Violent comic book doesn't meet Apple's standards
Murderdrome was not accepted into the App Store.
(Credit: Infuriouscomics)Apple recently took an axe to Murderdrome, an electronic comic book in its App Store that the company deemed too violent.
Murderdrome, created by the United Kingdom-based Infuriouscomics, had been created especially for the iPhone. Apple turned down Infuriouscomics' application to put the comic in the App Store.
"This is due to the part of the SDK that suggests content must not offend anyone in 'Apple's reasonable' opinion," a post on the Infurious blog read. "Here at Infurious, we would love to work with Apple to ensure a content-rating system can be put in place to allow material that is no more offensive than many of the R-rated films available to download on iTunes."
The first installment of Murderdrome is an eight-panel comic that shows one character slicing another's head with a machete, and cleaving another's with a sword, as part of a sport called "murderdrome." The violence is comic, but still bloody.
Artist P.J. Holden told TechRadar UK that while he plans to advocate for the creation of a ratings system for the App Store, right now, he also plans to draw more comics that will be more "Apple-friendly."
Caroline McCarthy, a CNET News staff writer, is a downtown Manhattanite happily addicted to social-media tools and restaurant blogs. Her pre-CNET resume includes interning at an IT security firm and brewing cappuccinos. E-mail Caroline.
Other sites just said: "Apple banned comics from AppStore."
The own seller recognizes that it was against SDK definition!
jestead - Yeah, sure there are plenty of places for this kind of content. Unfortunately, so far there has been no avenue for these independent comic creators to make a living from their work. Apple has the opportunity to provide a new avenue to readers (and I don't just mean for G-rated comics).
It's not their responsibility.
Again, where would YOU draw the line?
It's not their responsibility.
Again, where would YOU draw the line?
Rating should be made. Just because a user in the bible belt of the USA does not like something and works for Apple has the item removed? What if the future application was created by Orthodox Muslims & Jews or Hindus? Would it still be banned? If it is banned will the purchaser be refunded the full price if it is removed from his/her phone without their implicit permission?
Things are not looking good for the app store. What if the Geico ape men made their own game for the iphone. Will people cry racism and ban it as well?
Some people here really need to relax.
The only entity that can (legally) engage in censorship is *the government* and the only means they can employ to do this is *force*. In this regard, it is interesting to juxtapose the cries against Apple being a "censor" in this post to a related article in which an Apple ad is really and truly censored by the government, who should have no such power (even if the ad may be considered by some to be misleading). This is the typical twisted inversion of our age: actual censorship by the government (using force) is welcomed, whereas expression of rights by private parties is excoriated, with explicit or implicit demands of retribution. Well, if Apple is forced to publish things, against their wishes, that is simply another form of censorship.
Where would I draw the line? Simple. I wouldn't.
-
by solitare_pax
August 28, 2008 4:48 PM PDT
- HEY! Don't forget about Freedom of the Press! That is - it's FREE to those who own the PRESSES! Or radio, tv, webspace or whatever. Move along, it sounds more like applied good taste rather than censorship.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(17 Comments)This just in: Paypal won't let you buy PORN! ebay won't let you sell Nazi relics to Frenchmen! The Chinese are blocking iTunes! And Homeland Security is watching you (along with Santa Claus)