Unofficial iPhone Blog

Apple has decided to end the nondisclosure agreement attached to software that has already been released for the iPhone, in the latest sign that it is starting to take developer concerns to heart.

The company put up a notice on the main Apple developer Web page that, effective immediately, says developers are released from the NDA regarding iPhone software that has already been released. The “Fing NDA” was one of the most frustrating aspects of iPhone development in its first three official months, forbidding developers from discussing their software and throwing into legal limbo the status of programs such as iPhone development classes.

Apple’s explanation for dropping the NDA follows:

• We put the NDA in place because the iPhone OS includes many Apple inventions and innovations that we would like to protect, so that others don’t steal our work. It has happened before. While we have filed for hundreds of patents on iPhone technology, the NDA added yet another level of protection. We put it in place as one more way to help protect the iPhone from being ripped off by others.
• However, the NDA has created too much of a burden on developers, authors and others interested in helping further the iPhone’s success, so we are dropping it for released software. Developers will receive a new agreement without an NDA covering released software within a week or so. Please note that unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released.

Apple has made subtle tweaks to the App Store this week in response to developer concerns, but this is by far the most sweeping change it has made to placate developers, who continue to flood the App Store with iPhone applications. The greatest source of frustration–the nebulous guidelines for what is permitted in the App Store, and what isn’t–remains unaddressed as of this moment, but perhaps Apple’s decision to drop the NDA means it has realized the extent of developer angst.

The launch of an open-source developer-friendly mobile operating system just last week probably didn’t hurt.

People are remarkable. We can spend time figuring out precisely what we’re not allowed to do. Spend even more time doing it. Then spend triple that complaining when we suffer the foreseeable and reasonable consequences of our informed and deliberate actions. Heck, Dr. Phil has amassed a money-bin throwing us up on TV for just such spectacle.

Witness all the PR flackery and blog blustering (present posting included!) going on about the strategic geniuses who decided to go ahead and make an iPhone App Store-optimized engine for navigating and displaying specially formatted comic books.

Was their debut feature a family friendly installment of the Tremendous Super-Spider? Nope. It was “Murderdrome” and it was rejected. Find out why after the jump!

The App Store’s policy — which is part of the License Agreement the writers/developers agreed to when they got the iPhone SDK — expressly 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.”

Is this a good policy, as Lying in the Gutters rightly points out:

“…you need to have a credit card to download content. And, say, viewers are able to download the “300″ movie.”

Maybe, maybe not. TV and Movies are mature mediums with a parental guidance system that is well understood in the market and long inoculated against the most extremist of faux-puritanical propaganda (wardrobe malfunctions not withstanding). App Store is a brand new platform delivery model, likely in the sights of every hyper-litigious, uber-manipulative fringe group, and Apple is undoubtedly playing is safe as a result.

Will “Murderdrome” ever make it onto the App Store? Probably some day, maybe even soon-ish. LITG, however, points out that it might be better to get the comic reader App up separately, and then establish downloads for content, like eBooks.

Er… Could it be that was the plan all along? Let’s face it: a killer comic reader (and admittedly, this one looks sweet), would definitely be in high demand, especially if Marvel or DC ever decided to explore the mobile internet delivery model for their content. A nice little well-manufactured controversy could bring a lot of attention to an App that wants to own that space, now couldn’t it?

As an artist, I’d like to believe in vision without compromise, pushing boundaries, and finding new outlets for creative expression. As a blogger, however, I’ve grown just a little more jaded, especially when press releases seem so ready to fly…