News

NIN iPhone application gets rejected

You are here: blasteroids.com / news / nin iphone application gets rejected /

Latest news | News archive | Search news

Not registered yet? Register here.

DVDBack23 @ May 05, 2009 02:21 | 39 comments

Trent Reznor, front man for Nine Inch Nails, has spoken out against the arbitrary Apple App Store approval process, after his application submission was rejected.

As posted on his personal blog, the rejection letter was as follows:

"Thank you for submitting nin: access to the App Store. We've reviewed nin: access and determined that we cannot post this version of your iPhone application to the App Store at this time because it contains objectionable content which is in violation of Section 3.3.12 from the iPhone SDK Agreement which states:

"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."

The objectionable content referenced in this email is "The Downward Spiral". Since the app is live on the App store, please make the necessary changes to the application as soon as possible, and resubmit your binary to iTunes Connect. Thank you

Regards,

iPhone Developer Program "

Reznor responded with:

Now, "The Downward Spiral" the album is not available anywhere in the iPhone app. The song "The Downward Spiral" I believe is in a podcast that can be streamed to the app.

Thanks Apple for the clear description of the problem - as in, what do you want us to change to get past your stupid fucking standards?

And while we're at it, I'll voice the same issue I had with Wal-Mart years ago, which is a matter of consistency and hypocrisy. Wal-Mart went on a rampage years ago insisting all music they carry be censored of all profanity and "clean" versions be made for them to carry. Bands (including Nirvana) tripped over themselves editing out words, changing album art, etc to meet Wal-Mart's standards of decency - because Wal-Mart sells a lot of records. NIN refused, and you'll notice a pretty empty NIN section at any Wal-Mart. My reasoning was this: I can understand if you want the moral posturing of not having any "indecent" material for sale - but you could literally turn around 180 degrees from where the NIN record would be and purchase the film "Scarface" completely uncensored, or buy a copy of Grand Theft Auto where you can be rewarded for beating up prostitutes. How does that make sense?

You can buy The Downward Fucking Spiral on iTunes, but you can't allow an iPhone app that may have a song with a bad word somewhere in it. Geez, what if someone in the forum in our app says FUCK or CUNT? I suppose that also falls into indecent material. Hey Apple, I just got some SPAM about fucking hot asian teens THROUGH YOUR MAIL PROGRAM. I just saw two guys having explicit anal sex right there in Safari! On my iPhone!

Come on Apple, think your policies through and for fuck's sake get your app approval scenario together.

Previous Next

Comments

There are more user comments available, read them here

Comment by: DXR88 (May 06, 2009 01:38)

A steam engine would be the best solution to the issue of emissions and Waste why it will never happen. it cant be controlled and the government doesn't want anything they can't control.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 06, 2009 01:53)

Originally posted by DXR88:
A steam engine would be the best solution to the issue of emissions and Waste why it will never happen. it cant be controlled and the government doesn't want anything they can't control.

compressed air is more efficient.

Comment by: DXR88 (May 06, 2009 02:10)

Quote:
Originally posted by DXR88:
A steam engine would be the best solution to the issue of emissions and Waste why it will never happen. it cant be controlled and the government doesn't want anything they can't control.
compressed air is more efficient.

Steam is more readily available, we already have a combustion engine in almost every vehicle.

air would work but it would require a major engine over haul, steam not so much.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 06, 2009 02:25)

Quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by DXR88:
A steam engine would be the best solution to the issue of emissions and Waste why it will never happen. it cant be controlled and the government doesn't want anything they can't control.
compressed air is more efficient.
Steam is more readily available, we already have a combustion engine in almost every vehicle.

air would work but it would require a major engine over haul, steam not so much.

The power needed to create the heat for stream makes it moot as are all the cars on the road today.

What we need is a revolution in vehicles in the US, we need low cost highly efficient vehicles first off we need to get rid of the crash test mafia and replace it with mandates that all new vehicles are required to have a reinforced cab(doors/roof,ect the whole area is crush proof for most crashes) if have to make it as simple as full roll cage in the cab area then so be it adding 30-80% onto a car because of over reactive safety nazis and regulation whores is adding to the overall burden of over priced,bloated and poorly built vehicle industry in the US.

Then make any customized or not street legal vehicle to be used on the road force the owner to have a minuim of 150K in insurance on the vehicle.

This way you can have a insurgence of modernized vehicles for the masses who are making less and less every year at the end of the day.

edit
Ok steam is on par with compressed air, didn't know Volkswagen made one that could start in 30sec, though you have to wonder about icing/freezing issues though beet juice would work.... LOL .

Comment by: chicnshit (May 06, 2009 03:05)

Almost make you wonder if the united states is actually communist. We can't use freedom of speach.We keep changing the constitution. And big companys will always short change everyone because they know the goverment will bail them out each time. Who is it going to offend? the person buying the music or the person wanting to buy the app for the iphone?

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 06, 2009 03:12)

Originally posted by chicnshit:
Almost make you wonder if the united states is actually communist. We can't use freedom of speach.We keep changing the constitution. And big companys will always short change everyone because they know the goverment will bail them out each time. Who is it going to offend? the person buying the music or the person wanting to buy the app for the iphone?

Hello...we've been a populist socialistic country since the 30s...wakey wakey....

Comment by: KillerBug (May 06, 2009 03:31)

Quote:
Originally posted by chicnshit:
Almost make you wonder if the united states is actually communist. We can't use freedom of speach.We keep changing the constitution. And big companys will always short change everyone because they know the goverment will bail them out each time. Who is it going to offend? the person buying the music or the person wanting to buy the app for the iphone?

Hello...we've been a populist socialistic country since the 30s...wakey wakey....

No, we are Socio-Fascists (minus the universal healthcare)...get it right!

...But seriously, this thread started about Apple's censorship of an iPhone app and turned into a discussion about steam powered cars and the breakdown of freedoms. The USA government does a lot of evil things, but they have never banned "the Downward Spiral" and that is what this news article is all about...Apple (once the Alternative, rebel platform) banning an app based on it's alternative content.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 06, 2009 03:34)

Quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by chicnshit:
Almost make you wonder if the united states is actually communist. We can't use freedom of speach.We keep changing the constitution. And big companys will always short change everyone because they know the goverment will bail them out each time. Who is it going to offend? the person buying the music or the person wanting to buy the app for the iphone?

Hello...we've been a populist socialistic country since the 30s...wakey wakey....
No, we are Socio-Fascists (minus the universal healthcare)...get it right!

...But seriously, this thread started about Apple's censorship of an iPhone app and turned into a discussion about steam powered cars and the breakdown of freedoms. The USA government does a lot of evil things, but they have never banned "the Downward Spiral" and that is what this news article is all about...Apple (once the Alternative, rebel platform) banning an app based on it's alternative content.

Wellllll....if you want to be pessimistic about it....
:P

Comment by: Morreale (May 06, 2009 04:29)

This topic is more about cars and fuel then the iPhone lol

Comment by: gallagher (May 06, 2009 04:56)

Originally posted by chicnshit:
Almost make you wonder if the united states is actually communist. We can't use freedom of speach.We keep changing the constitution.

How do we keep changing the Constitution? In 220 years, it has only been amended 27 times. 10 of those were right off the bat to get it passed. So to me, 17 amendments in 220 years would not imply that we keep changing Constitution . . .

Now, with commie libs who want judicial activists who will reinterpret the Constitution every chance they have, we do have a problem with it constantly being changed with application. Defeats the whole point of stare decisis.

Comment by: DXR88 (May 06, 2009 05:03)

Quote:
Originally posted by chicnshit:
Almost make you wonder if the united states is actually communist. We can't use freedom of speach.We keep changing the constitution.
How do we keep changing the Constitution? In 220 years, it has only been amended 27 times. 10 of those were right off the bat to get it passed. So to me, 17 amendments in 220 years would not imply that we keep changing Constitution . . .

Now, with commie libs who want judicial activists who will reinterpret the Constitution every chance they have, we do have a problem with it constantly being changed with application. Defeats the whole point of stare decisis.

they have bills the negate other bills. the only bill they don't have is the bill that mandates what toilet paper the American people wipe there ass with.

there is no difference between apple and the government they both have a common goal,control.

Comment by: KillerBug (May 06, 2009 09:46)

Quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by chicnshit:
the only bill they don't have is the bill that mandates what toilet paper the American people wipe there ass with.
Actualy, there is a law against growing hemp...

Comment by: mogofwar (May 06, 2009 14:28)

What the heck?
You are in america! You should be used to the fact that [removed] or [removed] is pretty much a comma in our vocabulary.

Edit ~ Oner: While I do understand your point there are still rules of which need to be abided by here @ aD

Comment by: chicnshit (May 06, 2009 15:42)

They should have some warning lable like the parental advisory or a warning that there may be some swear words when you download your app. This issue is similair to when there were small companies trying to change hollywood movies when someone wanted heir movie edited from someone in the movie either naked or saying afew cus words.I don't think that it it is right for walmart to do that.But walmart will strong arm prices or anything else to sell someones product.

Comment by: Oner (May 07, 2009 00:29)

Originally posted by KillerBug:

Originally posted by chicnshit:
the only bill they don't have is the bill that mandates what toilet paper the American people wipe there ass with.
Actualy, there is a law against growing hemp...

Yet it was against the law to NOT grow hemp in America at one time ~

Quote:
The first hemp laws in America were passed in 1619 and they were 'must grow' laws. If you were a farmer living in America and you didn't grow hemp, you would be jailed or kicked out of the country as a non patriot. These first laws were put in place by the Colonist Government of Great Britain. In 1773 and again in 1776, ( the year the Declaration of Independence was signed). American made their own must grow laws. At that time, it was one of the most widely used plants in the world.

Fact - Cannabis hemp was legal tender (money) in most of America from 1631 until the early 1800s. Thomas Jefferson risked his life bring hemp seeds to America from overseas. Benjamin Franklin, started the first paper mill in America and all of the paper was made out of hemp. Wars were fought over hemp and without it, America never would have won the Revolutionary war.

In the 1920's during alcohol prohibition, almost every newspaper in the country was running ads for smoking hemp and hash ( a hemp by product ) the only legal high left. The fact is, hemp was in 80% of all human medicines when it was made illegal.

The first law against hemp was passed in 1937. This law was totally unconstitutional, but it took until 1968 for the Supreme court to agree that it was unconstitutional. In 1970-1972 American tax dollars paid to find out what to do about the hemp laws. Experts came back to president Nixon with this: Hemp is non-addictive, it is not a stepping stone to harder drugs, in fact it should not be in any drug category at all. They said there was nothing bad or dangerous about using hemp.

Nixon didn't like hemp and went against what the experts told him and pushed to have laws passed against it on the grounds that it has no medicinal value. This of course is untrue as most doctors would tell you. Well, some might not tell you because the way the laws are now, fear of persecution keeps many of the ones that know the facts quiet. A doctor told me that doctors can lose their license if they tell you that hemp would help you.

In the same year 1972, Holland had experts do research on the hemp plant as well. You see at the time Holland and the U.S.A. had about the same amount of hemp use per capita. Their experts said the same thing. Holland listened to their experts and made it legal.

Now, Holland has about half the hemp use per capita as the U.S. does. So why is this ? The answer to this was given to us with alcohol prohibition. What we found out then was this... usage goes up when you make a substance illegal. With alcohol, usage historically went back down when it was made legal again. so what can we gather from this ? It looks like Americans, proud citizens of the land of the free and the home of the brave, don't like it when you try to take their freedoms away.

In 1988, two million more of our tax dollars went to the U.S. army to do an in depth study on hemp. Their findings were that it should not be illegal at all etc.. The Reagan Bush administration was hoping for findings that the plant was bad in some way, but that is not the case or what the experts said, once again. This wasn't in the news much because they did their best to keep the American people from knowing the truth. So why don't they want you to know the truth ?

Because the United States Government is making billions of dollars by keeping it illegal.

Now some of you might be thinking, where do you get off calling federal drug laws unconstitutional ? To that I say... read your Constitution! Drugs would be a state issue, not a federal one the way our constitution is written. That is why it took about 20 years to figure out what to do with the first drug problems in the country. The first drug problem we faced as a nation was poppy and coca plant extracts like opium, cocaine, morphine, etc.. You see in 1900, you could walk in to almost any drug store and buy these drugs over the counter. Trade embargos is how they tried to fix the problem at first, because our Government knew they didn't have the Constitutional right to make laws against drugs.

I think it is too bad our government decided to break the law of our land, our Constitution of the United States, instead of trying honest education once they learned that those drugs were addictive. To this day our Government is still making schools teach lies about drugs instead of what they know to be the truth. This truly is a sad point in American history!

Source

Now I cannot confirm, say nor would agree with everything I quoted above, but the fact is it WAS legal for the purposes of growing (to coin a term) the country's expansion, infrastructure, cultivation of the lands etc. etc. etc.

But whatever...just don't get me started on our rights to bear arms and how utter BS how supposed "patriotic" people support some Constitutional rights but not others when they should uphold ALL.

Search > http://forums.afterdawn.com/search
Rules > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
Important Rule > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/380660

Comment by: cyprusrom (May 07, 2009 02:27)

I really don't know the reasoning behind hemp being illegal to cultivate, but I really don't see what's got to do with marijuana- except for the fact that both are from the same family. I have helped harvesting hemp back home(Europe) since I was in fifth grade, and from what I know, it is still grown to this day.

As for the idiots at Apple, I guess the NIN application must've been truly offensive, if it didn't move past the censorship that even the "Shaking Baby" did.Right.

Comment by: SoulGLOW (May 07, 2009 06:32)

well said Oner. i epecially like your last paragraph. You & I have to fight for all our rights or they will slowly be eroded away. These bastards even have us thinking we need a license to drive our personal vehicles & have to have insurance. if it isnt Commercial the Govt cant regulate it. period

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 07, 2009 06:56)

Originally posted by SoulGLOW:
well said Oner. i epecially like your last paragraph. You & I have to fight for all our rights or they will slowly be eroded away. These bastards even have us thinking we need a license to drive our personal vehicles & have to have insurance. if it isnt Commercial the Govt cant regulate it. period

The more rules and laws forced upon us the less rights and freedoms we have....

Comment by: KillerBug (May 07, 2009 10:03)

Originally posted by cyprusrom:
I really don't know the reasoning behind hemp being illegal to cultivate, but I really don't see what's got to do with marijuana- except for the fact that both are from the same family. I have helped harvesting hemp back home(Europe) since I was in fifth grade, and from what I know, it is still grown to this day.

The best I can tell the anti-hemp laws were put into effect to bennifit logging and cotton industries, as hemp is cheaper and more resiliant for both clothing and paper. (Also more eco-friendly, but no one cared about that back then). The effect today is that hemp products cost more than cotton and tree products because they are subject to tarrifs and shipping from other countries. There is almost no connection between marijuana and hemp; a joint contains more THC than a truckload of hemp, making hemp useless for intoxication, even with refinment. The wierd part of this law is that you can sell hemp...you just can't grow it.

Current System: Windows 7 RC1, DFI M2RS, ATI 3870HD, Hauppauge WinTV-HVR-1600, Athlon 9950, 6GB Corsair DDR2, 1.5TB RAID-1, 750GB RAIR-1, 500GB RAID-1, 640GB RAID-0 Boot, Intel Gigabit NIC (PCI), LG 20X Lightscribe DVDR, 1430SA, Coolmax 1200w Power Supply, Logitech G15(first edition), Logitech G5(Second Edition), modified 4U server case.
Overall configuration: Perfect chair, two 22" widescreens overhead, Logitech 5.1 Audio

Comment by: Oner (May 07, 2009 12:03)

Originally posted by SoulGLOW:
well said Oner. i epecially like your last paragraph. You & I have to fight for all our rights or they will slowly be eroded away. These bastards even have us thinking we need a license to drive our personal vehicles & have to have insurance. if it isnt Commercial the Govt cant regulate it. period

TY Soul, but I don't want to come off highly experienced or a well versed person in this particular area of discussion. Though I am surprised to see someone else who knows this particular item (in red). Personally I wouldn't want the no insurance thing as I don't want to have to be responsible for someone else's accident etc. but ultimately I do agree with you ~ If it isn't Commercial the Government cannot regulate it. Although it would then be the States area to enforce/create laws at that point anyway correct?

Search > http://forums.afterdawn.com/search
Rules > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
Important Rule > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/380660

Comment by: mystic (May 07, 2009 19:27)

Wait a minute.... Apple rejected software from Nine inch nails because of the content.... but it alowed the download of their Shake the baby software cuz it was kewl give me a break Im sooooooo glad I have a Black Berry Storm I can download all my apps and do everything the I phone can and not be held to the corperate monoply that Apple has on all those who have fallen into their trap... sorry for those who bought it cuz it was kewl but better phones are on their way and soon everyone will figure it out if we slow down our apple opsetion the they will have to lower the price on all their toys to sell them...

Comment by: KillerBug (May 08, 2009 05:11)

Finaly, back to the topic at hand. This is why I can't wait for a good Android device, if I want a game where you do nothing but buy drugs and kill hookers, I should be able to get it. I am an adult!

Comment by: Oner (May 08, 2009 12:35)

To be fair KB you did partake in the hemp discussion too...unless you forgot because of an "impairment" due to a derivative of hemp ;) but you are right back to the topic ~

Search > http://forums.afterdawn.com/search
Rules > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
Important Rule > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/380660

Comment by: alexeemo (May 08, 2009 18:24)

I'm so sick and tired of companies like Apple telling me what I can do with a product I bought and paid for. It's my stinkin iphone, my ipod! It's all about control

Comment by: Donnyp (May 16, 2009 06:15)

Truly. A king Among Men. Trent. I salute you.