Good grief Apple can be heavy handed some times.

Good for Apple!  I am tired of the ridicule that public figures have to endure.  Like it or not, these folks represent us.  Pictures can be bad enough without the caricatures.

Sadly, this is what happens when you let one company control the sole means of app installation on a device.

It’s sad that a great company like Apple is becoming a advocate of censorship.

Say what you want, but you’re not the one the disgruntled politicians will come after with a law suit. People are sued for a lot less.

I would love to buy this app if its up there. Too bad Apple is a b*tch. Apple is becoming more and more of a dictator. And I can’t believe these fanboys are so blinded by it and their just saying, apple is good and apple is great. WAKE UP STUPID! They are manipulating you.

I would love to buy this app if its up there.

Why? You can go to a .gov website and get info about Congress members

Apple is becoming more and more of a dictator.

What? How many apps have been pulled? Sure some don’t make sense to some of us, and some have been reinstated, but there hasn’t been all that many problems.

And I can’t believe these fanboys are so blinded by it and their just saying, apple is good and apple is great. WAKE UP STUPID! They are manipulating you.

Now we get to the root of your anger.

The issue here is not that Apple is “dictating” (it has a right to set the rules of its own store), or that Apple is practicing “censorship” (the app store isn’t a public entity and Apple’s not government), or that there is a risk that Apple will be sued (it won’t - caricatures of public figures are fair comment). 

The problem here is the pursuit of absolute tolerance.  Such a pursuit inevitably leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance, and that is what has happened here.

This is extreme intolerant liberalism at its worst. It’s quite shameful really.  Apple should be embarrassed.

Just wtf do these censors think they are.  Apple had better look over its shoulder, and for that matter, activate the CDMA chip.  Apple has a long history of shooting itself in the feet.  The iPhone OS could easily become an also-ran behind Android.

The caricatures of Speaker Pelosi and Senator McCain are pretty benign and they would probably get a kick out of them. However, have we seen all of them, could some of them not be so innocent? Perhaps that is the reason for the rejection or Apple is just taking a close look and may approve the app in the near future.

I would like to see a more specific guidance in this matter from Apple in their developers agreement.

Apple: We believe in free speech, just not when we’re incharge.

The artists went ahead with this project while knowing (or while he should have known) that it may have infringed on the developer agreement.

Where’s the beef?

This is incredible! I am an editorial cartoonist and perhaps this rejector at Apple isn´t aware of it, but caricatures such as these are actually popular among politicians themselves, at least here in Europe. My own has been bought up by a couple of presidents and prime ministers and lots of other political personalities along with other decision makers and influential people. Some of them ask to buy it themselves (or their secretary:) and others are given caricatures as presents. I am sure that any other caricaturist can tell the same story, also Maestro Richmond´s, which are really good! I have had the chances to do John McCain, but he beats me:)
Come on, Apple - this is a respected artform, also by our “victims”!

The artists went ahead with this project while knowing (or while he should have known) that it may have infringed on the developer agreement.

Except, deasys, for the little fact that it doesn’t infringe on any terms of a development agreement (except maybe for a catchall clause stating Apple may reject anything for any reason, or no reason whatsoever).

A simple caricature is in no way defamatory, or obscene. If this wasn’t true, then no newspaper in the world would be able to publish a political cartoon! (And the mythical Apple Tablet, if it was a news-media consumption device, would be DOA simply because Apple would have rejected the content from every single newspaper out there.)

The artists went ahead with this project while knowing (or while he should have known) that it may have infringed on the developer agreement.

I suppose he was assuming Apple would follow through on the “reasonable judgement” part.

@Harry Flashman: The “you can go to a website” argument would nullify 90% of the apps in the store.

A simple caricature is in no way defamatory, or obscene. If this wasn’t true, then no newspaper in the world would be able to publish a political cartoon! (And the mythical Apple Tablet, if it was a news-media consumption device, would be DOA simply because Apple would have rejected the content from every single newspaper out there.)

Not quite. In the case of the tablet, like the iPhone and a Mac, Apple would not be responsible for content viewed on it. However, the App Store is different. Apple’s attorneys (are you an attorney?) may have decided that Apple could be determined to be a “publisher,” which would mean that they WOULD be responsible for content.

FWIW, newspapers and magazines ARE responsible for any editorial cartoons they publish. That’s why they may reject particular cartoons.

“Free Speechæ doesn’t apply, as Apple is not a government entity. The artist has every right to draw and disseminate his caricatures, but Apple is under no obligation to publish or distribute them. Suppose they did and, next week, they get an app that has caricatures of the Pope or Jesus or Mohammed? Do you need to be reminded of the backlash when a publication in Denmark published satirical cartoons depicting Mohammed? Legally, they were on firm ground, but they were still threatened with violence. Remember what happened to Theo van Gogh?

Good for Apple!  I am tired of the ridicule that public figures have to endure.  Like it or not, these folks represent us.

First, the real reason for this app’s rejection is Apple’s coziness with certain political entities.

Second, check out http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Look at the lower right.  We’re already bankrupt by $32 trillion (yes, trillion), and our fine friends in government have no intentions of stopping.  THE VERY LEAST these clowns deserve are some caricatures.

Anyway, maybe this app’s rejection is for the better.  Instead of a pointless outlet, people can now funnel their simmering energies into something useful.  Like being part of the Second Revolution.

gslusher,

All of us are perfectly aware that in a free economy Apple has the right to choose what software they will sell and deseminate through their entity.

The problem is that Apple has no right to tell a consumer what software they can run on a device they own.

It’s sad that a great company like Apple is becoming a advocate of censorship.

Let’s say you ran a retail business.  Would it be fair for me to force you to carry any product, under the claim of Constitutional rights?

While I don’t agree with Apple’s decision, I do respect it.  It’s their store, THEY should be free to run it (within the rules of business laws) as they see fit.