A Danish newspaper is reportedly threatening to sue Apple over the iPhone maker's refusal to allow photos of topless women to appear on the iTunes App Store.
According to website HyperOm, newspaper Ekstra Bladet has featured topless women for 35 years on Page 9, likely the equivalent to Page 3 in the Rupert Murdoch owned The Sun in the UK.
Apple is unlikely to approve the Ekstra Bladet iPhone app unless the paper removes the sight of the "offensive content," namely nipples.
See: Apple censoring iCloud emails and attachments
"I think it's madness. [Photo of the lady] is not pornographic or offensive in any way… Page 9-girl is a part of Ekstra Bladet soul," said Ekstra Bladet editor Poul Madsen.
HyperOm adds, the newspaper editor has promised to go to the European Court to fight this "backdoor censorship," threatening the row could end with Apple in court.
The Danes are not alone in feeling rejected by Apple. Earlier this year The Guardian reported Germany's Stern magazine had it iPhone app pulled because it ran topless photo spreads, while the newspaper Bild was forced to add bikini tops to its topless models.
[Image credit: Ekstra Bladet]
Previously Apple's CEO Steve Jobs has promised a "freedom from porn" policy for the iTunes App Store, suggesting customers buy an Android phone if they wanted to view sexually explicit content.
"You know, there's a porn store for Android [phones using Google's software]. You can download porn, your kids can download porn. That's a place we don't want to go – so we're not going to go there," Jobs said.
Contact Us
Digg
It's easy and free to get the latest news headlines, reviews and opinions straight to your email inbox. Sign up NOW to make sure you receive the latest Mac news, reviews and tutorials on your favourite topics.
Comments received
Xhris2210 said on Wed, 08 Dec 2010
Notwithstanding these images seem to be airbrushed within an inch of their life, they still look rather tacky.
That's a taste issue and they're below a certain taste threshhold for me personally.
However - I would not seek to impose my taste on anyone else. If Apple continues down this line, my much-loved iPhone 4 may well be eventually replaced by a phone where I make my own decisions on what the nature of any potential content may be...
Xhris2210 said on Wed, 08 Dec 2010
Notwithstanding these images seem to be airbrushed within an inch of their life, they still look rather tacky.
That's a taste issue and they're below a certain taste threshhold for me personally.
However - I would not seek to impose my taste on anyone else. If Apple continues down this line, my much-loved iPhone 4 may well be eventually replaced by a phone where I make my own decisions on what the nature of any potential content may be...
greendave said on Wed, 08 Dec 2010
Grow up. So are you going to sue TESCO next for not stocking your XXX rated magazines? It is up to Apple - if you don't like it do a deal with Android or Microsoft or Samsung or RIM.
Crystal-lite said on Wed, 08 Dec 2010
Good for Apple and good for Steve Jobs, at least there still is some decency in this world.
Zebedeesaunt said on Wed, 08 Dec 2010
Good for Apple. Firm guidelines and no exceptions - very encouraging. There's plenty of 'dodgy' content everywhere and Apple have always been clear about their policy. If you don't like it, pick another platform.
@Xchris2210 said on Thu, 09 Dec 2010
Can you not fill your iPhoto library full of girly images and sync to iPhone, then you can have as much titillation as you want!
@Greendave said on Thu, 09 Dec 2010
I AM a grown-up. Which is why I feel I should have the CHOICE not to touch stuff like this. If Tesco were in a position of monopoly provider I would be equally infuriated that they could make a decision to filter what I could and could not see.
Censorship in the purview of government is one thing [they are acountable in theory to an enire adult population].
Self appointed unaccountable censorship is a dangerous precedent. You may be happy to have Nanny Apple decide for you now, what happens when her tastes don't coincide with your own?
I prefer Apple tech to Android, but this is an issue that could make me switch. It is a bit of a playground argument to simply say: if you don't like it go elsewhere - what if Google and Microsoft also decide to dictate content?
Robbocop said on Thu, 09 Dec 2010
Well, Ekstra Bladet are not forced to change their content. If they don't like the censorship they could, as SJ said, not distribute the App. I'm no prude, and I agree that Apple are being hyper tight about this, but it's their line to draw. If a court forces them to allow soft porn surely that opens the door to a worse situation than we have currently, doesn't it?
NeilFiertel said on Thu, 09 Dec 2010
In America, porn and nudity are out and violent war games are in. What can one say but that Apple is an American owned and dominated company with its largest customer base within the US. I personally could care less what they ban from their stores. On the other hand, if one is ever on a bus in Roma and glance at teens looking at real porn right there in public view, I can see why Steve thinks..maybe not. I do not subscribe to censorship of the nude to be sure. The born again, right wing, crypto fascist folks down in the USA buy Apple branded products also and it is good business to turn down porn products but this goes aganst the prinicple that there ought to be freedom of information so long as it is not stolen from embassies! Boobs seem to be pretty tame compared to Wikileaks which I presume are easily available on the iPhone!
LGN said on Thu, 09 Dec 2010
I concur with those who say everyone should have theright to download what they wish. I an surorised that Jobs hasn't sued the hundreds of sites that are available on the net -in turn available on your Mac. What is so special about the iPhone - at least it is more personal that a laptop or iPad.
whelk said on Thu, 09 Dec 2010
There's more than enough porn and glamour on the Web. Anyone who wants titty ladies can easily find lots without being spoonfed by a quasi-liberal attitude to censorship. It IS censorship to refuse an item, but that doesn't mean to say that a careful attitude is always wrong - anyone ready to root for a kiddy porn app in the AppStore? It must be said that the illustration of the rude ladies in question does make them look as though they're made of polythene - is this some kink that I missed?
Xhris2210 said on Fri, 10 Dec 2010
I was waiting for someone to mention paedo images, inevitably. Doesn't really apply does it? Because paedophilia is illegal and by its very nature exploitative.
This sort of blunt-stick censorship always reveals itself to be simple minded and ultimately unworkable.
Where is the line drawn? Will they bar the Birth of Venus? Remember the U-Turn on the cartoon Ulysses? That simple-minded prudery looked especially ridiculous and inappropriate at the time that the 'broken bottle' app was flying high in the download charts.
If App content does have a deleterious effect on the minds of the young and impressionable, which is worse: the sight of a lady's nipple, or bloody shards of glass indicating a bottle-stab?
Why do we feel that we have to protect against a natural everyday act [no continuation of our or any animal species without it] whilst extreme violence seems par for the course. Sublime idiocy. sic transit gloria mundi
Xhris2210 said on Fri, 10 Dec 2010
I was waiting for someone to mention paedo images, inevitably. Doesn't really apply does it? Because paedophilia is illegal and by its very nature exploitative.
This sort of blunt-stick censorship always reveals itself to be simple minded and ultimately unworkable.
Where is the line drawn? Will they bar the Birth of Venus? Remember the U-Turn on the cartoon Ulysses? That simple-minded prudery looked especially ridiculous and inappropriate at the time that the 'broken bottle' app was flying high in the download charts.
If App content does have a deleterious effect on the minds of the young and impressionable, which is worse: the sight of a lady's nipple, or bloody shards of glass indicating a bottle-stab?
Why do we feel that we have to protect against a natural everyday act [no continuation of our or any animal species without it] whilst extreme violence seems par for the course. Sublime idiocy. sic transit gloria mundi
Disclaimer
Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Macworld. Macworld accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content.
Click here to read the house rules.
Click here for the latest reader comments