May 27

Apps Approval & Rejection: a flaw in Apple processes

We have seen an unprecedented number of iPhone apps rejections by iTunes store in the past few weeks.  In some cases, it seems that Apple is willing to bend the rules from time to time if needed to silence screams of rejection, bad media attention or a law suit such as the one we reported in a previous post. We have compiled a list of 5 most problematic and controversial iPhone and iPod Touch apps in the past few weeks:

Eucalyptus E-Book Reader

What is it for?

An e-Book reader that allows the iPhone user to find, download and present classic books from Project Gutenberg.
Rejected by iTunes App Store on Thursday, 21 of May 2009. This is due to the fact that it’s possible, after explicitly searching for them, to find, download from the Internet, and then read texts that Apple deems ‘objectionable’. We think this is nonsense of course.

Accepted back to iTunes App Store on Sunday, May 24 2009. This happened after a phone call by an Apple representative to the developer explaining the “confusion” surrounding Apple Apps Store rejections. Unclear how Apple decided to reverse their action, but we believe it’s due to media attention.

Me So Holy iPhone App

Me So Holy

What is it for?

iPhone and iPod touch apps which allows the user to choose a religious figure, take a picture using iPhone camera or choose an existing one, fit the face within the religious figure and add text.

Rejected on Monday 11 May 2009 because contains objectionable material” according to Apple. This one didn’t make it back to iTunes App Store.

Baby Shaker

What is it for?

Presenting the iPhone user with a baby crying out loud that would only stop with a vigorous shake of the iPhone. Shake the baby hard enough and the user would be “rewarded” with red “X’s” that appeared over the baby’s eyes.

Baby Shaker iPhone App

Accepted initially on Monday 20 April 2009. Unclear how this one split the common sense of Apple apps approval process. What adds insult to injury is the iTunes description including the line: “See how long you can endure his or her adorable cries before you just have to find a way to quiet the baby down!” by shaking it to death!

Rejected and removed from iTunes Store 2 days later on Wednesday 22nd April 2009. This occurred after angry calls from various organisation such as the National Centre on Shaken Baby Syndrome, the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation, Massachusetts Citizens for Children to name a few. Apple has issued an apology for a “deeply offensive” iPhone application. Very disgusting and saddening at the same time in our opinion, how a big company such as Apple shows total disregard for infants by allowing such an offensive iPhone app in it iTunes apps store.

Tweetie 1.3

What is for?

Tweetie iPhone App

Provides access to public Twitter from iPhone.

Rejected on Tuesday 10 March 2009 because it’s able to return “Offensive Language” when searching on public Twitter??! OK, what would you be able to return if you type stuff in Safari browser to search in Google?

Accepted later on the same day it was rejected. Again, unclear why, but the developer Loren Brichter was just happy to see it available on iTunes App Store.

Nine Inch Nails app (aka NIN app) update

What is it for?

Nine Inch Nail’s official iPhone app give mobile access to multimedia and community features of nin.com

Nine Inch Nail iPhone App

Rejected on Monday 27 April 2009, because it has “objectionable content” according to Apple. Although the song to which Apple specifically objected – “The Downward Spiral” is not the app. Instead, it’s a podcast which can be downloaded using nin: access.

Accepted on 7 May 2009 after Apple has “revisited” its previous rejection.
Trent Rezner, lead singer of the band replied to the rejection on his blog, saying :”You can buy The Downward Spiral on iTunes, but you can’t allow an iPhone app that may have a song with a bad word somewhere in it. Come on Apple, think your policies through and get your app approval scenario together.” More details on a thread on NIN forum here.

Going back to the iPhone  SDK agreement, part of it states the following: “Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, etc.), or other content or materials that in Apple’s reasonable judgement may be found objectionable by iPhone or iPod touch users,”. This has been loosly applied to many apps, but soon “revised” or “revisited”.

Conclusions

All the above apps rejections sparked news, blog and various media attention around the world for the cause of rejection or approval. This  clearly shows a flaw in the process of how these apps found their way in or out of the iTunes Apps Store. Frankly, we think a major online store for a huge number of apps need to have better and clearer guidelines; technical, moral…etc that governs how apps are considered in iTunes App Store. Until, we see a better process from Apple on apps proval process, every news and blog is going to mock and make a joke of Apple App Store processes, including this one.