Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks App Removed From Apple Store
Stoobalou writes "An 'unofficial' WikiLeaks App which contained published documents from the Cablegate leaks has been withdrawn from the Apple App Store.The $1.99 App created by developer Igor Barinov has been removed from sale without explanation despite the fact that all of the information contained in it is publicly available."
Well, I'm sure Safari would be pulled next because it makes the same information accessible.
They're not "slowly turning" at all. With their walled garden and draconian control over user habits and experience, they're a leading example of what a government might aspire to.
Today's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. -- Hunter S. Thompson
http://images.worldofapple.com/appstoreguidelines_9910.pdf
Donations can only be collected with free apps. That's where this specific app went wrong. Simple. Funny that Apple needed 4 days to find out.
Unfortunately the First Amendment doesn't apply.
Actually it's fortunate it doesn't apply, because if you think about it, what you're asking for would mean that government would literally have the mandate to *force* private individuals to carry a message they may not want to. Having a right to freedom of speech doesn't mean that other private individuals should be required by law to carry and spread anyone else's message (even at their own cost). Apple consists of private individuals, if governments could force Apple to carry anyone's speech, they could force you and me to carry speech too. If a kid scrawled graffiti on your wall, hey, that's "speech", government should force you to leave it up. Thankfully that's not how things work.
That said, dammit Apple, you keep disappointing me on a regular basis with the closedness and the draconian control over what is and isn't allowed in your 'app store'.
Fortunately there is competition, and competing app stores and platforms are popping up like mushrooms. So I'm not too worried, app stores will be forced to remain quite open thanks to competition. Apple's attitude is already reflecting in their market growth vs the growth of others like Android, and they'll have to ease up a little or they'll keep losing share.
Why would Apple need to risk reputation by supply questionable material via the App store? The app in question provided direct access to a site that has now entered into legal limbo. Apple is a private company, meaning they have every right to publish whatever content they like. I suppose from the parent post that Mastercard, PayPal, etc are now 'slowly turning into the government'. They probably made the same decision. It's not worth dealing with the bad public opinion of a cheap app.
As to the information being 'publicly available', so is internet porn, child pornography, instructions to make bomb's, etc. None of which are allowed in the App Store. It's a straw man argument.
Users can always browse to Wikileaks to it if they want to see that information, and Apple will do nothing to prevent that, just as they don't prevent you from browsing porn or whatnot. They simply refuse to peddle it.
The app clearly violated Apples policy on donations, which is most likely the case the app was removed, and was clearly admitted to by the apps creator. Boy do people read way too much into things.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
no, that's the nice thing about iTunes. the file is on your computer as a .app file and you can use it on your iphone as long as you want.
Why would Apple need to risk reputation by supply questionable material via the App store? The app in question provided direct access to a site that has now entered into legal limbo. Apple is a private company, meaning they have every right to publish whatever content they like. I suppose from the parent post that Mastercard, PayPal, etc are now 'slowly turning into the government'. They probably made the same decision. It's not worth dealing with the bad public opinion of a cheap app.
Then why is The Guardian's app still in the app store, genius? It too provides easily accessible access to the leaked cables, and is even one of the news agencies that has the complete file containing all of the cables.
As to the information being 'publicly available', so is internet porn, child pornography, instructions to make bomb's, etc. None of which are allowed in the App Store. It's a straw man argument.
And all of those things are illegal. I don't see the US government taking The New York Times to court, and they've been one of the news orgs publishing these things, so...
Users can always browse to Wikileaks to it if they want to see that information, and Apple will do nothing to prevent that, just as they don't prevent you from browsing porn or whatnot. They simply refuse to peddle it.
Once again, why is The Guardian's app still in the store then?
Living With a Nerd
What legal limbo? It is operating fully within the law here in the EU. Just because a couple of politicians on the other side of the pond have been braying their heads off doesn't create a legal limbo.
Not random at all... the app violates the donation prohibition in their store. Apps that solicit donations must be free, and this app promises a donation of $1 for each $1.99 purchase.
Now, that prohibition might be a different reason to hate Apple, but they aren't necessarily going after Wikileaks.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Apple's a business. They haven't made their billions by marketing to transparency-obsessed hippies.
Not that there is anything wrong with transparency-obsessed hippies, I'm just sayin'...
There is zero-value to Jobs distributing any app having anything to do with Mr. Kryptonite, Julian Assange. Risks far outweigh rewards. Open-source ideologues that don't grasp this concept AND have the cash to contemplate an Apple-gadget purchase AND are willing to overlook Google's routine co-opting of personal privacy will, I'm sure, all run out to buy an Android now. But somehow I don't think those numbers will affect the Apple stock price all that much...
Where in TFA does it mention the app soliciting donations? From what I read, it looks like the author is donating the money, rather than soliciting for it. As in, once he's paid, it's his money to use however he wants to.
Besides, why did Apple approve it in the first place, if your post is accurate?
Living With a Nerd
Give me a break. Apple sells a streamlined user experience to people who want exactly that. .
So the 'people' you speak of don't want to see an Android magazine app in the App Store and don't like others using it as well?
This space for rent.
http://images.worldofapple.com/appstoreguidelines_9910.pdf
See section 21. Donations can only be collected with free apps, and only in certain ways. Most likely since Apple cannot confirm that $1 is being donated like the app submitter is saying, it got pulled. If the person resubmits it with in app donations it will probably pass again. Otherwise we will have an explosion of "pay me $1.99 and I'll donate $1" apps all over the place and no money getting donated. Where as in app donations can be confirmed.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
12345
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I find it hilarious that you don't know the difference between publicly available & copyright infringement.
p.s. the cables aren't under copyright either.
There is a war going on for your mind.
i wonder what anonymous will do to apple's app store.
Probably the same thing they did to Amazon.com
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
What about YOUR bias?
The rules are clearly laid out in the license and they violated one (or more). Thus it got pulled out.
If the app gets corrected AND it's resubmission gets refused, THEN we will have reason to cry foul.
Until then, I don't see why everyone is getting all worked up given Apple wants to play fair with others who might have gotten the axe for the same rule violation.
Yeah, and those people are morally wrong and/or ignorant for selling a part of their soul and the future of all our children to a minor demon for shininess, figuratively speaking. Lots of people want and vote for government that is moving to be as controlling and polished as Apple. Doesn't mean that Apple and the government aren't both bastards for controlling shit.
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
In other news, Assange is suffering a major sense of humour failure over the Guardian publishing details from the leaked police report into his case.
http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/assange-turns-on-the-guardian-over-assault-case-coverage/s2/a542064/
If you're very, very quiet and listen very, very carefully, you might be able to hear the world's tiniest violin playing for Assange. ;-)
now if only you used that doz.me URL shortener for that, it might have had some effect
People, what a bunch of bastards
This is not is much abnout legal obligations as it is about a moral belief that all opions should be heard even if some people find it offensive.
Applying these sorts of arbitrary limitations on who might use a platform is generally considered pretty reprehesible behaviour.
Well here's Apple's stance on this moral belief: They are pro-censorship, anti-free-speech, end of story, have a nice day.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Which is funny, because Julian Assange and Wikileaks didn't steal anything... the documents were given to them by a third party, widely believed to be Bradley Manning. Wikileaks is guilty only of receiving the data and publishing the parts they feel are morally justifiable to make public, not stealing, and not espionage, and certainly not treason (they aren't even eligible to commit that one).
Deep Throat provided stolen, classified documents... nobody calls for the heads of Woodward and Bernstein.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Except again, the app was not asking for donations, the money for donations was not coming from any links in the app itself, nor was the author mentionning it in his litterature. What the author chooses to do with the money he receives is not up to Apple at all. Whether it be buying a Porsche, a house, a night on the Vegas strip or simply donating it to a cause of his choosing. The rules don't apply unless you have a DONATE button somewhere or mention that X$ amount of each purchases goes X cause in your submission text.
So people, stop playing the "donation" card, you're all wrong unless you have proof that he was actually breaking the rule. Giving away his own hard earned money is not breaking the rule.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Give me a break. Apple sells a streamlined user experience to people who want exactly that.
That's fine. But we should shout a bit every time Apple rejects a significant app, just so that the people buying iPhones/iPads are reminded what it is they've bought.
Then they can make an informed decision next time they're buying a phone/tablet/whatever.
It seems to me that ordinary users are bumping up against the walls of the garden more and more often now.
Your pessimism certainly won't.
An important change for education.
and if you do end up getting one, and deciding to leave, you are fairly well locked in.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
Maybe the laws are different over there, but the last I check here, knowingly accepting stolen property is still a crime.
Why do people keep bringing this one up? The data in the stolen cables is not property because the US government can not have copyright to anything, and data is not property if it is not under copyright. Transferring classified materials is usually only a crime if you had clearance to receive the materials in the first place. The exceptions to that rule probably don't apply to Assange.
Do I need to say this on every Wikileaks thread?
The bigger picture is that this is just another step on the road towards fascism, where all the corporations line up to show that they are on the side of the government. In return the corporations hope to get greater influence over government regulations, government policy and the flow of government dollars.
Support SETI@home
Not an Android App. An iPhone app for an Android Magazine.
Similar to if "Maximum Linux" was still around and Apple banned its iPhone version from the app store as well.