Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple May Loosen Restrictions With iPhone 3.0

Posted by kdawson on from the minimallly-invasive dept.

mr100percent writes "Apple rejected the iPhone aggregator app Newspapers because of a topless photo in one of the app's subscribed-to papers. In the rejection message, Apple noted that Parental Controls have been announced for iPhone OS 3.0, adding that it 'would be appropriate to resubmit your application for review once this feature is available.' Rumor sites are speculating that Apple will relax their content restrictions once the 3.0 update puts parental controls in place. This may mean that apps like NIN will be allowed in the future."

4 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. still fairly ridiculous by Aurisor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if those changes are forthcoming, it's still ridiculous that an expensive piece of technology used primarily by adults has such puritanical restrictions on it. I realize it does reflect poorly on Apple to have apps that are in very poor taste (e.g. the one where you shake the baby...), but it's pretty obvious that mainstream bands like NIN are an acceptable part of American culture.

    I work in technology (but not a tech-only office) and this fiasco is definitely getting noticed and is clearly reflecting badly on Apple.

    I'm not sure whether the concept of a parental-controls setting was the product of a deliberate leak to address this issue or if it was just part of the plan all along, but I seriously doubt that a significant portion of the iPhone userbase is comprised of children who might have not been given the phone if the app store weren't policed. It seems pretty clear to me that Apple is more than happy to piss off their users and snub even Trent (who is considered rather avant-garde in the music biz) if there's any risk to their image.

  2. The Holy Bible is pure by linhares · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Dear puritanical Apple overlords,

    I hereby submit my new app for app store approval. My app is aimed at teaching parts of the sacred bible to kid, most specifically Ezekiel 23:19-20.

    19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose genitals were like those of donkeys, and whose emissions was like that of horses.

    Since the app is aimed at little kids, it graphically depicts the holiness and splendid beauty of this biblical moment with the Egyptians' donkey-sizes penises as ejaculating like horses.

    AMEN.

    1. Re:The Holy Bible is pure by Kippesoep · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree... It appears most Americans are more easily offended by even mild nudity than by horrible acts of violence. The Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction" springs to mind. In this country such a thing would be pretty much completely ignored (maybe a small message on the third-to-last page of the papers). This behaviour has long puzzled me. We're all born naked. I can understand not wanting (ones kids to) see explicit porn, but nudity does not mean porn per se. I get the feeling Botticelli's "Birth of Venus" would be censored in the US. On the other hand it seems perfectly ok to show violence in cartoons and games to kids. The dichotomy is what's interesting. Maybe the whole 2nd amendment thing has something to do with it. Personally, I could care less about the effects of nudity and violence, but only if paid to do so. Well, actually, I prefer kids to grow up into people running around (semi-)naked than into people who think violence solves anything.

  3. Re:Democratize Censorship by maharb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know! Why does everyone have a problem with 'parental controls'. They allow people that want to use them to filter content and for those who don't care don't have to. I think it is quite useful actually. Without these controls you can't even do an image search for anything on Google without getting porn. So these content filtering features can even aid someone in finding useful information rather than just porn. (Even though we all know that is all the internet was made for.)

    Or is it that people can't stand to have what they look at labeled as 'explicit' or 'mature'?

    I am not sure but I just don't see how, as pointed out in the parent, allowing the USER to filter content doesn't anything other than help the user.