Go into Starbucks and ask them where the Penthouses are. They have newspapers there for you to read, why not porn? Every retailer need not sell porn, that's why. It's not a "freedom" issue at all.
Maybe you can get with some minority app developers, convince them to make some porn apps and have Apple reject them. Then flog Apple with racist, free speech robbing accusations. Figure out another reason to need Apple for your porn, but don't drag the Constitution into it. It is a ridiculous argument.
Maybe they don't sell Penthouse at Starbucks, but you can bet your ass the Starbucks is most European countries do sell the major newspapers that feature topless women if not full nudity. And I don't mean their equivalent of the National Enquirer, but papers similar to the the New York Post or the Los Angeles Times. These media companies are denied the right to sell what they sell on every major newsstand in their own country because Apple happens to be based in prudish North America. Apple's App Store rules apply globally. It doesn't matter where the developer is located or where the intended audience for their app is located.
Censorship probably isn't the right word, technically. But Apple is going to find it harder and harder to take a puritan stance as many books, movies, songs and whatever else in the digital world contain adult content.
And I find it all so silly. Put it in a special area like we've been dealing with it out here in the real world. Kids still get it, yet don't spontaneously combust. Besides, according to Dr. Oz, looking at breasts every day makes men live longer.
They are not censors. They are retailers, and they fill their servers with what they feel like filling them with. It has nothing to do with anything except Apple's choice in what they feel like selling to their customers.
They seem perfectly happy letting your porn dollars be spent elsewhere. Go find your Flash based porn (and not porn) somewhere else, too. Just don't bring up censorship, freedom of speech, or any argument other than a retailers choice to sell what they feel like selling.
Hell, they even retain the right to sell to whom they please.
Walmart would be a good example in addition to the Starbucks analogy. Walmart would be a closer comparison to Apple because both "retailers", by way of selling computers, provide the gateways for access to porn. That alone nullifies the censorship/freedom of speech argument. They are just two examples of many companies that choose not to hand it to you on a silver platter.
One could also argue against what I just said by saying if that what Apple's policy has been, now they're selling out for the bottom line by handing it to you on a silver platter just to sell more product.
Try this argument...
Apple planned it all along but, in usual fashion with them gradually adding features, chose to wait until they could do it right. Now they have a device with a screen large enough for "elicit material" to take advantage of, and has also come up with good, comprehensive, and notoriously easy to use parental controls. Think about it, unlike computers, the iPod Touch and the iPad are devices parents will allow even the youngest child to use since it's one piece, lightweight, and more durable by design compared to laptops.
Sure, there's a place for censorship - with individual consumers and with parents who wish to safeguard their children from what they deem to be objectionable content. Don't make content distributors into the gatekeepers. Responsible hardware and software manufacturers provide the security and password tools for parents to activate if they wish. Televisions have V chips. Cable boxes have parental locks. If you're a parent who lets your 11-year-old use an iPad, an iPhone, an iPod touch or a Mac or Windows computer, for heaven's sake make use of the parental control and restriction options that all those products provide to you. Why demand that Apple, Comcast, LG, Sony or anybody else do what you should already be doing for yourself?
... when you walk into a magazine or a book store do they not have pornographic magazines They have them. Apple is setting the ipad to be a replacement/companion to the ailing magazine and book stores.
As I said, neither does your argument. Excluding content from a retail store by the owner of the store is not censorship. If they placed the material up for sale, but edited it so any "offending" parts were removed or blacked out, then that would be censorship. You are only calling it censorship because it is an explicit category.
However, a retailer not offering a subset of items from their general category of sales doesn't make it censorship. If they didn't sell non-fiction books, would you consider those censored?
Have they then in fact, under your new definition of censorship, censored the mid-range headless Mac? Would that be censorship? It certainly is offensive to some people that they don't sell a mid-range expandable tower.....
I think you did not even read my post with this response. I understand as I said previously that any retailer can sell whatever they want and not sell whatever they want. The term censorship is somewhat correct. You can look this up if you want but this is a form of corporate censorship.
Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to halt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light.
We can continue to argue our points on this round and round. But I think we both agree that Apple or any retailer has the right to sell what they want or not. I was never contending that. Where we differ is I feel Apple should allow explicit adult content (with age approval) and you do not. Please correct this if I am wrong. I do not like putting words in peoples mouths.
Someone with a credit card has to set it when they open the account. If you know someone under the age of 17 with a credit card, then they must be pretty clever. I'm not sure about free content though, there may be a loophole there. You would have to try it and see.
Clever? As his parent I suppose I should say he is, but it is easy to setup an iTunes account without a credit card, you just purchase a iTunes voucher card using that cash stuff, and since a lot of places here are selling them at 25% off quite often, it is a cheaper way of getting things as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers
Although the rating system does say 12+. I suppose a rating of 17 is higher then 12.
One of the ones he downloaded was 17, which is why I wanted to know if you have to set the controls in iTunes before any age validation is activied
What's the difference between not viewing/buying porn off the web and not viewing/buying porn off the App Store?
The difference is that if you view / buy porn off the web you have to actively look for it. If it is available through the app store it is being presented/delivered to you directly on your iPad / pod courtesy of Apple. I am not a moralist and I don't care what people watch but there are a lot of people with ipods / phones that have no idea how to operate them but who's young children can and do. By running the app store and having a policy on the content it accepts into its store Apple is very different from the internet and has the right to refuse any content it likes. Do you think an app that guides you through bomb making, or a shoot-em up game that targets specific racial groups should be accepted? Censorship is dangerous and generally I don't like it but I see no reason why Apple should be obliged to deliver everything to the desktop of its products. Having said that, we don't know if the new category will contain porn or just apps with adult content.
The difference is that if you view / buy porn off the web you have to actively look for it. If it is available through the app store it is being presented/delivered to you directly on your iPad / pod courtesy of Apple. I am not a moralist and I don't care what people watch but there are a lot of people with ipods / phones that have no idea how to operate them but who's young children can and do. By running the app store and having a policy on the content it accepts into its store Apple is very different from the internet and has the right to refuse any content it likes. Do you think an app that guides you through bomb making, or a shoot-em up game that targets specific racial groups should be accepted? Censorship is dangerous and generally I don't like it but I see no reason why Apple should be obliged to deliver everything to the desktop of its products. Having said that, we don't know if the new category will contain porn or just apps with adult content.
I agree as I have said in previous posts on this thread that Apple or any other retailer can do as they please. I agree also that things can be taken too far. I just feel as I have said before that Apple needs be careful on how they morally grade apps for approval. There seems to be a very shaky grey area for approval. I feel as I said before that Apple should open up the app store for explicit adult content. That is just my opinion.
He mentions buying an iPad but being more than slightly annoyed by Apple telling him what content he can have on the device. Specifically thousands of adult titles from Amazon and other publishers
The other one that beggars belief is regional content restriction. This is the worst form of DRM that has ever been foisted on the world. In DVDs and games it is beyond being a PITA. The journalist points out that the iPad will use regional content restrictions to prevent his wife getting her French vogue subscription on the iPad as an example.
He does have a very serious point.
Imagine buying a book in the airport in Singapore and then as the plane entered European airspace, and when you were half way through it, the text just disappeared from the page.
Regional DRM and content restrictions are vile. Apple should not be enabling or joining in with this dreadful practice.
I am not understanding the problem that people are having here. They already sell explicit content, and it is rated is it not? In the next iTunes they will be a category for explicit content that you can search or ignore as you see fit.
Surely this means that anyone owning a device capable of viewing and buying from the app store who is underage for your country would have their device restricted by the people who are responsible for them, if that is what they deem is correct, while people over the age will be free to choose to ignore the explicit content or view it as they deem correct.
I don't see how every base is not covered here, from the people who want to explicit content removed to the detriment of free speech/censorship laws bleh bleh bleh to the people who want everything available and unrestricted.
Basically it allows you to tailer your experience of a store to your own moral standards. Win win?
Imagine buying a book in the airport in Singapore and then as the plane entered European airspace, and when you were half way through it, the text just disappeared from the page.
I don't believe it works like this. Like the iTunes store currently operates, if you have a bank card linked to an address in a region or country and that is used for the purchase, you can buy from that region or country and it stays on your device.
It is quite easy for example for people anywhere in the world of buy things from the much better stocked USA iTunes store simply by buying gift vouchers from companies that buy them locally in the USA and email you the code.
I do see regional distribution and censorship as a massive problem however and one that I would love to see abolished. But your content wont be yanked depending on where you are because I believe, apart from the pressure from various companies Apple and Steve Jobs hates it too.
My example was not meant to be serious. I actually even meant a physical book and not an e-book. I was just using something extreme to highlight the awful complications that regional DRM throws up for consumers.
Although it's a free country (so to speak) and everyone has rights to decide for themselves and their families what is acceptable and what is not, it is disappointing that porn (I assume the explicit category will largely contain porn) must find a new channel on these devices.
It was inevitable I suppose, and I suspect this news will meet with fanfare to those businesses that produce such material. But I'm disappointed, it will likely overtake these devices / app store service as it has the web.
The app store and/or itunes will likely become bloated on this stuff.
This isn't an opinion, a discussion, or an argument. It's just gibberish. What you could possibly mean by "overtake these devices" is pure F.U.D. of the worst kind. Don't post this kind thoughtless nonsense.
He mentions buying an iPad but being more than slightly annoyed by Apple telling him what content he can have on the device. Specifically thousands of adult titles from Amazon and other publishers
The other one that beggars belief is regional content restriction. This is the worst form of DRM that has ever been foisted on the world. In DVDs and games it is beyond being a PITA. The journalist points out that the iPad will use regional content restrictions to prevent his wife getting her French vogue subscription on the iPad as an example.
He does have a very serious point.
Imagine buying a book in the airport in Singapore and then as the plane entered European airspace, and when you were half way through it, the text just disappeared from the page.
Regional DRM and content restrictions are vile. Apple should not be enabling or joining in with this dreadful practice.
This is not at all how it works, and the alternative is no content at all, since Apple doesn't own or set these restrictions.
So you think that your personal choice overrides the corporate choice of the company running the store to sell what they feel like selling?
What I meant by the Starbucks thing was, you cannot tell a store owner what to sell. You can, however, find a store that sells what you want to buy and then go ahead and buy it there. If the first guy doesn't have what you want, you move on to who does.
Comments
Come on, seriously.....freedom of speech?
Go into Starbucks and ask them where the Penthouses are. They have newspapers there for you to read, why not porn? Every retailer need not sell porn, that's why. It's not a "freedom" issue at all.
Maybe you can get with some minority app developers, convince them to make some porn apps and have Apple reject them. Then flog Apple with racist, free speech robbing accusations. Figure out another reason to need Apple for your porn, but don't drag the Constitution into it. It is a ridiculous argument.
Maybe they don't sell Penthouse at Starbucks, but you can bet your ass the Starbucks is most European countries do sell the major newspapers that feature topless women if not full nudity. And I don't mean their equivalent of the National Enquirer, but papers similar to the the New York Post or the Los Angeles Times. These media companies are denied the right to sell what they sell on every major newsstand in their own country because Apple happens to be based in prudish North America. Apple's App Store rules apply globally. It doesn't matter where the developer is located or where the intended audience for their app is located.
And I find it all so silly. Put it in a special area like we've been dealing with it out here in the real world. Kids still get it, yet don't spontaneously combust. Besides, according to Dr. Oz, looking at breasts every day makes men live longer.
They are not censors. They are retailers, and they fill their servers with what they feel like filling them with. It has nothing to do with anything except Apple's choice in what they feel like selling to their customers.
They seem perfectly happy letting your porn dollars be spent elsewhere. Go find your Flash based porn (and not porn) somewhere else, too. Just don't bring up censorship, freedom of speech, or any argument other than a retailers choice to sell what they feel like selling.
Hell, they even retain the right to sell to whom they please.
Walmart would be a good example in addition to the Starbucks analogy. Walmart would be a closer comparison to Apple because both "retailers", by way of selling computers, provide the gateways for access to porn. That alone nullifies the censorship/freedom of speech argument. They are just two examples of many companies that choose not to hand it to you on a silver platter.
One could also argue against what I just said by saying if that what Apple's policy has been, now they're selling out for the bottom line by handing it to you on a silver platter just to sell more product.
Try this argument...
Apple planned it all along but, in usual fashion with them gradually adding features, chose to wait until they could do it right. Now they have a device with a screen large enough for "elicit material" to take advantage of, and has also come up with good, comprehensive, and notoriously easy to use parental controls. Think about it, unlike computers, the iPod Touch and the iPad are devices parents will allow even the youngest child to use since it's one piece, lightweight, and more durable by design compared to laptops.
It wasn't worth it for the iPod.
The time has come for iPorn.
... when you walk into a magazine or a book store do they not have pornographic magazines They have them. Apple is setting the ipad to be a replacement/companion to the ailing magazine and book stores.
This is the only post needed on this thread.
If you don't get it, you're an idiot.
As I said, neither does your argument. Excluding content from a retail store by the owner of the store is not censorship. If they placed the material up for sale, but edited it so any "offending" parts were removed or blacked out, then that would be censorship. You are only calling it censorship because it is an explicit category.
However, a retailer not offering a subset of items from their general category of sales doesn't make it censorship. If they didn't sell non-fiction books, would you consider those censored?
Have they then in fact, under your new definition of censorship, censored the mid-range headless Mac? Would that be censorship? It certainly is offensive to some people that they don't sell a mid-range expandable tower.....
I think you did not even read my post with this response. I understand as I said previously that any retailer can sell whatever they want and not sell whatever they want. The term censorship is somewhat correct. You can look this up if you want but this is a form of corporate censorship.
Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to halt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light.
We can continue to argue our points on this round and round. But I think we both agree that Apple or any retailer has the right to sell what they want or not. I was never contending that. Where we differ is I feel Apple should allow explicit adult content (with age approval) and you do not. Please correct this if I am wrong. I do not like putting words in peoples mouths.
I am not at all for censorship, and I abhor "activists".
Someone with a credit card has to set it when they open the account. If you know someone under the age of 17 with a credit card, then they must be pretty clever. I'm not sure about free content though, there may be a loophole there. You would have to try it and see.
Clever? As his parent I suppose I should say he is, but it is easy to setup an iTunes account without a credit card, you just purchase a iTunes voucher card using that cash stuff, and since a lot of places here are selling them at 25% off quite often, it is a cheaper way of getting things as well.
Although the rating system does say 12+. I suppose a rating of 17 is higher then 12.
One of the ones he downloaded was 17, which is why I wanted to know if you have to set the controls in iTunes before any age validation is activied
What's the difference between not viewing/buying porn off the web and not viewing/buying porn off the App Store?
The difference is that if you view / buy porn off the web you have to actively look for it. If it is available through the app store it is being presented/delivered to you directly on your iPad / pod courtesy of Apple. I am not a moralist and I don't care what people watch but there are a lot of people with ipods / phones that have no idea how to operate them but who's young children can and do. By running the app store and having a policy on the content it accepts into its store Apple is very different from the internet and has the right to refuse any content it likes. Do you think an app that guides you through bomb making, or a shoot-em up game that targets specific racial groups should be accepted? Censorship is dangerous and generally I don't like it but I see no reason why Apple should be obliged to deliver everything to the desktop of its products. Having said that, we don't know if the new category will contain porn or just apps with adult content.
The difference is that if you view / buy porn off the web you have to actively look for it. If it is available through the app store it is being presented/delivered to you directly on your iPad / pod courtesy of Apple. I am not a moralist and I don't care what people watch but there are a lot of people with ipods / phones that have no idea how to operate them but who's young children can and do. By running the app store and having a policy on the content it accepts into its store Apple is very different from the internet and has the right to refuse any content it likes. Do you think an app that guides you through bomb making, or a shoot-em up game that targets specific racial groups should be accepted? Censorship is dangerous and generally I don't like it but I see no reason why Apple should be obliged to deliver everything to the desktop of its products. Having said that, we don't know if the new category will contain porn or just apps with adult content.
I agree as I have said in previous posts on this thread that Apple or any other retailer can do as they please. I agree also that things can be taken too far. I just feel as I have said before that Apple needs be careful on how they morally grade apps for approval. There seems to be a very shaky grey area for approval. I feel as I said before that Apple should open up the app store for explicit adult content. That is just my opinion.
He mentions buying an iPad but being more than slightly annoyed by Apple telling him what content he can have on the device. Specifically thousands of adult titles from Amazon and other publishers
The other one that beggars belief is regional content restriction. This is the worst form of DRM that has ever been foisted on the world. In DVDs and games it is beyond being a PITA. The journalist points out that the iPad will use regional content restrictions to prevent his wife getting her French vogue subscription on the iPad as an example.
He does have a very serious point.
Imagine buying a book in the airport in Singapore and then as the plane entered European airspace, and when you were half way through it, the text just disappeared from the page.
Regional DRM and content restrictions are vile. Apple should not be enabling or joining in with this dreadful practice.
Surely this means that anyone owning a device capable of viewing and buying from the app store who is underage for your country would have their device restricted by the people who are responsible for them, if that is what they deem is correct, while people over the age will be free to choose to ignore the explicit content or view it as they deem correct.
I don't see how every base is not covered here, from the people who want to explicit content removed to the detriment of free speech/censorship laws bleh bleh bleh to the people who want everything available and unrestricted.
Basically it allows you to tailer your experience of a store to your own moral standards. Win win?
He does have a very serious point.
Imagine buying a book in the airport in Singapore and then as the plane entered European airspace, and when you were half way through it, the text just disappeared from the page.
I don't believe it works like this. Like the iTunes store currently operates, if you have a bank card linked to an address in a region or country and that is used for the purchase, you can buy from that region or country and it stays on your device.
It is quite easy for example for people anywhere in the world of buy things from the much better stocked USA iTunes store simply by buying gift vouchers from companies that buy them locally in the USA and email you the code.
I do see regional distribution and censorship as a massive problem however and one that I would love to see abolished. But your content wont be yanked depending on where you are because I believe, apart from the pressure from various companies Apple and Steve Jobs hates it too.
Although it's a free country (so to speak) and everyone has rights to decide for themselves and their families what is acceptable and what is not, it is disappointing that porn (I assume the explicit category will largely contain porn) must find a new channel on these devices.
It was inevitable I suppose, and I suspect this news will meet with fanfare to those businesses that produce such material. But I'm disappointed, it will likely overtake these devices / app store service as it has the web.
The app store and/or itunes will likely become bloated on this stuff.
This isn't an opinion, a discussion, or an argument. It's just gibberish. What you could possibly mean by "overtake these devices" is pure F.U.D. of the worst kind. Don't post this kind thoughtless nonsense.
I came across this rather good piece by a journalist who is a self proclaimed Apple avoider: http://blogs.zdnet.com/perlow/?p=12464
He mentions buying an iPad but being more than slightly annoyed by Apple telling him what content he can have on the device. Specifically thousands of adult titles from Amazon and other publishers
The other one that beggars belief is regional content restriction. This is the worst form of DRM that has ever been foisted on the world. In DVDs and games it is beyond being a PITA. The journalist points out that the iPad will use regional content restrictions to prevent his wife getting her French vogue subscription on the iPad as an example.
He does have a very serious point.
Imagine buying a book in the airport in Singapore and then as the plane entered European airspace, and when you were half way through it, the text just disappeared from the page.
Regional DRM and content restrictions are vile. Apple should not be enabling or joining in with this dreadful practice.
This is not at all how it works, and the alternative is no content at all, since Apple doesn't own or set these restrictions.
So you think that your personal choice overrides the corporate choice of the company running the store to sell what they feel like selling?
What I meant by the Starbucks thing was, you cannot tell a store owner what to sell. You can, however, find a store that sells what you want to buy and then go ahead and buy it there. If the first guy doesn't have what you want, you move on to who does.