Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

    (github.com)
    946 points giuliomagnifico | 16 comments | 01 Jan 21 19:19 UTC | HN request time: 1.315s | source | bottom
    Show context
    mmaunder ◴[01 Jan 21 19:42 UTC] No.25606123[source]▶
    You’re angry. I’ve felt this in a trademark lawsuit. You think the world should get behind you and change the corrupt system.

    My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to effect the transition.

    They kind of have a point which doesn’t make them right, but they hold all the cards and you will lose this one and regret the wasted bandwidth.

    replies(33): >>25606208 #>>25606212 #>>25606283 #>>25606293 #>>25606297 #>>25606321 #>>25606344 #>>25606360 #>>25606390 #>>25606393 #>>25606407 #>>25606449 #>>25606498 #>>25607021 #>>25607059 #>>25607219 #>>25607787 #>>25607915 #>>25608000 #>>25608011 #>>25608017 #>>25608073 #>>25608099 #>>25608152 #>>25608166 #>>25608206 #>>25608337 #>>25608771 #>>25608889 #>>25614737 #>>25615210 #>>25618043 #>>25620562 #
    1. tgsovlerkhgsel ◴[01 Jan 21 20:09 UTC] No.25606449[source]▶
    > They kind of have a point

    They don't (the claim is the app promotes drug use, which it doesn't), and it's quite likely that it's a reviewer mistake that will be overturned once the stink on social media gets big enough to reach the right person.

    replies(4): >>25606876 #>>25606935 #>>25608027 #>>25619793 #
    2. Angostura ◴[01 Jan 21 20:45 UTC] No.25606876[source]▶
    > the claim is the app promotes drug use, which it doesn't

    You don't think it could reinforce the idea that Amphetamines could be a useful tool to preserve wakefulness?

    replies(8): >>25607022 #>>25607042 #>>25607074 #>>25607080 #>>25607113 #>>25607145 #>>25607317 #>>25607582 #
    3. antiterra ◴[01 Jan 21 20:50 UTC] No.25606935[source]▶
    I think the argument, however tenuous, is that naming a utility after a drug generates a positive association for that drug. It’s not even so much that Apple has to believe this as much as there’s an elevated potential for negative PR. This sort of thing is given even more scrutiny with food items:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocaine_(drink)

    https://m.riverfronttimes.com/foodblog/2010/01/20/the-beerte...

    4. nyx_ ◴[01 Jan 21 20:57 UTC] No.25607022[source]▶
    Like the original post says, they are in fact a useful tool to promote wakefulness, and if you have a problem with wakefulness or attentiveness, you can go to a doctor, get diagnosed, and be prescribed with amphetamines perfectly legally if you so wish.
    5. ◴[01 Jan 21 20:58 UTC] No.25607042[source]▶
    6. incongruity ◴[01 Jan 21 21:02 UTC] No.25607074[source]▶
    Well - they do actually do that and under certain circumstances, they are used precisely for that. I find the puritanical mindset a little bit of an overreach here.
    7. zamadatix ◴[01 Jan 21 21:02 UTC] No.25607080[source]▶
    You can refrence a truth without promoting it. E.g. Darik's boot and nuke wipes everything but you'd be off your rocker to say it's promoting nuclear war as a result.
    8. dack ◴[01 Jan 21 21:05 UTC] No.25607113[source]▶
    Not op, but no; the app has nothing to do with drugs.

    I don't think we as a society should be this sensitive/prone to suggestion. If anything, I believe the censorship promotes the idea that people have no responsibility to make their own choices, and we must build to the lowest common denominator.

    Note, I'm not really making a judgement about whether Apple should be allowed to do this - I think that is harder question.

    replies(1): >>25607873 #
    9. dempseye ◴[01 Jan 21 21:08 UTC] No.25607145[source]▶
    They are. Militaries around the world agree. So do doctors who prescribe them for narcolepsy and other disorders. I think it is a good name.

    The fact remains that in most places amphetamines are an illegal drug when acquired without a prescription.

    I think he should just rebrand. A name change is not a big deal, given the app has low name recognition in the first place. News of the rebrand will be the first Google result for people who are unaware of it.

    Apple holds all the cards here. There is little to be gained if he wins, and if he loses he will have to rebrand anyway after much wasted effort.

    replies(2): >>25607884 #>>25608438 #
    10. outspeak ◴[01 Jan 21 21:22 UTC] No.25607317[source]▶
    If that was the case, health classes would censor the names of any recreationally-illegal substance. The fact is that Amphetamines are `a useful tool to preserve wakefulness`. Knowing that fact isn't inherently a promotion for the use of them.
    11. eknkc ◴[01 Jan 21 21:52 UTC] No.25607582[source]▶
    That is not an idea though. It is a fact.

    Why try to hide a fact?

    12. Grustaf ◴[01 Jan 21 22:25 UTC] No.25607873{3}[source]▶
    It’s named after a drug that inhibits sleep, and it inhibits sleep. The connection is pretty clear...
    replies(1): >>25622244 #
    13. danaliv ◴[01 Jan 21 22:26 UTC] No.25607884{3}[source]▶
    I’m told the military has switched to modafinil. No amphetamines anymore.
    14. anigbrowl ◴[01 Jan 21 22:42 UTC] No.25608027[source]▶
    They don't (the claim is the app promotes drug use, which it doesn't)

    It certainly references it. Definitions are fuzzy, and very much in the eye of the beholder.

    15. PrefixKitten ◴[01 Jan 21 23:27 UTC] No.25608438{3}[source]▶
    He could literally just call it "benzedrex" instead as that is the name of a nearly identically acting but otc stimulant you can grab off the shelf at any walmart lol...
    16. xadhominemx ◴[03 Jan 21 05:41 UTC] No.25619793[source]▶
    they named the app after a harmful drug that does the same thing the app purports to do. it is not a stretch at all to view the app as promoting drug use.