Regular readers will remember that Juggleware’s own app Freedom Time was actually the test case of this unwritten and up-til-then unknown policy, which had not been explicitly defined beyond the word “defamatory” briefly appearing.  For a timeline of other apps (there are at least 16 now) that have been banned for this silly charge, see this blog:

Apple’s Policy on Satire: 16 Apps Rejected for “Ridiculing Public Figures” [Cloud Four]

If there was an app rejected before September 2008 for political satire, we’d like to hear about it; please post in the comments below.

The interesting thing about the Mark Fiore case is that Apple has apparently reconsidered their rejection, and asked Fiore to resubmit his app. That’s great news, but does it really mean Apple is finally reconsidering their rather draconian policy? Or are they just trying to avoid the bad publicity that’s likely to escalate when the content is associated with the winner of a Pulitzer? I guess we’ll have to wait till the next rejection (or approval) to find out.

John Gruber of Daring Fireball makes the point that what’s most frustrating to developers is the grey area of ill-defined rules. Developers trying to navigate App Store policy plays out like trying to divine the will of a god, who is without a doubt omnipotent, but  rarely seems omniscient, and appears to mortals as vindictive and capricious at times. Or perhaps a closer amalgam could be a Kafka-esque bureaucracy, layers of obscure rules unseen by citizens, wheels moving cruelly behind the scenes towards some irreversible and arbitrary concept justice so thickly wrapped in red tape as to be impenetrable?

But back to the heart of it, what’s really so awful about demeaning public figures? Most of them need a swift kick in the ass. If it’s done in a way that’s not illegal or obscene,  that threatens violence or makes a patently untrue claim, then why the censorship? One possible answer might be that that’s it’s just wide cover for one public figure who is sacrosanct in the Apple canon, in which case I would like to suggest the following amendment to the satire rule:  No application may include images, text, or sound that demeans Steven P. Jobs.

At least that way we could still satirize everything else under the sun, and the rule would kind of be a parody of itself.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125561844

You can also read more from Mr Zittrain on the subject in this piece from the Financial Times.

Here’s the link: http://lambdajive.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/isinglepayer-iphone-app-censored-by-apple/

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/apple-answers-fcc-questions/

Of course the FCC is primarily interested in its rejection of big, important apps like Google Voice, and not indie developer apps, so Apple was able to gloss over its political censorship of apps like Freedom Time (See section 5, above), and not even include any rejected political content app in its list of “representative applications.”

To me, rejecting an app for speech reasons is much worse than for technological competition reasons, but maybe that’s because I am someone who cares about the first Amendment, something that has been shoved to the back of the bus while greasing the wheels of the free market machine.

Thanks to Brad at Bent Media for pointing me to this excellent essay by Joe Hewitt demanding the end of the App Store approval process as we know it.

Well, as everyone in the galaxy knows, we now have two reasons to celebrate at 12:00:00 GMT -0500 on January 20, 2009: good riddance to the worst president of all time, and hello to the first African-American president (and the first president I ever voted for with a smile on my face!)

You don’t even need to have an iPhone now to have a virtual iPhone on your desktop.

Watch the actual countdown on this page:

http://www.juggleware.com/iphone/freedomtime/

and download the version for your computer and keep it on.

Only 73 days left! TIME for a NEW leader!

Tip: click on the screen to hear the next Bush quote. (These are all actual audio quotes by Bush and are unedited.)

After a wait of 10 days while Freedom Time was in review, Apple sent us our Dear John letter.

I find the word “censorship” a bit strong, so I’ll use it carefully. But the long and short of it is that Apple did not find the Freedom Time app to their liking:

Hello Juggleware Developer,
Upon review of your application, Freedom Time cannot be posted to the App Store because it contains content that does not comply with Community Standards.  Usage of such materials, as outlined in the iPhone SDK Agreement section 3.3.12, is prohibited:

“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.”

Defaming, demeaning, or attacking political figures is not considered appropriate content for the App Store.

If you would like to provide an application that contains such content to a group of friends, then we encourage you to use the Ad Hoc application distribution method.  Please go to the Distribution Tab in the iPhone Developer Portal for complete information on Ad Hoc distribution.

Best Regards,

iPhone Application Review Team
Apple Developer Connection 
Worldwide Developer Relations
**************************************************************************
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS MESSAGE IS UNDER NON-DISCLOSURE
**************************************************************************

I don’t believe that we violated the terms as they were specifically defined. The reason in the rejection letter was that it’s not appropriate to defame, demean, or attack political figures. The original terms I agreed to of course allow for  ”Apple’s reasonable judgment”  which means that they have the right to reject anything they want of course by applying their own standards, and as it’s their App Store, I don’t dispute that right.

However, I could not disagree more with the approach both to the general public and to the developer community, and I wish they’d been more clear in defining what was “offensive”  or “demeaning.” I can honestly say that I believe this app does not demean George W. Bush. If we had wanted to do that, we’d have made him look like a monkey. (But then people would say that we were demeaning monkeys!).

Defamation means making an untrue claim about someone in order to hurt their public standing. This app makes no untrue claims whatsoever. It actually goes pretty light on “W” considering his record. A good case could be shown that the guy is probably a war criminal, possibly even a traitor in his role as military leader with respect to the Constitution. However, this App does nothing but animate him count the time till he leaves, and play back a few quotes that the guy himself said. The text “till the end of an error” is the only thing that could even remotely be considered defamatory (if it wasn’t obviously satirical). I know in Britiain the laws are a bit different, but in the USA you can say just about anything you’d like about a political figure and it’s not considered defamation. Especially if it falls under parody or satire, and this certainly would.

This isn’t exactly a case of First Amendment rights, and I can see why Apple wants to keep the App Store clean of controversy, but I think they really walk a thin line trying to make themselves arbiters of what is tasteful and what is not. There should be some sort of rating for explicit material, of course, and for stuff like this maybe put it in a “Satire” or “Commentary” section of the App Store so that people who get offended by such things won’t have to navigate to that part of the store.

I’d heard of their rejecting applications for duplicating technology and a violent comic book for being too violent, but I didn’t think they’d ban a lighthearted political satire very gently mocking the least popular president in recent U.S. history (if not all-time). 

My first Apple program was a text-based AppleBASIC Lunar Lander on an Apple ///, I’ve been a Macintosh afficionado for ages, and I’m even an Apple shareholder. The iPhone and the App Store are two of the coolest things that I’ve come across in ages, and have gotten me more excited about development than anything has in a long time — but I won’t deny that this puts a serious dent in my enthusiasm.

My hope is that they review and reconsider their policy. I’ve written them back, and at the urging of my friend John who’s a fellow Apple junkie, an email to Steve Jobs, in the off hope that he’ll see it. John says he responds to developers’ emails now and again, but I’m not holding my breath.