32 ms·

Apple tries to get Epic to admit there's porn on its store

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
itsdrewmiller 5y ago
How is epic having an app that can be used to get offensive content different from the Apple App Store allowing web browsers?
- heisenbit 5y ago
  Reddit has some explicit content. How on earth is this relevant to the question of abusing a dominant market position which is what case is about. Is Apple arguing we can commercially abuse our partners and customers because we save you from porn? Seriously?
  - itsdrewmiller 5y ago
    I assume their argument here is “It’s expensive to run an App Store that screens content effectively - here is an example where a cheaper store missed something.” This specific example doesn’t seem like strong evidence though.
    - jjcon 5y ago
      >here is an example where a cheaper store missed something I don't think they are saying itch missed something (itch certainly doesn't think so)
      - itsdrewmiller 5y ago
        Apple is saying that Epic missed that Itch allows offensive content via the Epic store (indirectly).
        Aeolun 5y ago
        I’m fairly certain Epic missed nothing about that, and just didn’t care one way or the other.
  - greshario 5y ago
    > Reddit has some explicit content Understatement of the millenium there.
    - jzl 5y ago
      I know right?? Some? Some? Oh my god ... Epic's lawyers just need to bring up the reddit app to counter this whole line of attack. Lowest hanging fruit ever.
- nodamage 5y ago
  Web browsers can be restricted using the iOS parental control system.
ben_w 5y ago
I’m not familiar with itch.io; is it actually relevant whether or not itch.io lists adult content, even if itch.io is listed on the Epic store? Apple blocks adult content (as much to my frustration as to one of the top comments on the kotaku article), but I can go into the iOS App Store, download the Amazon app, and see their dildo and porn collections, so it feels like a hypocritical argument on Apple’s part. (I don’t even have to be signed into the Amazon app).
- ronsor 5y ago
  Apple has never really enforced App Store rules consistently.
  - undersuit 5y ago
    Consistent enforcement requires perfect moderation.
    - johnnyanmac 5y ago
      not perfect, just reasonable moderation. Much like any other digital service.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
stephc_int13 5y ago
You can download Chrome, Firefox or even Safari and watch porn online for free from your xOS device, nothing easier and they know it.
crazydoggers 5y ago
This last line is obnoxious... > So there we go: That’s all cleared up now! Apple’s advertiser-sanitized, sex work- and LGBTQ-unfriendly utopia is saved from scary indie games like “Horny Chronicles.” Thank goodness. I for one don’t want to see all that crap in app stores when I’m browsing for something, and I don’t want my kids seeing that stuff... it has nothing to do with being “LGBTQ utopia”. It’s simple called good taste. Same reason when I turn on the TV I don’t want to be assaulted with this stuff. We’ve all decided long ago that the way forward with free speech is to categorize, and rate content... movie, tv ratings, preview ratings, etc. By having proper channels and places for certain content free speech is actually extend. I’m thankful Apple tries hard to make the App Store a place of quality. So let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water by forcing stores to be completely open un moderated spaces in the name of more competition. Edit: People are missing the point here. The issue is about intent. Browsers and Amazon apps are not app stores. So having those available doesn’t point to intent to allow specific types of content on an app platform.
- gostsamo 5y ago
  So, ask for a feature where 18+ content is not allowed for children's accounts and where an adult's account can filter this stuff out if so desired. Or allow all kinds of stores, one for every taste.
  - crazydoggers 5y ago
    Well I think I that’s the issue. If Apple loses control of the store then creating filters like this becomes much much harder.
    - gostsamo 5y ago
      I don't think so. If you like Apple's store, stick with it and you are good.
    - johnnyanmac 5y ago
      "If Apple loses control of the store then creating filters like this becomes much much harder." WHy do people still think this is about Fortnite being on the app store? it was already on the app store. Epic doesn't want to change the app store's content submission system (Epic has their own and it disallows adult apps). They want to host their own store for fortnite players and the other 12 people to download. If the worry is about a kid installing external apps, Android already solves this. You need to explicitly opt into the choice to download 3rd party apps. Which can be hidden behind a password (like every other permission). If your kid can crack that password, they probably already did it for Safari and have access to content you don't want them to see. At that point, it's a personal problem. Not Epic's, not Apple's.
sneak 5y ago
> "Folks who want porn can buy an android." > "You might care more about porn when you have kids. It’s not about freedom, it’s about Apple trying to do the right thing for its users." —Steve Jobs
- testific8 5y ago
  open safari, search for porn, and tap the first link. I think your point is moot.
  - sneak 5y ago
    I think you are perhaps confusing my posting the quote with my agreeing with the quote. That he said that is historical fact, which was my only point. I don't actually agree with his position on the matter at all.
- scarface74 5y ago
  Well Jobs has been dead for over 10 years. The current CEO said… https://www.inverse.com/article/42982-tim-cook-porn-on-iphone https://www.inverse.com/article/42982-tim-cook-porn-on-iphon... > The Apple CEO said in an interview with Kara Swisher on Wednesday that people who want to use their smartphone to look at porn are free to use the web browser, but they shouldn’t expect Apple to start offering apps.
speeder 5y ago
This whole trial is being a huge mess. 1. Day 1 kids screaming on stream. 2. A ton of confidential third party data leaking. 3. Sony refusing cross platform play because it wouldn't earn them money directly meanwhile they were claiming it was for technical reasons. 4. Tim Sweeney going off on a weird tangent trying to claim Fornite is a "metaverse" and not a game. 5. Judge getting annoyed with all the requests to seal records from a ton of companies. 6. Epic lawyer saying he wants a record sealed because he doesn't want to leak that Paradox is doing a deal with Epic. And Apple lawyer pointing out he just made his request pointless. 7. Epic paid so far 1 billion USD to convince devs to not sell in competitor stores. 8. Epic tried to convince Nintendo to sell on Epic Store (lol) 9. Apple lawyer pointing out that Epic bans rule breakers, and Epic broke rules.
- mpalmer 5y ago
  The metaverse point is sort of relevant, though. Epic has been trying to pin Apple down on their definition of a game. Apple says Roblox is permissible on the App Store, even though it's a user-generated content hub much like Fortnite.
  - Pulcinella 5y ago
    But Fortnite wasn’t banned because it was or was not a game, it was banned because Apple alleged that Epic violated the App Store rules around payment.
    - setr 5y ago
      By adding in non-apple transactions. Which is what Robles apparently does as well, and has been allowed to do so for years. The defense from apple was apparently that roblox and Minecraft to do not in fact constitute games, whereas fortunate does, so the rules are different.
      - spiderice 5y ago
        I don’t know enough to outright refute your claims, but I’m guessing you’re getting something wrong or leaving out an important detail (unintentionally). Apple doesn’t allow non-game apps selling digital goods to circumvent the 30%. So whether or not fortnite is a game or not seems irrelevant. I would be shocked if I could enter in a credit card number and buy something inside roblox without going through Apple.
pronlover723 5y ago
How does that help Apple's case? Isn't the fact that some competing store can't offer porn apps on iOS proof in Epic's favor that Apple should allow 3rd party stores? There are plenty of VR 3D Porn games (not video). They could potentially run on iOS but since there is no way to install them and no alternative store they aren't allowed. Note: Apple themselves argued code = speech in their FBI trial. Given that, disallowing certain apps is disallowing certain speech. Apple might not sell porn videos, or porn books (though they probably actually do), or porn music (though the probably actually do) but, all of those things can be installed on your iOS device in other ways. But, porn apps can not and there are plenty of types of porn apps that can't be done via web apps, and certainly not via iOS Safari with it's lack of APIs. If Apple blocked users from watching/reading/listening to porn on their iOS device people would be likely find it unacceptable. The same should be true for porn apps by Apple's own logic.
- ben_w 5y ago
  IIRC (and IANAL), the USA’s free speech thing is about preventing the government from limiting it (except they do limit it anyway), and never prevented private companies from limiting it on their own turf. I do feel that super-massive companies need similar restrictions on what they can do as governments, and for similar reasons, but that’s for the future not for the present.
  - Dracophoenix 5y ago
    While all of that is true, the bigger question in this argument is whether or not Apple can justify the premise of restricting speech on its platform as arbitrarily/selectively as it does without being taking to task for interfering in the operation of the product they sold. For example, was Apple in the right to threaten Telegram with expulsion from the App Store for user-generated chatrooms protesting the election in Belarus when such events are the function of chatroom services? Would Apple have done the same with iMessage, Discord, Facebook Messenger, IRC clients, etc for similar discussions Apple deemed inappropriate the previous example? We can all agree Apple has a 1st amendement right to freedom of association. But how far does it justify hypocrisy, unwritten rules, retroactive changes to their EULA, and interference in commerce at point of sale or after the fact? At some point a contract must be a contract and not a list of suggestions or commands subject to whimsical application. Not on Apple's or Epic's. On another note, I'm surprised Apple hasn't interfered with Tinder or dating apps as a whole considering that user-generated content on those is almost certainly pornographic.
ludamad 5y ago
Good to see itch.io getting so much press :) The founder is also the author of https://moonscript.org/ https://moonscript.org/
swiley 5y ago
Good. Apple has no right to demand that the entire world conform to their views on sexuality. That there has been a disagreement on this lasting this long is insane.
- ericmay 5y ago
  Apple can demand it on their platforms though. If you don’t like their world view you don’t have to buy an iPhone ya know.
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    They should be able to do whatever they want in their store. What they shouldn't be able to do is prohibit competing stores. "If you don't want the AT&T handset just build your own phone network" obviously isn't a reasonable alternative.
    - ericmay 5y ago
      Except that doesn’t hold. If you don’t like AT&T there is Verizon, Google FI, T-Mobile, etc. If you don’t like Apple, there’s Google, Samsung, etc.
      - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
        It's a reference to the classic AT&T monopoly, when Verizon et al were still part of AT&T and you notoriously had to buy your phone from them (and they prohibited analog modems in favor of paying them for extortionately expensive ISDN lines etc.) "You can just use Google" is the equivalent of saying "you can just use British Telecom." True only in some kind of theoretical sense. You can fly to Britain and subscribe to telephone service there. It's not realistic. Saying that you have a choice for the $1 app and all you have to do is replace your $400 phone and all your other apps and convince all your friends to switch away from iMessage is at the same level of practicality. Worse, because there are multiple different apps. What do I do if I need both iMessage and a BitTorrent client?
pmoriarty 5y ago
What's the argument for banning porn, anyway?
- dkarras 5y ago
  Steve Jobs didn't want it on the platform back in the day. I think that's about it.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago
    Did he say why?
    - hellbannedguy 5y ago
      I'm not a prude, but why ruin a family friendly product with porn?
      - pmoriarty 5y ago
        Would it be ruined? It's not difficult to make the porn opt-in, so you wouldn't even see it if you didn't want to.
      - katbyte 5y ago
        and it's certainly readily available via a browser
      - neogodless 5y ago
        Are you talking about computers?
      - dkarras 5y ago
        I mean, we are not saying Apple should have shipped iPhones with porn preinstalled. What is the harm in allowing developers offer porn content FOR PEOPLE THAT SEARCH FOR IT IN THE APP STORE, possibly after turning on a flag for nsfw content? That is not possible, that content is not allowed on the app store, ever. It is their right to do so of course, their store and product and all, but people that support the decision confuse me a bit. There is literally no harm to you if it was allowed. You won't see it unless you search for it.
eqtn 5y ago
If apple are fored to allow other stores through its app store, then those stores and apps in them would have to adhere to the same app store guidlines. What I would like to see is a way to sideload alternative stores or ipa. They can make it as hard as to enabling this, instead of a simple switch for security and privcy purposes. So that we don't have to fiddle with the Altstore to install iTorrent, Emulators or Youtube++
uberswe 5y ago
Isn't it the same thing for mobile web browsers offered on the Apple app store? You can download them and use them to access and download porn.
thesquib 5y ago
You can download an app from the App Store called a "browser". This browser lets you access anything on the world wide web. There's explicit content on the web. Therefore you must remove browsers from the App Store.
- wheybags 5y ago
  There are no browsers on the app store though... Apple doesn't allow it already. Eg: Firefox on iOS is actually just a skin on top of safari. Agree that in general the stance is ridiculous though.
  - the_gipsy 5y ago
    That's for reasons of disallowing VMs or any kind of program interpreter, officially. In reality it suppresses web apps from gaining capabilities of native apps, like notifications.
    - scarface74 5y ago
      There in fact is at least one VM in the App Store. https://ish.app/ https://ish.app/ It emulates x86. The only thing I have tried with it is downloading the x86 version of the aws cli.
      - saagarjha 5y ago
        iSH is more an emulator than an actual VM.
        scarface74 5y ago
        What’s the difference between an emulator and a VM? You run applications for other platforms on both. You can actually run GUI apps on it.
        saagarjha 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
amcoastal 5y ago
Imagine how high apples stock price will go when they're forced to allow porn on the app store. They're missing out on so much potential revenue right now.
tyingq 5y ago
Oh boy. I'd reply back with Leisure Suit Larry on iOS, just to poke fun at the puritan rhetoric. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/leisure-suit-larry-reloaded/id659661997 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/leisure-suit-larry-reloaded/id...
cletus 5y ago
This whole thing is a shit show. I’ve said for awhile that App Store monopolies won’t last forever. But it’s not clear to me what the alternative is and maybe that’s why they will last. First there are a couple of different issues. Deciding what’s on the App Store is one issue but payment processing is a potential separate issue. Second 30% May have made sense once when this was a small business. It’s not anymore. Apple is inviting these lawsuits by simply not throwing big publishers a home with reduced rates. Third, the whole tax on digital purchases is completely arbitrary. There was a time when Apple was working out what to do with Amazon and that’s when this role came about. Not being able to purchase kindle books just highlights the artificial and arbitrary nature of all this. Fourth, at the risk of offending HN folks who self-servingly believe everyone wants or needs side-loading apps, most people benefit from the filtering of apps. Side-loading and unrestricted third party payments would simply be another attack vector. Lastly, a bunch of different app stores is a terrible user experience. Just look at the friction of finding which streaming service has a particular movie or TV show. I honestly think Apple could make most of these objections and potential problems go away by simply having a tiered percentage that rewards high volume publishers. It could scale down to 10% at which point the business case for an expensive legal challenge mostly disappears.
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  > First there are a couple of different issues. Deciding what’s on the App Store is one issue but payment processing is a potential separate issue. This is all the same issue -- whether there should be other stores. If there are other stores then the other stores could filter apps differently and use other payment methods. > Second 30% May have made sense once when this was a small business. It’s not anymore. Apple is inviting these lawsuits by simply not throwing big publishers a home with reduced rates. > Third, the whole tax on digital purchases is completely arbitrary. There was a time when Apple was working out what to do with Amazon and that’s when this role came about. Not being able to purchase kindle books just highlights the artificial and arbitrary nature of all this. Other stores could also charge lower fees and not charge any fee for digital purchases, and provide competitive pressure for Apple to do so. This is probably the largest reason they don't want to. > Fourth, at the risk of offending HN folks who self-servingly believe everyone wants or needs side-loading apps, most people benefit from the filtering of apps. Side-loading and unrestricted third party payments would simply be another attack vector. Nothing about third party stores prevents filtering. It only provides a choice of who does the filtering separate from your choice of hardware and operating system. But naturally if anyone can operate a store then you can operate your own and do your own filtering. Maybe most people don't want to do that; that's fine. They don't have to. Anyone could still choose to leave it to Apple or Debian. > Lastly, a bunch of different app stores is a terrible user experience. Just look at the friction of finding which streaming service has a particular movie or TV show. The problem there was never finding which service has it. There are several interfaces that allow you to search through all of them. The problem there is that you have to pay for each subscription and nobody wants to pay a monthly fee to a thousand separate subscription services. But there is no monthly fee for an app store app. It's not a subscription service.
TekMol 5y ago
What is the issue with porn? Is there something bad about it? If so, what? Seeing people naked? Seeing people having sex? The article even mentions porn in one sentence with hate: A little further down, you say no porn and no hate,” Apple’s lawyer continued. “Do you see that?" Hate and porn? Really? How are hate and porn related?
- newsclues 5y ago
  Content many parents want to keep away from their children
  - 13415 5y ago
    Apple sells iPhones to children? Couldn't the just sell children's iPhones then? It's not uncommon to have two different products for adults and for children.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    Yeah. But maybe that should be up to the parent?
  - salamandersauce 5y ago
    Which they can do with parental controls. Even something like sideloading could be behind parental controls. Why make everyone else's experience worse for some lazy parents?
- devmunchies 5y ago
  interesting, I'm the exact opposite, i don't see an issue with mean words but I consider porn personally destructive.
  - sp332 5y ago
    I don't think "mean words" is an adequate description of people egging each other on to violence and sexual violation.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Animats 5y ago
They have the kind of erotica that used to be done in Flash. So what? That stuff is more funny than erotic. PornHub is easily available to anyone with access to a web browser. Get over it. Fussing about porn is usually an excuse for controlling something else.
Tiktaalik 5y ago
This is like the 90s era Nintendo vs SEGA Senate hearings about video game violence all over again. Cynically grasping pearls to try to damage a business competitor.
- jonny_eh 5y ago
  Nintendo was not going after SEGA, it was Congress. Nintendo did act like they're better behaved though.
Aeolun 5y ago
I don’t understand. Is there any reason the answer to these questions couldn’t have been. ‘Yes’ and ‘So what’? Are they really trying to dance around the fact that some, if not most, people like sexual content?
- viraptor 5y ago
  Apple disallows sexual content in their ecosystem. Epic wants to be a part of it. That's a pretty good reason not to.
  - colinmhayes 5y ago
    Reddit explicitly has tons of sexual content. So does chrome.
    - viraptor 5y ago
      Saying "but you allow them" is not the best option, unless you're happy with the result of Apple blocking Reddit instead of allowing you to do it too. (I'm ignoring here the part where Reddit data is user-generated and not reviewed by the Reddit app publishers, which is a completely different situation than Epic and itch.io)
      - colinmhayes 5y ago
        let's see apple ban reddit and browsers. Then we can talk about this argument.
      - mnouquet 5y ago
        > unless you're happy with the result of Apple blocking Reddit instead of allowing you to do it too Yes, please. Maybe Apple-fanboy here will finally understand Apple's evilness.
  - johnnyanmac 5y ago
    unless this theoretical IOS EGS is working on a universal Windows to IOS transpiler to deploy their games on, I feel the burden is on Apple to prove that itch.IO has an interest of hosting adult content on IOS, not Epic. As for the answer to that; Itch developers for IOS tend to just link to the IOS store for their app, so the interest isn't there (and Apple's control is).
Griffinsauce 5y ago
Emphasis mine: > “You may not be aware, then, that the description of that game includes a list of fetishes, which include many words that *are not appropriate for us to speak in federal courts*,” > “So Epic Games, your store, is on the hook for whatever process itch.io put in place to review these games that are *so offensive we cannot speak about them here*, correct?” I'm floored that this line of reasoning is allowed in court, it all hinges on the assumed puritanism of the court and the implied ethics of that. It gives no information whatsoever about the actual content either, it allows the judge and everyone to fill in what they find "offensive" while we know Apples bar for this is low and extremely wonky. Just for example, Facebook removes images of breastfeeding. You cannot discuss that just mentioning "offensive images" - the content matters for the judgement.
- casefields 5y ago
  This is the world we are heading towards. All those law professors getting called racists when teaching old case law that has n-bombs is where it's started.
  - Griffinsauce 5y ago
    That's not where it started. Religion is where it started and continues to spew from.
    - hajile 5y ago
      Except that the modern left that pushes these things is non-theistic (or maybe you mean they are a non-theistic religion?)
      - nick-of-time 5y ago
        What do you mean by "modern left"? The left that I know (I myself am a socialist) is largely against the nonsensically puritanical restrictions that Griffinsauce mentioned.
merb 5y ago
Isn't it funny that itch.io even has a sexualized/porn game on iOS? > https://fymm-game.itch.io/dead-dating-demo > https://apps.apple.com/app/dead-dating-pd/id1554938911 well blaming others about their qa, while it's so easy to put a porn game into iOS. just search for iOS porn and there is so many stuff, which would clearly cross her argument line.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

How is epic having an app that can be used to get offensive content different from the Apple App Store allowing web browsers?

heisenbit 5y ago
Reddit has some explicit content. How on earth is this relevant to the question of abusing a dominant market position which is what case is about. Is Apple arguing we can commercially abuse our partners and customers because we save you from porn? Seriously?
- itsdrewmiller 5y ago
  I assume their argument here is “It’s expensive to run an App Store that screens content effectively - here is an example where a cheaper store missed something.” This specific example doesn’t seem like strong evidence though.
  - jjcon 5y ago
    >here is an example where a cheaper store missed something I don't think they are saying itch missed something (itch certainly doesn't think so)
    - itsdrewmiller 5y ago
      Apple is saying that Epic missed that Itch allows offensive content via the Epic store (indirectly).
      - Aeolun 5y ago
        I’m fairly certain Epic missed nothing about that, and just didn’t care one way or the other.
- greshario 5y ago
  > Reddit has some explicit content Understatement of the millenium there.
  - jzl 5y ago
    I know right?? Some? Some? Oh my god ... Epic's lawyers just need to bring up the reddit app to counter this whole line of attack. Lowest hanging fruit ever.
nodamage 5y ago
Web browsers can be restricted using the iOS parental control system.

ben_w 5y ago

I’m not familiar with itch.io; is it actually relevant whether or not itch.io lists adult content, even if itch.io is listed on the Epic store? Apple blocks adult content (as much to my frustration as to one of the top comments on the kotaku article), but I can go into the iOS App Store, download the Amazon app, and see their dildo and porn collections, so it feels like a hypocritical argument on Apple’s part. (I don’t even have to be signed into the Amazon app).

ronsor 5y ago
Apple has never really enforced App Store rules consistently.
- undersuit 5y ago
  Consistent enforcement requires perfect moderation.
  - johnnyanmac 5y ago
    not perfect, just reasonable moderation. Much like any other digital service.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

stephc_int13 5y ago

You can download Chrome, Firefox or even Safari and watch porn online for free from your xOS device, nothing easier and they know it.

crazydoggers 5y ago

This last line is obnoxious... > So there we go: That’s all cleared up now! Apple’s advertiser-sanitized, sex work- and LGBTQ-unfriendly utopia is saved from scary indie games like “Horny Chronicles.” Thank goodness. I for one don’t want to see all that crap in app stores when I’m browsing for something, and I don’t want my kids seeing that stuff... it has nothing to do with being “LGBTQ utopia”. It’s simple called good taste. Same reason when I turn on the TV I don’t want to be assaulted with this stuff. We’ve all decided long ago that the way forward with free speech is to categorize, and rate content... movie, tv ratings, preview ratings, etc. By having proper channels and places for certain content free speech is actually extend. I’m thankful Apple tries hard to make the App Store a place of quality. So let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water by forcing stores to be completely open un moderated spaces in the name of more competition. Edit: People are missing the point here. The issue is about intent. Browsers and Amazon apps are not app stores. So having those available doesn’t point to intent to allow specific types of content on an app platform.

gostsamo 5y ago
So, ask for a feature where 18+ content is not allowed for children's accounts and where an adult's account can filter this stuff out if so desired. Or allow all kinds of stores, one for every taste.
- crazydoggers 5y ago
  Well I think I that’s the issue. If Apple loses control of the store then creating filters like this becomes much much harder.
  - gostsamo 5y ago
    I don't think so. If you like Apple's store, stick with it and you are good.
  - johnnyanmac 5y ago
    "If Apple loses control of the store then creating filters like this becomes much much harder." WHy do people still think this is about Fortnite being on the app store? it was already on the app store. Epic doesn't want to change the app store's content submission system (Epic has their own and it disallows adult apps). They want to host their own store for fortnite players and the other 12 people to download. If the worry is about a kid installing external apps, Android already solves this. You need to explicitly opt into the choice to download 3rd party apps. Which can be hidden behind a password (like every other permission). If your kid can crack that password, they probably already did it for Safari and have access to content you don't want them to see. At that point, it's a personal problem. Not Epic's, not Apple's.

sneak 5y ago

> "Folks who want porn can buy an android." > "You might care more about porn when you have kids. It’s not about freedom, it’s about Apple trying to do the right thing for its users." —Steve Jobs

testific8 5y ago
open safari, search for porn, and tap the first link. I think your point is moot.
- sneak 5y ago
  I think you are perhaps confusing my posting the quote with my agreeing with the quote. That he said that is historical fact, which was my only point. I don't actually agree with his position on the matter at all.
scarface74 5y ago
Well Jobs has been dead for over 10 years. The current CEO said… https://www.inverse.com/article/42982-tim-cook-porn-on-iphone https://www.inverse.com/article/42982-tim-cook-porn-on-iphon... > The Apple CEO said in an interview with Kara Swisher on Wednesday that people who want to use their smartphone to look at porn are free to use the web browser, but they shouldn’t expect Apple to start offering apps.

speeder 5y ago

This whole trial is being a huge mess. 1. Day 1 kids screaming on stream. 2. A ton of confidential third party data leaking. 3. Sony refusing cross platform play because it wouldn't earn them money directly meanwhile they were claiming it was for technical reasons. 4. Tim Sweeney going off on a weird tangent trying to claim Fornite is a "metaverse" and not a game. 5. Judge getting annoyed with all the requests to seal records from a ton of companies. 6. Epic lawyer saying he wants a record sealed because he doesn't want to leak that Paradox is doing a deal with Epic. And Apple lawyer pointing out he just made his request pointless. 7. Epic paid so far 1 billion USD to convince devs to not sell in competitor stores. 8. Epic tried to convince Nintendo to sell on Epic Store (lol) 9. Apple lawyer pointing out that Epic bans rule breakers, and Epic broke rules.

mpalmer 5y ago
The metaverse point is sort of relevant, though. Epic has been trying to pin Apple down on their definition of a game. Apple says Roblox is permissible on the App Store, even though it's a user-generated content hub much like Fortnite.
- Pulcinella 5y ago
  But Fortnite wasn’t banned because it was or was not a game, it was banned because Apple alleged that Epic violated the App Store rules around payment.
  - setr 5y ago
    By adding in non-apple transactions. Which is what Robles apparently does as well, and has been allowed to do so for years. The defense from apple was apparently that roblox and Minecraft to do not in fact constitute games, whereas fortunate does, so the rules are different.
    - spiderice 5y ago
      I don’t know enough to outright refute your claims, but I’m guessing you’re getting something wrong or leaving out an important detail (unintentionally). Apple doesn’t allow non-game apps selling digital goods to circumvent the 30%. So whether or not fortnite is a game or not seems irrelevant. I would be shocked if I could enter in a credit card number and buy something inside roblox without going through Apple.

pronlover723 5y ago

How does that help Apple's case? Isn't the fact that some competing store can't offer porn apps on iOS proof in Epic's favor that Apple should allow 3rd party stores? There are plenty of VR 3D Porn games (not video). They could potentially run on iOS but since there is no way to install them and no alternative store they aren't allowed. Note: Apple themselves argued code = speech in their FBI trial. Given that, disallowing certain apps is disallowing certain speech. Apple might not sell porn videos, or porn books (though they probably actually do), or porn music (though the probably actually do) but, all of those things can be installed on your iOS device in other ways. But, porn apps can not and there are plenty of types of porn apps that can't be done via web apps, and certainly not via iOS Safari with it's lack of APIs. If Apple blocked users from watching/reading/listening to porn on their iOS device people would be likely find it unacceptable. The same should be true for porn apps by Apple's own logic.

ben_w 5y ago
IIRC (and IANAL), the USA’s free speech thing is about preventing the government from limiting it (except they do limit it anyway), and never prevented private companies from limiting it on their own turf. I do feel that super-massive companies need similar restrictions on what they can do as governments, and for similar reasons, but that’s for the future not for the present.
- Dracophoenix 5y ago
  While all of that is true, the bigger question in this argument is whether or not Apple can justify the premise of restricting speech on its platform as arbitrarily/selectively as it does without being taking to task for interfering in the operation of the product they sold. For example, was Apple in the right to threaten Telegram with expulsion from the App Store for user-generated chatrooms protesting the election in Belarus when such events are the function of chatroom services? Would Apple have done the same with iMessage, Discord, Facebook Messenger, IRC clients, etc for similar discussions Apple deemed inappropriate the previous example? We can all agree Apple has a 1st amendement right to freedom of association. But how far does it justify hypocrisy, unwritten rules, retroactive changes to their EULA, and interference in commerce at point of sale or after the fact? At some point a contract must be a contract and not a list of suggestions or commands subject to whimsical application. Not on Apple's or Epic's. On another note, I'm surprised Apple hasn't interfered with Tinder or dating apps as a whole considering that user-generated content on those is almost certainly pornographic.

ludamad 5y ago

Good to see itch.io getting so much press :) The founder is also the author of https://moonscript.org/ https://moonscript.org/

swiley 5y ago

Good. Apple has no right to demand that the entire world conform to their views on sexuality. That there has been a disagreement on this lasting this long is insane.

ericmay 5y ago
Apple can demand it on their platforms though. If you don’t like their world view you don’t have to buy an iPhone ya know.
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  They should be able to do whatever they want in their store. What they shouldn't be able to do is prohibit competing stores. "If you don't want the AT&T handset just build your own phone network" obviously isn't a reasonable alternative.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    Except that doesn’t hold. If you don’t like AT&T there is Verizon, Google FI, T-Mobile, etc. If you don’t like Apple, there’s Google, Samsung, etc.
    - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
      It's a reference to the classic AT&T monopoly, when Verizon et al were still part of AT&T and you notoriously had to buy your phone from them (and they prohibited analog modems in favor of paying them for extortionately expensive ISDN lines etc.) "You can just use Google" is the equivalent of saying "you can just use British Telecom." True only in some kind of theoretical sense. You can fly to Britain and subscribe to telephone service there. It's not realistic. Saying that you have a choice for the $1 app and all you have to do is replace your $400 phone and all your other apps and convince all your friends to switch away from iMessage is at the same level of practicality. Worse, because there are multiple different apps. What do I do if I need both iMessage and a BitTorrent client?

pmoriarty 5y ago

What's the argument for banning porn, anyway?

dkarras 5y ago
Steve Jobs didn't want it on the platform back in the day. I think that's about it.
- pmoriarty 5y ago
  Did he say why?
  - hellbannedguy 5y ago
    I'm not a prude, but why ruin a family friendly product with porn?
    - pmoriarty 5y ago
      Would it be ruined? It's not difficult to make the porn opt-in, so you wouldn't even see it if you didn't want to.
    - katbyte 5y ago
      and it's certainly readily available via a browser
    - neogodless 5y ago
      Are you talking about computers?
    - dkarras 5y ago
      I mean, we are not saying Apple should have shipped iPhones with porn preinstalled. What is the harm in allowing developers offer porn content FOR PEOPLE THAT SEARCH FOR IT IN THE APP STORE, possibly after turning on a flag for nsfw content? That is not possible, that content is not allowed on the app store, ever. It is their right to do so of course, their store and product and all, but people that support the decision confuse me a bit. There is literally no harm to you if it was allowed. You won't see it unless you search for it.

eqtn 5y ago

If apple are fored to allow other stores through its app store, then those stores and apps in them would have to adhere to the same app store guidlines. What I would like to see is a way to sideload alternative stores or ipa. They can make it as hard as to enabling this, instead of a simple switch for security and privcy purposes. So that we don't have to fiddle with the Altstore to install iTorrent, Emulators or Youtube++

uberswe 5y ago

Isn't it the same thing for mobile web browsers offered on the Apple app store? You can download them and use them to access and download porn.

thesquib 5y ago

You can download an app from the App Store called a "browser". This browser lets you access anything on the world wide web. There's explicit content on the web. Therefore you must remove browsers from the App Store.

wheybags 5y ago
There are no browsers on the app store though... Apple doesn't allow it already. Eg: Firefox on iOS is actually just a skin on top of safari. Agree that in general the stance is ridiculous though.
- the_gipsy 5y ago
  That's for reasons of disallowing VMs or any kind of program interpreter, officially. In reality it suppresses web apps from gaining capabilities of native apps, like notifications.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    There in fact is at least one VM in the App Store. https://ish.app/ https://ish.app/ It emulates x86. The only thing I have tried with it is downloading the x86 version of the aws cli.
    - saagarjha 5y ago
      iSH is more an emulator than an actual VM.
      - scarface74 5y ago
        What’s the difference between an emulator and a VM? You run applications for other platforms on both. You can actually run GUI apps on it.
        saagarjha 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

amcoastal 5y ago

Imagine how high apples stock price will go when they're forced to allow porn on the app store. They're missing out on so much potential revenue right now.

tyingq 5y ago

Oh boy. I'd reply back with Leisure Suit Larry on iOS, just to poke fun at the puritan rhetoric. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/leisure-suit-larry-reloaded/id659661997 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/leisure-suit-larry-reloaded/id...

cletus 5y ago

This whole thing is a shit show. I’ve said for awhile that App Store monopolies won’t last forever. But it’s not clear to me what the alternative is and maybe that’s why they will last. First there are a couple of different issues. Deciding what’s on the App Store is one issue but payment processing is a potential separate issue. Second 30% May have made sense once when this was a small business. It’s not anymore. Apple is inviting these lawsuits by simply not throwing big publishers a home with reduced rates. Third, the whole tax on digital purchases is completely arbitrary. There was a time when Apple was working out what to do with Amazon and that’s when this role came about. Not being able to purchase kindle books just highlights the artificial and arbitrary nature of all this. Fourth, at the risk of offending HN folks who self-servingly believe everyone wants or needs side-loading apps, most people benefit from the filtering of apps. Side-loading and unrestricted third party payments would simply be another attack vector. Lastly, a bunch of different app stores is a terrible user experience. Just look at the friction of finding which streaming service has a particular movie or TV show. I honestly think Apple could make most of these objections and potential problems go away by simply having a tiered percentage that rewards high volume publishers. It could scale down to 10% at which point the business case for an expensive legal challenge mostly disappears.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
> First there are a couple of different issues. Deciding what’s on the App Store is one issue but payment processing is a potential separate issue. This is all the same issue -- whether there should be other stores. If there are other stores then the other stores could filter apps differently and use other payment methods. > Second 30% May have made sense once when this was a small business. It’s not anymore. Apple is inviting these lawsuits by simply not throwing big publishers a home with reduced rates. > Third, the whole tax on digital purchases is completely arbitrary. There was a time when Apple was working out what to do with Amazon and that’s when this role came about. Not being able to purchase kindle books just highlights the artificial and arbitrary nature of all this. Other stores could also charge lower fees and not charge any fee for digital purchases, and provide competitive pressure for Apple to do so. This is probably the largest reason they don't want to. > Fourth, at the risk of offending HN folks who self-servingly believe everyone wants or needs side-loading apps, most people benefit from the filtering of apps. Side-loading and unrestricted third party payments would simply be another attack vector. Nothing about third party stores prevents filtering. It only provides a choice of who does the filtering separate from your choice of hardware and operating system. But naturally if anyone can operate a store then you can operate your own and do your own filtering. Maybe most people don't want to do that; that's fine. They don't have to. Anyone could still choose to leave it to Apple or Debian. > Lastly, a bunch of different app stores is a terrible user experience. Just look at the friction of finding which streaming service has a particular movie or TV show. The problem there was never finding which service has it. There are several interfaces that allow you to search through all of them. The problem there is that you have to pay for each subscription and nobody wants to pay a monthly fee to a thousand separate subscription services. But there is no monthly fee for an app store app. It's not a subscription service.

TekMol 5y ago

What is the issue with porn? Is there something bad about it? If so, what? Seeing people naked? Seeing people having sex? The article even mentions porn in one sentence with hate: A little further down, you say no porn and no hate,” Apple’s lawyer continued. “Do you see that?" Hate and porn? Really? How are hate and porn related?

newsclues 5y ago
Content many parents want to keep away from their children
- 13415 5y ago
  Apple sells iPhones to children? Couldn't the just sell children's iPhones then? It's not uncommon to have two different products for adults and for children.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  Yeah. But maybe that should be up to the parent?
- salamandersauce 5y ago
  Which they can do with parental controls. Even something like sideloading could be behind parental controls. Why make everyone else's experience worse for some lazy parents?
devmunchies 5y ago
interesting, I'm the exact opposite, i don't see an issue with mean words but I consider porn personally destructive.
- sp332 5y ago
  I don't think "mean words" is an adequate description of people egging each other on to violence and sexual violation.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Animats 5y ago

They have the kind of erotica that used to be done in Flash. So what? That stuff is more funny than erotic. PornHub is easily available to anyone with access to a web browser. Get over it. Fussing about porn is usually an excuse for controlling something else.

Tiktaalik 5y ago

This is like the 90s era Nintendo vs SEGA Senate hearings about video game violence all over again. Cynically grasping pearls to try to damage a business competitor.

jonny_eh 5y ago
Nintendo was not going after SEGA, it was Congress. Nintendo did act like they're better behaved though.

Aeolun 5y ago

I don’t understand. Is there any reason the answer to these questions couldn’t have been. ‘Yes’ and ‘So what’? Are they really trying to dance around the fact that some, if not most, people like sexual content?

viraptor 5y ago
Apple disallows sexual content in their ecosystem. Epic wants to be a part of it. That's a pretty good reason not to.
- colinmhayes 5y ago
  Reddit explicitly has tons of sexual content. So does chrome.
  - viraptor 5y ago
    Saying "but you allow them" is not the best option, unless you're happy with the result of Apple blocking Reddit instead of allowing you to do it too. (I'm ignoring here the part where Reddit data is user-generated and not reviewed by the Reddit app publishers, which is a completely different situation than Epic and itch.io)
    - colinmhayes 5y ago
      let's see apple ban reddit and browsers. Then we can talk about this argument.
    - mnouquet 5y ago
      > unless you're happy with the result of Apple blocking Reddit instead of allowing you to do it too Yes, please. Maybe Apple-fanboy here will finally understand Apple's evilness.
- johnnyanmac 5y ago
  unless this theoretical IOS EGS is working on a universal Windows to IOS transpiler to deploy their games on, I feel the burden is on Apple to prove that itch.IO has an interest of hosting adult content on IOS, not Epic. As for the answer to that; Itch developers for IOS tend to just link to the IOS store for their app, so the interest isn't there (and Apple's control is).

Griffinsauce 5y ago

Emphasis mine: > “You may not be aware, then, that the description of that game includes a list of fetishes, which include many words that *are not appropriate for us to speak in federal courts*,” > “So Epic Games, your store, is on the hook for whatever process itch.io put in place to review these games that are *so offensive we cannot speak about them here*, correct?” I'm floored that this line of reasoning is allowed in court, it all hinges on the assumed puritanism of the court and the implied ethics of that. It gives no information whatsoever about the actual content either, it allows the judge and everyone to fill in what they find "offensive" while we know Apples bar for this is low and extremely wonky. Just for example, Facebook removes images of breastfeeding. You cannot discuss that just mentioning "offensive images" - the content matters for the judgement.

casefields 5y ago
This is the world we are heading towards. All those law professors getting called racists when teaching old case law that has n-bombs is where it's started.
- Griffinsauce 5y ago
  That's not where it started. Religion is where it started and continues to spew from.
  - hajile 5y ago
    Except that the modern left that pushes these things is non-theistic (or maybe you mean they are a non-theistic religion?)
    - nick-of-time 5y ago
      What do you mean by "modern left"? The left that I know (I myself am a socialist) is largely against the nonsensically puritanical restrictions that Griffinsauce mentioned.

merb 5y ago

Isn't it funny that itch.io even has a sexualized/porn game on iOS? > https://fymm-game.itch.io/dead-dating-demo > https://apps.apple.com/app/dead-dating-pd/id1554938911 well blaming others about their qa, while it's so easy to put a porn game into iOS. just search for iOS porn and there is so many stuff, which would clearly cross her argument line.