3 ms·

In all honesty, the requirements aren't that bad, especially for game designers that aren't just attempting to make a quick buck. There's really nothing in the

by cube13 14y ago

In all honesty, the requirements aren't that bad, especially for game designers that aren't just attempting to make a quick buck. There's really nothing in there that should force good developers to really have to stretch to follow them. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh694083.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh69408... And their user agreement is friendlier to FOSS projects than Apple's. c. Third Party Rights. Your app, including any app that contains FOSS, must not infringe or misappropriate any intellectual property or personal right of any third party. You will obtain and maintain all necessary rights, clearances and consents, and pay all performance, licensing and reuse fees, including any consideration associated with providing music or video related content in and through your app. If your app includes FOSS, you must comply with all applicable FOSS licensing terms, including any source availability requirements. d. FOSS Software. If your app includes FOSS, it must not cause any non-FOSS Microsoft software to become subject to the terms of any FOSS license.

mattmanser 14y ago
Did you read the article? He's talking about this, mass censorship that many of today's games and TV shows cannot pass: 5.1 Your app must not contain adult content, and metadata must be appropriate for everyone 5.2 Your app must not contain content that advocates discrimination, hatred, or violence based on membership in a particular racial, ethnic, national, linguistic, religious, or other social group, or based on a person’s gender, age, or sexual orientation 5.3 Your app must not contain content or functionality that encourages, facilitates or glamorizes illegal activity 5.4 Your app must not contain or display content that a reasonable person would consider to be obscene 5.5 Your app must not contain content that is defamatory, libelous or slanderous, or threatening 5.6 Your app must not contain content that encourages, facilitates or glamorizes excessive or irresponsible use of alcohol or tobacco products, drugs or weapons 5.7 Your app must not contain content that encourages, facilitates or glamorizes extreme or gratuitous violence, human rights violations, or the creation or use of weapons against a person or animal in the real world 5.8 Your app must not contain excessive or gratuitous profanity
- ngcazz 14y ago
  any of those points can be easily challenged i suppose!
- cube13 14y ago
  All of which are CYA statements that are there to remove MS' liability for any app used for any of those purposes. It's worth pointing out that Google has roughly the same requirements in their Google Play content requirements( http://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html http://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html ), as do Apple and Amazon. Google's ratings requirements are potentially even more stringent, especially because they're in plain English.
  - bad_user 14y ago
    Just because everybody with similar platforms do it, doesn't make it right. And I do not agree about those statements being CYA - the worst thing you can get is an environment where the rules are selectively enforced, based on a decision-making process that will never be transparent. Oh so content-makers are complaining that Youtube steals their traffic? Clearly there's enough content on Youtube to justify a ban under any of those rules and Google is not exactly on Microsoft's list of favorites. Let's also remember the apps banned by Apple for being "offensive". Were they obnoxious, definitely, to some people at least. However that's censorship. And it's OK as long as controlled platforms are a minority, but when it becomes a monopolizing problem leaving consumers with no choices left, then it should really be against the law.
    - cube13 14y ago
      >However that's censorship. And it's OK as long as controlled platforms are a minority, but when it becomes a monopolizing problem leaving consumers with no choices left, then it should really be against the law. I have trouble accepting this argument. Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Amazon are not preventing the production of that content. They're simply refusing to sell it, which is their prerogative. That's not censorship, at all. It's no different from any of the major big-box chains refusing to sell things because of content.

by cube13 14y ago

mattmanser 14y ago

Did you read the article? He's talking about this, mass censorship that many of today's games and TV shows cannot pass: 5.1 Your app must not contain adult content, and metadata must be appropriate for everyone 5.2 Your app must not contain content that advocates discrimination, hatred, or violence based on membership in a particular racial, ethnic, national, linguistic, religious, or other social group, or based on a person’s gender, age, or sexual orientation 5.3 Your app must not contain content or functionality that encourages, facilitates or glamorizes illegal activity 5.4 Your app must not contain or display content that a reasonable person would consider to be obscene 5.5 Your app must not contain content that is defamatory, libelous or slanderous, or threatening 5.6 Your app must not contain content that encourages, facilitates or glamorizes excessive or irresponsible use of alcohol or tobacco products, drugs or weapons 5.7 Your app must not contain content that encourages, facilitates or glamorizes extreme or gratuitous violence, human rights violations, or the creation or use of weapons against a person or animal in the real world 5.8 Your app must not contain excessive or gratuitous profanity

ngcazz 14y ago
any of those points can be easily challenged i suppose!
cube13 14y ago
All of which are CYA statements that are there to remove MS' liability for any app used for any of those purposes. It's worth pointing out that Google has roughly the same requirements in their Google Play content requirements( http://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html http://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html ), as do Apple and Amazon. Google's ratings requirements are potentially even more stringent, especially because they're in plain English.
- bad_user 14y ago
  Just because everybody with similar platforms do it, doesn't make it right. And I do not agree about those statements being CYA - the worst thing you can get is an environment where the rules are selectively enforced, based on a decision-making process that will never be transparent. Oh so content-makers are complaining that Youtube steals their traffic? Clearly there's enough content on Youtube to justify a ban under any of those rules and Google is not exactly on Microsoft's list of favorites. Let's also remember the apps banned by Apple for being "offensive". Were they obnoxious, definitely, to some people at least. However that's censorship. And it's OK as long as controlled platforms are a minority, but when it becomes a monopolizing problem leaving consumers with no choices left, then it should really be against the law.
  - cube13 14y ago
    >However that's censorship. And it's OK as long as controlled platforms are a minority, but when it becomes a monopolizing problem leaving consumers with no choices left, then it should really be against the law. I have trouble accepting this argument. Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Amazon are not preventing the production of that content. They're simply refusing to sell it, which is their prerogative. That's not censorship, at all. It's no different from any of the major big-box chains refusing to sell things because of content.