course… The policy is to remove any sexual content unless it's a big company who have the resources to actually retaliate against Apple.

Phil Schiller said so here (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/23/phil-schiller-acknowledges-new-app-store-sexual-content-ban-and-exceptions/).

[Intruder_qcc]

I just read an article from NYTimes about this whole situation and they ask Apple about this. And got the official word from the big man himself, Mr. Schiller.

And of course the best quotes is the following when they ask him about how come SwimSuit Illustrated and Playboy apps were still available.

“The difference is this is a well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format,”

You can read the article here :

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/technology/23apps.html

So from my understanding is that, if you are a well known famous publisher/company well known for those kind of thing (for example FHM, Maxim, Victoria Secret, etc...). Then you wont get any problem, but if you are lesser known entity then you get the boot.

Ill say the best to everyone is to avoid any "sexyness" in their apps. If not you might get the boot.

[dmn001]

In bbc news here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8530124.stm

Probably said already, but I thought the parental controls in itunes are for this kind of thing. I wonder if one sets the controls to children only, does this stop them from viewing the previews for 18+ apps, specifically the screenshots and icons, and description? Also, credit cards for purchases have age information on them.

It seems the reason Apple are doing this is to change it's image pre-ipad launch?

Or, another theory, is Apple is opening its iPorn store and cleaning out potential competition! :P

[RevolvingDoor]

Spoken like someone that has never dev'd a game before. Just saying.

To be fair, I haven't written game code in about a decade. For the last eight years, I've stayed on the art side of game development, and mostly as a contractor. I can't say I know what it feels like to have a game that you've poured the last six months of your life into pulled from the app store.

However, I think this is just common sense here. Apple can afford to be unfair to you and thousands of indie devs just like you. You're not going to accomplish much by railing against them.

There are more constructive ways to make things happen. Here's a thought -- Maxim has Apple's support, what if Daisy Mae had Maxim's? What if developers and players wrote in to Maxim and asked them to publish Daisy's story? Apple's not likely to do away with an app put out by a fairly big name in entertainment, but they don't want to look embarrassed by them, either. Something like that may cause them to consider re-evaluating their policies. It's a long shot, but at least it's something.

[RegularStormy]

So did Apple change it's mind about Daisy Mae? It is apparently back in the store today. It's prominently featured as one of IUGO's best games. How's that for coverage? Not just a featured app, but a whole selection from one company!

Edit: Apparently I fail at reading. TA has an article on this very thing. I guess IUGO makes them enough money that they decided to un-pull the game.

[RevolvingDoor]

Strange turn of events, that. But great news!

[oliath]

I understand where Apple has come from but not the way this has been implemented.

I believe that they wanted to 'clean up' the app store a bit.

Removing apps that are blatant soft porn image galleries or whatever is an acceptable decision. I don't necessarily agree that they are offensive, or that even if they are, they couldn't be put into an 18 only section of the store.

I do however think, as usual, Apple take things too far with their ban hammer and wipe out anything that remotely relates to the targets.

Removing games that feature characters with breasts, too much skin showing or even men in tights is absurd. If the focus of an app is clearly not pornographic.... and this really shouldn't be too hard for anyone to judge unless they have the most prudish person sitting on the panel making the decisions.. then leave it alone.

While Apple has the monopoly they can pull sh%t like this but give it some more time and the presence of other devices and their stores will increase and Apple will be forced to change its tact once again to maintain its strong position in the market.

Not suggesting that the boob issue will loose their foothold, but if they keep pulling too many stunts like this and costing people money then they will move away from the appstore.

[egarayblas]

IMHO, this is bad move for Apple. The could've just created an "Adult" app category or section so as not to clutter the store with these kind of apps lying around on almost every category possible. Since they have an approval system, they can control or "guide" devs with their submissions anyway. Furthermore, moderation should be done by the end-users themselves and not Apple--everything is a matter of choice or preference. If parents can't control their kids (or minors) for using such apps, that's a problem they have to deal on their end, not Apple's. As a developer, I have no such apps but I somehow feel bad for our fellow indie devs who got affected by this move. My 2 cents.

[Big Albie]

Apparently you may get your wish if this article is to be believed...

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/patterson/65763/report-apple-may-be-prepping-explicit-section-of-the-app-store/

There may be a new section (roped off of course) for 17+.

[Random_Guy]

Well done, Apple. Keep it up!