Apple Rejects Thomas Jefferson Book App, Claiming It's Just A Book... Even Though It's Not

from the this-is-not-a-book dept

Fri, Sep 6th 2013 2:21pm — Mike Masnick

Apple's legendary arbitrariness in keeping things out of its walled garden has struck again. As a bunch of folks have sent over, some professors at the University of Virginia have put together what sounds like a wonderful app for the iPad, which takes different early versions of Thomas Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia (the only full-length book he ever wrote) and allows users to compare the different versions, and to get a glimpse into Jefferson's writing process and how his thoughts changed over time. It sounds both fascinating and like a really excellent use of tablet app technology -- to do something that really would have been much more difficult to do in physical form. Except... Apple has rejected the app over and over again, claiming that it is merely "a book" not an "app" and thus needs to be formatted as an iBook, with all of the restrictions that entails. Unfortunately, those restrictions also mean that as an "iBook" it won't do what the app is supposed to do.

But when we submitted the app to Apple for approval, it was turned down. Why? The reason the App Review Team gave (again and again) was that our app was “simply” or “just a book” (their words), and that it therefore had to be formatted in Apple’s iBooks Author program in order to be distributed through the iBookstore. We decided to play along and make a good-faith effort to convert our app into an iBook, only it doesn’t work. We cannot reproduce all of the features of our app–including some of the ones that we think the app needs to be useful to anyone–and for reasons no one has been able to explain, the iBooks Author file seems to expand well beyond the maximum size for an iBook (currently 2 GB). We’re stuck with an app that does just about everything we envisioned, that has impressed the many people to whom we have shown it on our own iPads, that does something that no app or printed book out there does–but that Apple won’t allow to be listed in its App Store. So, yes, it is possible to download an app called “Burp and Fart Piano” that does pretty much what you’d expect such an app to do, but a free, edited edition of Jefferson’s Notes on the State of Virginia that lets you compare Jefferson’s and Lafayette’s own copies and to zoom in on Jefferson’s handwritten corrections? No dice.

As they note, this is absolutely Apple's prerogative, just as it's their prerogative to point out how ridiculous this whole thing is. In the meantime, they've found another solution:

In the meantime, we’re looking for a programmer who can help us port our app to Android.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: arbitrary, ebooks, ibooks, rejections, thomas jefferson, walled gardens
Companies: apple

31 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

jupiterkansas (profile), 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:30pm

They should have started with Android to begin with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Sep 2013 @ 3:55pm
  
  Re:
  I was going to say this, the mistake was even being on Apple's app store, I think everyone would be better off if we all stop using it and submitting to it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Las, 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:35pm

Android stinks. Apple is evil enough, but google is a subset of the CIA - founder attends bilderberg meetings, etc. I don't trust apple and what they instal on my devices, I don't want to think about what google does. Besides google ripped off apple. Apple was the first truly smartphone. Android cloned exactly what apple did. It frankly should have been illegal. Too bad Jobs isn't around. He destroy android which was his mission.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:40pm
  
  Re:
  Those sure are a lot of opinions!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Glen, 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:41pm
  
  Re:
  Fanboy much?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Zakida Paul (profile), 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:44pm
  
  Re:
  "Apple was the first truly smartphone"
  
  I now have a concussion with that face palm moment
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - TheLastCzarnian (profile), 6 Sep 2013 @ 3:18pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Wait, are you saying Windows Mobile was already on version 6.5 when Apple invented the smartphone?
    
    It can't be a smartphone unless it has a capacitive touchscreen! Resistive and button interfaces are featurephones!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PRMan, 6 Sep 2013 @ 6:54pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Sort of. But even with me calling them and begging them to create a way to install apps directly from the internet without hooking it up to your PC, they told me, "Nobody wants that."
      
      Apple was the first to do it and phone apps took off through the roof.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - PRMan, 6 Sep 2013 @ 6:55pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        And I've owned Palm, Windows and Android phones, but never an iOS device.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 7 Sep 2013 @ 2:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I installed apps on my Nokia before iPhone existed. They were downloaded through MMS
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - R.H. (profile), 7 Sep 2013 @ 2:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I don't know about you but I could install applications on my HTC Wizard running Windows Mobile 5 back in 2006. They used .cab files for installers. I still have a few of them stored on my computer.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - nasch (profile), 7 Sep 2013 @ 7:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It can't be a smartphone unless it has a capacitive touchscreen! Resistive and button interfaces are featurephones!
      
      That's a joke, right? It's hard to be sure.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:49pm
  
  Re:
  I don't want to think about what google does.
  
  And you don't have to. Unlike the iPhone, you can have an android device that never talks to Google at all.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Sep 2013 @ 4:23pm
  
  I think there's a rock with your name on it...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - David (profile), 9 Sep 2013 @ 12:18pm
    
    Re:
    You forgot a tin-foil hat.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Votre (profile), 6 Sep 2013 @ 6:07pm
  
  Re:
  Drank the KoolAid.
  Came back for seconds.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
dr evil, 6 Sep 2013 @ 2:49pm

apple vs android
apple has been and always will be a talented 'fast follower'. nothing truly original, but when they follow, the products tend to be the best of the best. I love myiPad, but am smart enough to have android devices to get everything I want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 6 Sep 2013 @ 3:02pm

NO, it's not "absolutely Apple's prerogative"...
Corporations are sheerly legal fictions that must ask public permission to even exist, and must be subject to our control, else we'll soon be literal slaves.

Can't you get over your notion that corporations can just do whatever the hell wished and that real live people just have to lump it? -- Man, your pro-corporatist bias just pops out and reveals you every time, even when as here the corporation is visibly stupid and arbitrary.

Apple in particular (though certainly not exclusively!) needs to be taken down several notches in arrogance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Sep 2013 @ 5:07pm
  
  Re: NO, it's not "absolutely Apple's prerogative"...
  You're literally stupid.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Gwiz (profile), 6 Sep 2013 @ 5:59pm
    
    Re: Re: NO, it's not "absolutely Apple's prerogative"...
    You're literally stupid.
    
    Crap. Now I am really confused.
    
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/13/literally-broken-english-language- definition
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2013 @ 1:20am
  
  Re: NO, it's not "absolutely Apple's prerogative"...
  Okay, let me offer a theoretical for you. You open a store and stock it with whatever you want. Someone comes along and forces you to sell their product. How does that make you feel? Because that's exactly what you're advocating, right here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2014 @ 11:23am
    
    Re: Re: NO, it's not "absolutely Apple's prerogative"...
    Do you believe that anti-trust laws violate our natural rights? Or is the matter more nuanced than that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2014 @ 11:31am
    
    Re: Re: NO, it's not "absolutely Apple's prerogative"...
    Or that the source of justice is "how we feel"? Then you might have trouble dispensing justice.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Sep 2013 @ 4:21pm

Apple is silly, Jobs is dead, move on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 6 Sep 2013 @ 7:23pm

Makes A Change...
I see Techdirt has been invaded by Apple-versus-Android fanbois. Is that better or worse than the usual crowd accusing copyright/patent minimalists of �intellectual property theft�?

Disclaimer: I am a current Android/Linux, former Apple. fanboi, currently within arm�s reach of 4 Macs and 6 functioning Linux boxes (3 of them Android).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2014 @ 11:33am
  
  Re: Makes A Change...
  In other words you are not a fanatic except maybe over tech in general.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shon Gale, 8 Sep 2013 @ 7:13am

Here you go. Develop and debug your android app using MIT servers. http://appinventor.mit.edu/
Screw Apple and the public will soon let them know. How long do you think people will accept exorbitant prices, and year old technology? And to have top pay those high prices for two years. You must all be rich.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 8 Sep 2013 @ 7:38am
  
  Re:
  How long do you think people will accept exorbitant prices, and year old technology?
  
  I have not yet figured out why they do so, so I have no prediction. :-) I have an iPod Touch for work, and it has a really pretty screen (though some new Android devices have awesome screens too) and the performance is impeccable - never any lag, never jerky scrolling or the like. It's also of course ridiculously thin and light. Otherwise I find my 3-4 year old Android phone preferable. So I guess people value those things enough to pay a whole lot more? Or is it really that they want the physical device to look nice? That would be sad.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 9 Sep 2013 @ 12:19pm
    
    Re: Re:
    It's neither of those things. What it is is tribalism. Many people purchase Apple products because they feel an affinity for the Apple tribe, and don't mind paying a premium to be a part of it. Yes, they'll make all their arguments about Apple products being objectively superior in some way, but that's just rationalization, not reason. The same is true for many people who purchase Android things.
    
    There's a reason that these disputes are called "religious wars" -- they are not based on reason, but on tribalism.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - nasch (profile), 9 Sep 2013 @ 4:02pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It's neither of those things. What it is is tribalism.
      
      You're probably right. Maybe it's good that people can now belong to tribes such as Apple or Android or Chevy. Perhaps they have less need (or at least opportunity) to harm members of other tribes if they're not real tribes.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2014 @ 11:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The future of the species is secure if we can just get over the next 125 years.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]