Apple Sets New Mark for Hypocrisy and Censorship in App Store

Just one day after earning congratulations for pulling the developer’s license of a prolific producer of useless (and possibly copyright-infringing) applications, propriety demands Apple receive a major Bronx cheer for the way the company treated Matchstick software and their Ninjawords iPhone Dictionary application.

The degree of censorship and hassle Apple forced Matchstick developers to endure in order to get their nifty $2 app listed on the App Store, as reported Tuesday at Daring Fireball, is simply unconscionable.

In recent weeks, Cult of Mac has reported a number of stories showing many holes in the tattered shroud of respectability with which Apple attempts to proclaim the innocence and purity of all things that might ever appear on the iPhone. The tale behind Ninjawords’ (iTunes link) tribulations would seem to set Apple’s high-water mark for institutional hypocrisy to date.

As Daring Fireball author John Gruber put it so well: Apple requires you to be 17 years or older to purchase a censored dictionary that omits half the words Steve Jobs uses every day.

DON'T MISS
Apple Responds to Ninjawords Censorship Tempest

For Shame.

6 comments »

About the author

Lonnie Lazar is a writer-musician-web designer-attorney. He writes about Apple for Cult of Mac and Mac|Life, and about VoIP and telecommunications for Voxilla. Follow Lonnie on Twitter @LonnieLazar, join the Cult of Mac on Facebook, and find Lonnie's photos on Flickr.

(sorry, you need Javascript to see this e-mail address)| Read more posts by Lonnie Lazar.

Posted in Apple, iPhone, News, Software |

ecu9697
Personally, I am tired of seeing the thinly veiled porn apps while literature and art apps are pulled or censored for their potential content. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Though I am beginning to wonder if Apple has any. They seem to be using these apps as “examples” while letting the ones that will earn them a greater share through.
http://milwaukeemcg.com Freedonia
I’m in no way a fan of the way Apple has been doing these things, but dang it, it’s *their* sandbox and they get to make the rules. I can’t imagine that these developers haven’t signed agreements that pretty much spell it out for them. “We’ll pull your app at any time for any reason we see fit” or words similar.
If the developers want to be a part of their system it’s what they agree to.
Is it fair? No. Is it legal? Yep.
Gary
I think they should remove the Dictionary app from Mac OS X distributions as it also can be used to look up objectionable words. The iPhone Tom Tom app should be rejected because it could be used to get directions to adult businesses.
KB
In the end, I see all these inconsistencies as different employees defining “inappropriate” differently. While Apple should have better definitions of what is and isn’t allowed, I really think that somehow the “porn” apps are making it to one employee with loose definitions and the art/literature apps are making it to another.
anon@work
censorship – this word doesn’t mean what you think it means
http://cultofmac.com Lonnie Lazar
@anon: given your work domain, i’m inclined to presume you are a scientist, but you seem to feel quite authoritative with respect to linguistics. either way, i thank you for being a close reader.