7 ms·

EDIT: I was concerned this might prevent malware from getting weeded out, but there are rational carve-outs if you dig a little deeper in: > The various except

EDIT: I was concerned this might prevent malware from getting weeded out, but there are rational carve-outs if you dig a little deeper in: > The various exceptions to the 30-day notice period can in particular arise in connection with illicit or inappropriate content, the safety of a good or service, counterfeiting, fraud, malware, spam, data breaches, other cybersecurity risks or suitability of the good or service to minors. Original Post ------------- I'm a bit concerned that "Article 4" will protect malware and fraudulent software from being removed: > Platforms will have to provide 30 days notice to publishers before removing content from stores, allowing them time to appeal or make changes to their software. So no immediate and opaque bans (article 4). Minimizing malware is one of the selling points of App Stores, and this seems to kneecap that to some extent.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mrweasel 6y ago
I don't really like the: "inappropriate content" that's the kind of language which allows American companies to apply an American sense of moral onto countries with completely different ideas of what is inappropriate.
- tennineeight 6y ago
  Yup, that caught my eye as well. This is the loophole that will probably continue the stupid events like app getting removed for a screenshot of reddit app showing the post with ISIS in it.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  That is something fundamental essentially for better or worse - it is their right. Even if their objections are stupid or morally wrong they have real impacts they have to be conscious of. Not having it would effectively render markets mutually exclusive as the terms are "do something which would cause a shitstorm here" like saying they can't take down a Zwarte Pete face swap app. The law prohibiting it would turn it into an international incident as a "EU demands a right to profit from blackface" scandal and nobody wins.
  - anoncake 6y ago
    The people who want to use apps that violate American morals win, that's enough. Sure, there may be a shitstorm or two, but that will pass once people get used to the law.
    - viro 6y ago
      Do you live in the States? ... That is NOT how that would go down.
      - anoncake 6y ago
        Seriously? Would there be a shitstorm for years?
        paulryanrogers 6y ago
        I think that would depend on who was offended and to what degree. Consider that Christianity is still quite a thing here, and while there aren't many killings for criticism of Jesus, people will boycott.
        anoncake 6y ago
        Maybe they will. But ultimately, the opinions of Americans shouldn't determine European policies.
        viro 6y ago
        I think you forget how serious Americans are about free speech. Trying to force an American company to allow Lolli or cub content(just an example) on their platform won't end well. " the opinions of Americans shouldn't determine European policies." The issue here is that's not how international politics works. Unless you don't see an issue with forcing someone of another culture to do something they find to be morally evil.
- blendergeek 6y ago
  > an American sense of moral onto countries with completely different ideas of what is inappropriate. I am really interested to know what you mean by "an American sense of moral". Is there some better "universal sense of moral" that we could be following?
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago
    Perhaps less puritanism as around sexuality and a bit more acceptance of people as they are.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Yeah, I didn't catch that, but I can also see the sense in it as well. I'm not sure how you avoid having at least a bit of gray area. > apply an American sense of moral onto countries This is an interesting comment because it could go both ways. You have the EU and Australia where there are somewhat more permissive morals (nudity isn't considered obscene for example), and on the other hand you have many other countries like the Middle East where the moral code is much more stringent (alcohol is not allowed, face coverings, etc). Also, this isn't any worse than the current state, the App Store owners have complete control here already. It just doesn't fix this particular potential abuse.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mrweasel 6y ago

I don't really like the: "inappropriate content" that's the kind of language which allows American companies to apply an American sense of moral onto countries with completely different ideas of what is inappropriate.

tennineeight 6y ago
Yup, that caught my eye as well. This is the loophole that will probably continue the stupid events like app getting removed for a screenshot of reddit app showing the post with ISIS in it.
Nasrudith 6y ago
That is something fundamental essentially for better or worse - it is their right. Even if their objections are stupid or morally wrong they have real impacts they have to be conscious of. Not having it would effectively render markets mutually exclusive as the terms are "do something which would cause a shitstorm here" like saying they can't take down a Zwarte Pete face swap app. The law prohibiting it would turn it into an international incident as a "EU demands a right to profit from blackface" scandal and nobody wins.
- anoncake 6y ago
  The people who want to use apps that violate American morals win, that's enough. Sure, there may be a shitstorm or two, but that will pass once people get used to the law.
  - viro 6y ago
    Do you live in the States? ... That is NOT how that would go down.
    - anoncake 6y ago
      Seriously? Would there be a shitstorm for years?
      - paulryanrogers 6y ago
        I think that would depend on who was offended and to what degree. Consider that Christianity is still quite a thing here, and while there aren't many killings for criticism of Jesus, people will boycott.
        anoncake 6y ago
        Maybe they will. But ultimately, the opinions of Americans shouldn't determine European policies.
        viro 6y ago
        I think you forget how serious Americans are about free speech. Trying to force an American company to allow Lolli or cub content(just an example) on their platform won't end well. " the opinions of Americans shouldn't determine European policies." The issue here is that's not how international politics works. Unless you don't see an issue with forcing someone of another culture to do something they find to be morally evil.
blendergeek 6y ago
> an American sense of moral onto countries with completely different ideas of what is inappropriate. I am really interested to know what you mean by "an American sense of moral". Is there some better "universal sense of moral" that we could be following?
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  Perhaps less puritanism as around sexuality and a bit more acceptance of people as they are.
ogre_codes 6y ago
Yeah, I didn't catch that, but I can also see the sense in it as well. I'm not sure how you avoid having at least a bit of gray area. > apply an American sense of moral onto countries This is an interesting comment because it could go both ways. You have the EU and Australia where there are somewhat more permissive morals (nudity isn't considered obscene for example), and on the other hand you have many other countries like the Middle East where the moral code is much more stringent (alcohol is not allowed, face coverings, etc). Also, this isn't any worse than the current state, the App Store owners have complete control here already. It just doesn't fix this particular potential abuse.