There’s a couple of responses already, but I think they miss the main point: when the Apple reviewer goes out and does this, they don’t mark your app for “unrestricted web access” (which is the category third party browsers go in, and immediately makes them rated 17+). That would actually make sense, even if you consider it “unfair” because Apple’s own apps of course don’t get those ratings.

No, the problem is that when a reviewer finds anything “questionable” in your app, they mark it as a porno app. Pornographic apps cannot be in the App Store. That rule is designed to keep PornHub off the store (again, putting the morality of this aside…) and yet Apple equates your app with them even if 99% of your content is squeaky clean. The reviewers specifically seek out content that they want to flag, and the problem is that they then reject it by representing it as if they just stumbled upon it by accident, or that it’s so prevalent that it’s obviously the purpose of your app. So now you’re stuck arguing that your app is not a portal for porn in these absurd cases where the reviewer has, through their misunderstanding of the rule, changed the argument from “is your app primarily focused around the consumption of pornography” to “does your app make nudity available to a determined user”?

The app store should have porn. I'm sick of American corporations' War on Breasts. These days the comedy bit would be "7 words you can't say on the App Store"

Typical American cultural prudeness where nudity is taboo but violence is glorified.

I have fond memory of playing those "buddy" apps on my iPod when I was younger where you would throw staplers and chainsaws and whatnot at little virtual guys who were trapped behind the screen. Mildly sadistic? Sure, but I really wonder what was going through the head of the reviewer who allowed all 15-some iterations on that idea to get put up on the App Store while finding a picture of boobs in your app is carte-blanche means for removal.

> . This is what people who download the app will do, so they’re trying out real scenarios that will happen

let's ban browsers then or chat apps or sharing apps

and why not apps in general that play images and videos and that enable people to send aforementioned images and videos?

you know what? now that I think about it, let's ban the smart (computing) part from iPhone.

but let's not stop there, let's ban the phone part too, because one could always call an hotline or make a booty call...

>> . This is what people who download the app will do, so they’re trying out real scenarios that will happen

> let's ban browsers then or chat apps or sharing apps

you joke, but telegram had to implement porn-filters for group chats on ios/macos.

> let's ban browsers then or chat apps or sharing apps

This would be Apple's dream.

Latest headlines? Here's Apple News.

Movie trailers? Don't have those, but here's Apple TV +

Online gaming? Apple Arcade.

Stop giving Apple exec's ideas, they might be reading this site.

That doesn't make sense to me. The iPhone comes with a web browser. If a user wants milfs and butts they can put that in the address bar.

> The iPhone comes with a web browser.

The iPhone comes with a web browser that has parental controls. A parent can have some degree of control over what their kids see when they use Safari. A parent does not have that choice with typical applications.

If that's the problem, then simply add a setting which apps can check.

If that's the concern, then Apple needs to deliver a parental controls API that apps can use to check whether or not the app needs to use filters. Otherwise, their complaints are wholly their fault for not having the functionality to let people discriminate between safe and unsafe content.

Sure they do. I’ve used those parental controls myself.

Every single app in the App Store has an age rating. An underaged user can only download apps in the age categories that their parents have specifically authorized.

So the general agreement is that people should not be allowed to consume porn in the united states?

Not sure if you were saying this ironically, but I firmly believe limiting the consumption of porn would be a net positive. The negative effects are at best overlooked, but normally twisted, and the average age of first experience with porn keeps dropping.

The constant struggle to control what other people can consume. Outside of things like CSAM (which I have zero desire to view) I don’t need a nanny telling me what I can view

Also, anyone who feels entitled to impose on others for a cause this mild clearly has an underdeveloped respect for personal liberty and isn't going to stop there.

I don't appreciate the insinuation. The level of severity should not gate how people feel about this specific issue.

Let's lift it out of insinuation territory, then: I think you have an underdeveloped sense of respect for personal liberty and I think that if you won a victory on this front it would embolden you to continue chipping away at other liberties to further your circle of control. People love crusading against vices because the feeling of moral authority is heady and addictive. One hit is never enough.

The concept of liberty is how we rein in this dark tendency.

I don't disagree. I won't pretend to know how I would act if limiting porn consumption was actually implemented. But ignoring the thousands of people who self-report an ironically similar addictive experience you just described, but for porn, is dismissive and self-centered.

It looks like that if you buy apple products, you deserve a nanny because you are clearly a moron!

(I use 'you' as a generality, not you the poster ;-) )

Yes because limiting a vice based on what a few people “firmly believe” has always worked so smoothly and successfully in the past and has never caused any major societal issues. Worked so well in America for alcohol and drugs, why not give it a shot with porn too?

I didn't say ban. Unless you're for kids drinking at age 9 we're on the same page. And it's more than a few people at this point.

I am pretty sure the law does not deter any 9 years olds from drinking alcohol. I would even say that it is not because of the law that people do not give alcohol to their 9 years old kid. If it truly is because of the law, you have bigger issues I believe.

?

His analogy is perfectly consistent. There are laws prohibiting minors from purchasing alchoholic drinks. In the same way, porn can be restricted from minors. He is just saying that there needs to be strict enforcement of a law against porn to protect minors.

I guess your argument is that there is no need for a law against alchoholic drinks since there is common sense to not give alchohol to minors and for minors to not drink alchohol.

But the existence of laws regulating alchoholic drinks purchase suggests that common sense is not enough and laws need to be created for it.

I love how any time anyone says that maybe porn shouldn't be available for every 9 year old with a tablet people get up in arms about it.

OP didn't say ban all porn, but it should be more tightly regulated and its consumption has proven to be damaging.

I'm actually agreeing with you at this, but how should this regulation look?

Also, I believe there are a number of non-porn sexual education resources, which should stay available.

However, note that the current crackdown on porn isn't about underage consumers, it's about consumption in general. Apple isn't asking for age verification, they are banning adult content completely.

OP said Apple's stance is reasonable and Apple is pretty close to saying "ban all porn".

> This is what people who download the app will do, so they’re trying out real scenarios that will happen. They don’t want to have there be a segment on the nightly news saying, “App Store Full of Porn!” Which is what will happen in these scenarios.

Lets ban web browsers.

Why not just stick on an NSFW warning and restrict downloads for minors, and maybe treat your adult users as adults?

13-18 is a major spender age category. I'd really like to say a breakdown but I think most of app store revenue comes from games.

Why would the news say that app store is full of porn when you search it on Tumblr but not when you search it on Reddit? If they let at least one company do it it does seem kind of dumb.

I don't know about tumblr, but reddit doesn't allow nsfw subs out of the box on mobile, and for logged in users, you have to explicitly enable it.

Obviously you can still find nsfw content on reddit that isn't labeled as such, so beyond that, it's probably up to the developer's soft skills. reddit probably has some people who are good at framing the app in communication with review, escalating review decisions, and communicating content policies in a way that makes them seem consistent and trustworthy.

I don't know about tumblr, but unfortunately, I don't think many indie apps with user-generated content would have the bandwidth to develop the same relationship with app stores. So there is some de facto gatekeeping happening that benefits the largest and most well-spoken social networks.

> I don't know about tumblr, but reddit doesn't allow nsfw subs out of the box on mobile, and for logged in users, you have to explicitly enable it.

This is an Apple rule. From the App Store Review Guidelines:

> If your app includes user-generated content from a web-based service, it may display incidental mature “NSFW” content, provided that the content is hidden by default and only displayed when the user turns it on via your website.

— https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#use...

Let's be honest, it likely has much less to do with developer soft skills and more to do with the value Apple perceives from the app being on their platform. The big fish will have more sway; it makes good business sense but it's anti-competitive.

I don't agree, but even if true, the developer can influence the perceived value of their smaller or newer application.

> the developer can influence the perceived value of their smaller or newer application

by influence you mean "conform"?

No. This goes back to the original soft skills comment. Developers who can convince app review that they have a solid and trustworthy process, and more successfully escalate and have conversations about the review process, and frame their app differently to change the perspective of review, are able to get more interesting USG into their app (the opposite of conforming.)

The problem, as I said earlier, is that indies have no chance of spending enough time developing their app and also having time to do this or of hiring someone to do this. This is where the gatekeeping comes from. I think it actually keeps them from launching and growing, not just publish with neutered content (what you call conforming.)

The escalation path mentioned in the original post ("developer support contact", I think more officially a Worldwide Developer Relations Partnership Manager) is invite-only.

So allow sideloading. Problem solved.

And as a nice bonus, app store would then have to actually compete with those alternate sources. As macOS shows, when the use of the app store is not mandatory, almost none of the developers will be taking the app store seriously and will instead handle the distribution of their apps themselves just fine.

I feel like with that logic web browsers should be banned including their own. There’s nothing stopping me from buying a brand new iPhone and immediately opening up safari and finding porn. Heck even their own search feature built into the OS can do this. Rules for thee and not for me.

Is Safari not able to search for porn on iOS ? Or is Apple only trying to protect their revenue sources ?