Pulse iPad app praised by Steve Jobs, later pulled from App Store

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Monday morning, Steve Jobs was highlighting the Pulse reader application for iPad during his WWDC 2010 keynote, but that afternoon a complaint from The New York Times prompted Apple to pull the software from the App Store [update: now available again].



The $4 application, which serves as an RSS reader and news aggregator, was one of the best selling products on the iPad App Store. Jobs, Apple's CEO, mentioned Pulse on Monday during his Worldwide Developers Conference keynote, calling it a "wonderful RSS reader."



But Kara Swisher of BoomTown reported Tuesday that the software was pulled from the App Store later that day, after a complaint was filed by the Times. Why the newspaper complained remains unclear, as the Pulse news reader simply relies on the publicly available Times RSS feeds.



Update: Later Tuesday, the Pulse was back on the iPad App Store.



An e-mail sent by a lawyer for the Times suggested that the application was in violation of the NYTimes.com and Boston.com terms of use, because Pulse is a paid application.



"The Pulse News Reader app, makes commercial use of the NYTimes.com and Boston.com RSS feeds, in violation of their Terms of Use. Thus, the use of our content is unlicensed. The app also frames the NYTimes.com and Boston.com websites in violation of their respective Terms of Use," the note reads. "I note that the app is delivered with the NYTimes.com RSS feed preloaded, which is prominently featured in the screen shots used to sell the app on iTunes."







Ironically, the application was recently profiled by the Times, which called the software a "stylish and easy-to-use news aggregator." It went on to say that news organizations looking for how to present their content on the iPad might look to Pulse, created by two students of Stanford's Institute of Design.



The application rose to No. 1 a number of times on the iPad App Store, and sold more than 35,000 copies at $4 each. The creators said they plan to contact Apple to figure out what they must remove from the application in order to place it back on the App Store.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Ironically, the application was recently profiled by the Times, which called the software a "stylish and easy-to-use news aggregator." It went on to say that news organizations looking for how to present their content on the iPad might look to Pulse, created by two students of Stanford's Institute of Design.



    Clearly the NYT legal department don't read their own newspaper.
  • Reply 2 of 31
    nunyabineznunyabinez Posts: 106member
    As of 1:00 Pacific time the application is still up on the store. Maybe all the publicity made Apple or NYT rethink the approach. I still don't understand why NYT didn't just privately contact Pulse and resolve it. Seems like another example of the big boys sh**ing on the little guys. I know that there may be some legal aspects to this, but regardless, it doesn't seem like Pulse was trying to rip off NYT. Me personally, I plan to boycott NYT content for being bullies.
  • Reply 3 of 31
    ilogicilogic Posts: 298member
    Wow NYT bullying app developers! That's wrong, we are paying for the application not the information, the information is free. The developer makes money from the application delievered, how many paid applications that use free information already out there. How about those paid RSS readers, how about those... oh yeah Paid Web Browsers, should those all die because they can access Times.com. Wrong!
  • Reply 4 of 31
    mactelmactel Posts: 1,275member
    The Title of this piece makes Apple look like the bad guy/idiot, when it was neither. There will be many more situations like this. Copyrights and laws still hold water in the digital domain.
  • Reply 5 of 31
    nunyabineznunyabinez Posts: 106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ilogic View Post


    Wow NYT bullying app developers! That's wrong, we are paying for the application not the information, the information is free. The developer makes money from the application delievered, how many paid applications that use free information already out there. How about those paid RSS readers, how about those... oh yeah Paid Web Browsers, should those all die because they can access Times.com. Wrong!



    I think it is slightly more complicated than that. I'm not an expert on RSS feeds, but I doubt that NYT has a totally frivolous claim. What I don't doubt is that their legal department is clueless about marketing and PR. I hope someone gets fired for this because it is going to generate a lot of press (ironic) and none of it good for NYT>
  • Reply 6 of 31
    oxygenhoseoxygenhose Posts: 236member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nunyabinez View Post


    As of 1:00 Pacific time the application is still up on the store. Maybe all the publicity made Apple or NYT rethink the approach. I still don't understand why NYT didn't just privately contact Pulse and resolve it. Seems like another example of the big boys sh**ing on the little guys. I know that there may be some legal aspects to this, but regardless, it doesn't seem like Pulse was trying to rip off NYT. Me personally, I plan to boycott NYT content for being bullies.



    The only legitimate gripe they have is that Pulse was using NYT content/images for their marketing, clearly using RSS feed with Pulse is not a legal battle the NYT could win.



    I think what's really pushing this, is NYT's concerns about selling their own content on the iPad, and don't like the fact that Pulse is probably negating any reason to buy a wrapper for their website. The NYT could never be called a place where enlightened thought is encouraged, but it's remarkable stupid even by their own shady print-junk-now, then-retract-quietly-later, only to print-or-reference-again approach. They shouldn't be praising an app with a review and publicity for working with one of the RSS services they offer for free, only to whine later when Pulse returns the favor with some free marketing for the NYT. Then again the public perception of newspaper and print reviews are largely a myth, they are almost exclusively done in exchange for advertising in the magazine itself.



    I guess their contribution to disinformation and damage to our collective intelligence continues.

    It's not worth reading anyway, but very glad they are finally sending that message directly to the public.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    spotonspoton Posts: 645member
    Quote:

    "The Pulse News Reader app, makes commercial use of the NYTimes.com and Boston.com RSS feeds, in violation of their Terms of Use. Thus, the use of our content is unlicensed.



    The New York Time is essentially bankrupt and only exists upon the handouts of Carlos Slim, the Mexican billionaire (richer than Bill Gates supposedly now)



    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_494325.html





    Recently the NY Times laid off a bunch of their employees to save X dollars and then the top dogs gave themselves increased pay/bonuses. They know the party is going to be over soon.



    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_189909.html





    So one can see the Times is pinched for cash, all except the top dogs apparently.



    And buying a copy of the Wall Street Journal recently, I've noticed it's rather thin too, much of it's information is available free on line.



    Not looking too good for the newspaper business, a few more years and the rush of bankruptcies will begin, which means a lot of Mac creatives will be out of work.



    Likely these "newspapers" will attempt to survive on a iPad as paid content, but a shadow of their former self.
  • Reply 8 of 31
    ahmlcoahmlco Posts: 432member
    Yes, it was pulled.



    And it's already been reinstated. Shouldn't a news organization like, check for facts or something???
  • Reply 9 of 31
    macdanboymacdanboy Posts: 39member
    Simple solution. Remove NYT and Boston Times and any other publication related to these two papers and make it impossible to add them back in. NYT will suffer in the long run. As mentioned before, they really aren't worth reading anyway.
  • Reply 10 of 31
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTel View Post


    The Title of this piece makes Apple look like the bad guy/idiot, when it was neither. There will be many more situations like this. Copyrights and laws still hold water in the digital domain.



    A bit embarrassed, more like. The Times' timing could have been better.



    BTW, for those who wonder why the Times didn't contact the developers before complaining to Apple, the likelihood that they did is close to 100%. Probably they didn't get the answer they wanted -- whatever that was -- then squawked it to Apple.
  • Reply 11 of 31
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macdanboy View Post


    Simple solution. Remove NYT and Boston Times and any other publication related to these two papers and make it impossible to add them back in. NYT will suffer in the long run. As mentioned before, they really aren't worth reading anyway.



    To misquote an OP in the Steve Ballmer thread... "What does the world look like to a pinhead?"
  • Reply 12 of 31
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macdanboy View Post


    Simple solution. Remove NYT and Boston Times and any other publication related to these two papers and make it impossible to add them back in. NYT will suffer in the long run. As mentioned before, they really aren't worth reading anyway.



    As opposed to, say, Drudge or Fox?

    The biases of some of the right wing trolls here is pretty obvious.

    NYTimes is still the 'paper of record' for those still in the fact based universe.



    Doesn't mean they're not capable of dumb moves such as this tho'.
  • Reply 13 of 31
    multimediamultimedia Posts: 1,034member
    Read the Critical Reviews to see how many buyers want their money back. It's majorly buggy, crashes a lot and only allows for 20 feeds.



    Here's what I found that I like just poking around for free iPad specific or Universal alternatives.



    1. xFeed

    2. FeeddlerRSS

    3. Thomson Reuters News Pro

    4. DVICE



    These are all great and I'm sure others here can add to my list since there are many better to choose from for less than $3.99 or FREE. I think that after they fix their bugs Pulse should be priced at $0.99 with a 20 feed limited version for FREE. \
  • Reply 14 of 31
    drudru Posts: 43member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    As opposed to, say, Drudge or Fox?

    The biases of some of the right wing trolls here is pretty obvious.

    NYTimes is still the 'paper of record' for those still in the fact based universe.



    "Fact based universe" You missed out on the fraud & plagiarism fiasco over NYTimes' Jayson Blair?and that's just one example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayson_Blair



    I haven't been to Drudge in a long time but when I was a reader his site was nearly all a headline aggregator with such "right wing trolls" as NYTimes, WA Post, Time, Newsweek, AP, Reuters, CNN, ABC/NBC/CBSNews?



    In the world of facts the only TROLL here appears to be you.
  • Reply 15 of 31
    Well these newspapers need to survive don't they? I mean our democracy depends on it doesn't it?



    His lordship went on record when he said, and i quote: "doesn't want to see us descend into a nation of bloggers".



    He got quite a few rounds of applause for that. Murdoch loves him too.
  • Reply 16 of 31
    randraderandrade Posts: 2member
    Funny as hell... Either it was never pulled or it is a record for reappearance of a pulled app because I just checked: it's listed prominently on the App store. I have been using Pulse since the day it appeared on the App store. LOVE IT.



    In fact, reading this article on and replying through Pulse this very moment.



    NYT are idiots. Their RSS feed is a courtesy out of the box. If anything, the Pulse folks are doing NYT a FAVOR as NYT is hemorrhaging readers and was about to go under only last year. He'll, even AppleInsider has more dedicated readers than NYT! (yes, tongue in cheek comment at the last.)
  • Reply 17 of 31
    aiaddictaiaddict Posts: 487member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    As opposed to, say, Drudge or Fox?

    The biases of some of the right wing trolls here is pretty obvious.

    NYTimes is still the 'paper of record' for those still in the fact based universe.



    Doesn't mean they're not capable of dumb moves such as this tho'.



    FYI, the 1950's ended a LONG time ago. The NYT has been nothing but trash for many years, and their honesty, integrety, accuracy and impartiality are all beyond lacking.



    As for their stupidity, if you put out an RSS feed, people are going to need to use some sort of application to read it. Did they complain to MS about IE being able to read their RSS feeds or display their web page? If you want people to pay for your content, don't give it away for free...DUH!
  • Reply 18 of 31
    blogorantblogorant Posts: 71member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    As opposed to, say, Drudge or Fox?

    The biases of some of the right wing trolls here is pretty obvious.

    NYTimes is still the 'paper of record' for those still in the fact based universe.



    Doesn't mean they're not capable of dumb moves such as this tho'.



    Really? The biases of some of the left wing trolls here is pretty obvious.
  • Reply 19 of 31
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AIaddict View Post


    FYI, the 1950's ended a LONG time ago. The NYT has been nothing but trash for many years, and their honesty, integrety, accuracy and impartiality are all beyond lacking.



    That's just ludicrous. It is so easy to bash the media (just read half the posts here) by picking up one mistake any given outlet made and magnifying to make it look like the frigging Titanic, but I have yet to hear from any of the reflexive press bashers how they propose to replace traditional media. And no, the aggregators don't count, because they just aggregate the media sources you already hate. And the bloggers don't count because they are utterly lacking in accountability to anyone. So what's left? Pretty much nothing -- which based on all I've ever heard is plenty enough for the media bashers.
  • Reply 20 of 31
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macdanboy View Post


    Simple solution. Remove NYT and Boston Times and any other publication related to these two papers and make it impossible to add them back in. NYT will suffer in the long run. As mentioned before, they really aren't worth reading anyway.



    Glad you didn't develop the application. You don't remove large syndicated services and suddenly expect your app to grow in exposure.
Sign In or Register to comment.