Apple removes app created by Andrew Tate::Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Last week, the Real World Portal app was removed from Google’s Play store after claims that it was an illegal pyramid scheme and encouraged misogyny.

    Before the news that Apple had withdrawn the app, Matt Jury, the lawyer representing the women, said: “Andrew and [his brother] Tristan Tate manipulate their significant online following to promote subscriptions to Real World Portal.

    He and Tristan were charged in June, along with two Romanian female suspects, with human trafficking, rape and forming a criminal gang to sexually exploit women.

    A spokesperson for Andrew Tate said: “We unequivocally deny the allegations that ‘The Real World’ app operates as a pyramid scheme or perpetuates harmful techniques aimed at exploiting any individuals, particularly women.

    “Accusations suggesting otherwise are unfounded, lacking credible evidence, and seem to be part of a targeted campaign against Andrew Tate, a known supporter and promoter of the platform.

    “The platform is designed as an educational tool that fosters healthy habit formation, financial literacy, and self-discipline, with thousands of lives positively impacted.


    The original article contains 611 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • hyperhopper@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”

    While I truly believe the dude and his app are bad, Apple shouldn’t be able to both arbitrarily remove whatever apps they want from the store, but disallow loading apps from places other than the store.

      • hyperhopper@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m aware of it. But this is not the same as letting Nazis hang out in your bar turning it into a Nazi bad, you don’t have to even interact, see, or be aware of the shitty things that others do with their own devices.

        • Grant_M@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Apple is a private company that doesn’t want to promote this rapist. It’s their right.

          • hyperhopper@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Owning black people was also the right of plantation owners. And Nazis said they had a lot of rights as well…

            If you think that something being a legal right means it morally should be, you’re on the wrong side of history.

            • Grant_M@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re comparing Apple to Nazis because they don’t want to be in business with a rapist scumbag?

              • hyperhopper@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                No, I’m saying just because we currently don’t regulate large corporations enough doesn’t mean they should have the right to fuck over anybody they want to

                • Grant_M@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  As a privately owned company, they reserve the right to not support rapists.Stop advocating for a rapist.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m an Apple person. I love their platforms and could be described as a “fanboy” by people who don’t employ critical thinking. That said, I want to know if Apple will forfeit the profits from sales / subscriptions of this app. They probably won’t. Fuck them if they don’t.

  • Cam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    67
    ·
    1 year ago

    The reason why you should not have an iPhone. It is a walled garden and Apple is the ministry of truth in this walled garden.

    • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, sure, I will almost always die on this hill - but for something that supports harming women (or people in general), and/or is part of a pyramid scheme? Naw dawg ima dip out for a second and go get some smokes (and also never come back).

      Now, if it was like an app that was supporting human rights or something that is being removed, sure, it’s bad to have an entity control what you see/hear/interact with. And there may be gray areas between those two examples. But suppressing a human(s) just because the developer has a tiny pp and needs to overcompensate to the max? And try to gain traction and supporters to do the same? Uhh, no fucking way.

      • Cam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        33
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, sure, I will almost always die on this hill - but for something that [Insert excuse here]

        Now, if it was like an app that [Insert app that I like], sure.

        Really bro? Lets say you liked Jimmy. Jimmy was a contraversal guy and Jimmy had the Jimmy app on the App Store. Then Apple took down the Jimmy app since they do not like Jimmy, Jimmy is too contraversal, Jimmy triggers too many people online.

        You either die on this hill of being against censorship or you don’t.

        You do not have to like or support Andrew Tate to be against his app being taken off the App Store.

        • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This app didn’t get taken down because it was by a “controversial” guy. It got taken down because content in the app encouraged violence and because the app itself was a pyramid scheme (People had to pay $50/month just to use the app, with promises of rewards if they got more people to join).

          Google removed the app from their store, too. Yes, you can still probably install it from their website or a third party app store on Android, and yes, it would be great if third party app stores and sideloading existed for iOS (and they kinda do, though they’re very limited) but even if they did exist it would be reasonable to expect every single one of them to refuse to host this app (especially if “hosting” entails accepting payments).

          Tate can still host this via the web. He can even build a progressive web app for it. I suspect he’ll run into issues collecting that $50 monthly payment any way other than by crypto, though, since I suspect most payment processors will refuse to work with him.

          • Cam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            The app was taken down because it had Andrew Tate’s name on it, lets not kid ourselves.

            Even if you were correct on why the app was taken down due to “it will cause violence”, minus well ban all social media apps and messanging apps.

            If the app was banned due to it being a scam (which is not the case), that is reasonable to protect users, but still sucks since even if the app was banned with the excuse of it being a scam, iOS users are SOL since there is no alternative way to really install apps on iOS.

            • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              If the issue were his name, then it wouldn’t have made it on the App Store in the first place.

              Apple also removes social media apps that don’t meet their standards for moderation, so that’s already a thing. For example:

              Note that Apple didn’t remove “Truth Social” (though Google did) so this isn’t a political issue (it may be for Google, but I doubt it).

              Check out Apple’s App Store Review Guidelines. Personally, I approve of Apple protecting its users from scams and other dangerous content. There are a ton of things I’d love for them to be more open about allowing, but I’m fine with them banning apps like this one.

              Is your issue that you don’t like Apple’s requirements? If so, this app is an excellent point in their favor in most people’s eyes.

              Is your issue that you think Apple’s requirements are discriminatory in some way? If so, an app by a cis het white misogynist is probably not a great example of that.

              Do you think their standards were applied unfairly? If so, I find it hard to believe that you even read their guidelines.

              Honestly, I get the impression that you’re just a Tate fanboy and that you’re mad that Apple pulled his app.

              scam (which is not the case)

              I’m guessing you haven’t visited the website, because it screams “Scam!”

              no alternative way to install apps on iOS

              Apple users can install PWAs.

              • Cam@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                cis het

                I stop reading after that since those are made up words.

                My two cents is that censorship is bad. Not many on lemmy get it since they see censorship as a weapon to use against their opponents. However censorship usually always gets out of control over time and that is why I oppose it.

                Android is the way to go since Android is censorship resistant to app store bannings by allowing APK sideloads and alternative app stores to Google Play.

            • wagoner@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Were you a user of this app? Why do you say it’s not a scam app? You seem to know it well enough, so hopefully you can answer.

              • Cam@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I never used the app. However I know many tankies hate Andree Tate and Lemmy is full of tankies. I doubt a famous guy on the internet will start a scam app which will ruin his reputation. And seeing people get cancelled by tankies over snd over again with false accusations, I am sure the accusation of this app being a scam is false.

                Even if the app is a complete scam and Andrew Tate made it to scam his fans, sadly tankes online have zero credibility for making that accusation. Why should I trust lefties (a cult following) that cancelled so many people over false accusations in the past?

                Call me a fanboy if you want, I do not know much about the man. Even if Andrew Tate is a truly evil man, it is not my fault since the reputstion tankies have made when it comes to “he should be cancelled” is always due to absurb reasons and is fuelled with envy and hate.

                If you do not like my answer to this, fine. I do not care and thats your problem since cancel culture brought me to this conclusion. And I am against censorship in general which is known to piss off many tankies.

            • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              If the app was banned due to it being a scam (which is not the case)

              The term “scam” is a straw man. “Scam” is subjective, so you could define a scam as “an app that provides no content and steals your money” and conclude that the app in question is not that, and therefore fine.

              The main assertion in the article is:

              the app deliberately targets young men and encourages misogyny, including members of the app sharing techniques on how to control and exploit women. The firm has also claimed that there is evidence to suggest that the app is an illegal pyramid scheme

              • Cam@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                The main assertion in the article is:

                It is a Guardian article. Not a trustworthy source, has a strong leftie bias and has been known to dox people in the past.

                Therefore, why should I take the article accusations seriously?

                • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Sorry I don’t really understand your position.

                  You’re rejecting the quotes from the article on the basis of the publication, suggesting a better accusation would be a “scam”, and then refuting that accusation as baseless.

                  I’m not trying to be an ass, I mean this as kindly as possible, but this is a straw man argument. You should look into logical fallacies. They’re well documented tactics for manipulating people and misrepresenting information. Everyone should. It will help you to reason about information and ultimately identify when you’re being manipulated.

        • Lantern@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I feel like your negative opinion of censorship is so strong that it overpowers your morality. Would you let a serial killer walk around shouting that we should kill everyone just for the sake of preventing censorship, or would you insist they’re locked up? See, even you have your limit.

          Its a less extreme example, but the same logic applies here. We shouldn’t just let misogyny grow for the sake of ‘freedom’. That’s how you end up with stuff like the Nazis. Classic bystander mentality.

      • Cam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am criticizing the closed garden iOS ecosystem. This has nothing to do with Andrew Tate except the fact his app was censored for being “contraversal”.

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Controversial”? No - he’s an asshole and horrible person.

          If your think he’s simply controversial then that says a lot more about you than Apple.

          Apple should allow installing apps from third parties.

          Apple should not let this asshole sell his app on their store.

          • Cam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sigh. Your pro censorship and think those who are not are horrible. What a surprise.

            Read my other comments in this thread to see why I can care less who it is. Weather it is an asshole or an angel.

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh, I’ve read a ton of your naive “censorship is bad m’kay” takes. You think it’s sheltering your argument from criticism when it’s really not.

              Some censorship is fine. Who is doing it, the magnitude, and why all matter. This is not a black and white issue.

    • body_by_make@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Google had this removed from the play store before lmao sure you could download the APK, but that’s way less user friendly and people he’s trying to target aren’t going to

      • ilmagico@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, Google still allows some kind of freedom by allowing you to sideload the apk, while still doing the right thing and removing this abominations their store. Win win. Apple sucks (imho).

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dunno… this feels like the first genuinely good news I’ve heard apple linked with in a long while.

      • Cam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is censorship good news? Yeah this is all about Andrew Tate, but that is not the point. The point is that censorship is bad and censorship can occur on centralized app stores were it is done for “politicial” reasons.

        I don’t care if you think Andrew Tate is evil, it is the action of banning an app because “we do not like you”. That is the problem and Apple users have no choice since they are in a walled garden.

        • kimpilled@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Apple users do have a choice. Apple isn’t the only game in town. If those users disagree with Apple and want Tate shit, they can use a different platform.

          • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s funny, because not only does he really not get what a sheep he is, but I’ve pasted the link to it on Wikipedia to him twice already. He’s really trying his hardest to stay as ignorant as possible.

            Ask him his opinion of tertiary education if you want a laugh :)

          • ilmagico@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not the person you were replying to, but here’s my take.

            We don’t need to tolerate intolerance, but that’s different than “freedom of speech”. We can still refuse to tolerate intolerance while still protecting freedom (I’m purposefully ignoring the whole “inciting violence” and “pyramid scheme” that would make this illegal, not just controversial, for the sake of this argument).

            Example: on Android, you can still sideload apps at your own risk, protecting freedom, while Google can still remove it from their store, and so refusing to tolerate intolerance. (wow am I really defending Google? Well I guess at least they used not to be evil).

    • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I do think it’s hilarious how you’re viciously defending fraud and pyramid schemes. “People MUST be allowed to rob other people, and Apple MUST help and support theft!”

      Just amazing.

    • ilmagico@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      While I would never need anything with Andrew Tate’s name on it, I absolutely agree with the statement and that’s why I stick with android. Upvoted.