I honestly think the post is a bit ridiculous and whiny. While the iOS review process may be draconian and inconsistent, it's clear that the "apps" in question

I honestly think the post is a bit ridiculous and whiny. While the iOS review process may be draconian and inconsistent, it's clear that the "apps" in question contain basically no functionality other than video playback - certainly they are not note taking apps, even after the fixes - so how defensible is the position of the author? Now - it's clear that the only video content that Apple can accept is content coming through traditional channels. Why? I am not sure, but probably there are some contractual reasons (e.g. the studios give content only if Apple keeps small fish at bay?). It's certainly not different for songs. I have an album on iTunes and it got there through a major. Three other independent albums were never accepted. Also, while Apple may tolerate, or pretend not to see video hiding in the app store in order to be friendly to developers whilst stretching, bending but not breaking any contractual obligation they probably have, this doesn't mean that they won't stomp such content if and when it's found. They certainly have no obligation whatsoever towards the author to keep his apps in. I find the blog post naive at best and malicious at worst.