/article-new/2014/08/secret-iconB-250x250.jpeg?lossy)
Apple has started blocking downloads of anonymous communication app Secret [Direct Link] following a preliminary injunction that was granted recently by a Brazilian civil court judge (Via 9to5Mac). According to the injunction ruling shared by Gigaom earlier this week, Apple is required to remove the app from the Brazilian App Store and remotely delete the app from customers' devices.
Local media noted earlier today that Secret was still listed in the Brazilian App Store, but that Apple was preventing users from installing the app on their iOS devices. The app now appears to have been removed entirely from the the Brazilian store.
Apple reportedly has not started deleting the app from user's devices per the injunction requirements, and it is unclear whether Apple plans to comply with that portion of the order or pursue the issue further. The injunction also applies to the Android version of Secret and a similar Windows Phone Secret client titled Cryptic, but Microsoft and Google are not yet complying with the injunction terms.
The injunction stems from a civil case filed by public prosecutor Marcelo Zenkner, who took action after receiving complaints about bullying on the anonymous social network. Secret allows users to post messages and comment while keeping their identity hidden. This anonymity provision violates Brazilian law, prompting the judge to issue the injunction earlier this week. Google, Apple and Microsoft have ten days to comply with the ruling or face daily fines of 20,000 reals ($8,890 USD).
Top Rated Comments
hehe
Anyway the main point is that the actual interpretation from the Brazilian Supreme Court is Brazilian Constitution forbids anonymity. You are allowed to express whatever you want, as long as you bear the consequences of your acts. It doesn't forbid the use of a hammer, as long as it is possible to track the hammer's users.
Great way to ensure nobody says anything that is unpopular or criticize the powerful.----------
How can you be bullied by an app that you can just delete and ignore?The injunction stems from a civil case (http://blogs.estadao.com.br/link/promotor-quer-extirpar-secret-do-brasil/) filed by public prosecutor Marcelo Zenkner, who took action after receiving complaints about bullying on the anonymous social network.
I have a different view on this.
Anonymity brings out the worst in people and although I believe in freedom of expression, I think people should not be allowed to make statements anonymously.
If you make a statement be prepared to assume responsibility for it, especially if you slander/attack someone (see where this whole thing started).
Yes, there are some exceptions, but I doubt they apply here (whistleblowers, abuse etc)
As for the fact that it was removed remotely, it's a decision from a judge, Apple can't really do much but comply.
I don't know who you are, you're using an alias which allows you to stay anonymous.
Please provide your full name, address and telephone number.
Actually I don't care, do what you want.
Do you live in Brazil?
Not all citizens of the world enjoy the same freedoms and liberties as those of us in the "west". And there are many countries out there far worse than Brazil.
The west is no longer free like it was either, it seems most people don't care about freedom and long as they get something for free in return.
Remotely delete? So if I buy book at a local store and the courts then say that book should not be sold, the retailer must come into my house and physically remove the book? What kind of totalitarian society do we live in? :confused:
I have a different view on this.Anonymity brings out the worst in people and although I believe in freedom of expression, I think people should not be allowed to make statements anonymously.
If you make a statement be prepared to assume responsibility for it, especially if you slander/attack someone (see where this whole thing started).
Yes, there are some exceptions, but I doubt they apply here (whistleblowers, abuse etc)
As for the fact that it was removed remotely, it's a decision from a judge, Apple can't really do much but comply.