In conjunction with this week's Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple has updated its App Store Review Guidelines, and part of the new approval process includes a section that prohibits the inclusion of DUI checkpoints in iOS apps.

Section 22.8 states:

Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected.

The updated terms come a few months after a group of U.S. Senators sent letters of concern to Apple, Google and RIM, asking the smartphone companies to remove any and all apps that would inform users of DUI checkpoints.

While developers might be able to remove the DUI stop functionality from their apps, most of the programs that identify law enforcement activity and speed traps are crowd-sourced, meaning users could submit the checkpoints themselves without the app's devs knowing what they're identifying.

Neither Google or RIM have modified their app review guidelines yet, but if history holds true, where Apple goes, so goes the industry...


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 52 Comments
      Making11s
      • 3 Years Ago
      The walls around the garden just keep getting taller.
      Timothy Tibbetts
      • 3 Years Ago
      To add to what I said before no one here is FOR drunk driving. What some of us are against is wasted resources for what I feel is "feel good" legislation. Without the apps you can simply load a website up and do the same thing. Many apps exist as nothing more than a smartphone version of a website. It's just silly. As for "where Apple goes, so goes the industry" you should keep in mind most of the ideas that you use were someone elses ideas made popular, just like when Apple tried to get in on the Facebook thing but failed. You try and answer what the consumer thinks is hot. Here is a good example of Apple taking a guys app, writing it for themself and adding it to the iPhone 5: http://www.gizmag.com/apple-war-instapaper-ios5/18832/ . I use Microsoft on my desktop and iPhone on my phone but I don't do "fanboy". Whatever product suits my needs, I don't care who makes it but your only kidding yourself if you think Apple invented the touchscreen. If you really cared, you would be concerned about the Chinese workers who filed suit becoming ill making the iPhone touchscreens we all love so much. Pull head from sand, carry on :)
      danrarbc64
      • 3 Years Ago
      This is a ridiculous guideline. How far does it go? Checkpoints can often be published in the local newspaper, will they block news apps?
      Rob K
      • 3 Years Ago
      Checkpoints are not a secret. Here in California, anyhow, checkpoints have to be announced to the public with at least their general vicinity (e.g. street name) before the fact.
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Rob K
        Here in NC, they are not. You are just driving along, minding your business, and then surprise, you must submit what ever the cop in the road wants you to without any proof of guilt beyond being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
      detox440
      • 3 Years Ago
      Well this is crap. So what happens if I call my friends up and say 'hey there is a checkpoint if you head north on main street - be careful" have I just violated some sort of code or law that says I can't tell people what's a publically funded service is doing? I will agree that drunk driving is terrible -- in terms of penalties I think we are way too soft. We hear about people getting their 5th, 6th, and 10th DUI but still get behind the wheel. I'm in the middle of the road here, if you have ONE beer and drive home, you don't deserve to go to jail. If you are over the legal limit, you deserve to spend a few nights in jail. If you kill someone due to you being over the limit and driving - you deserve the death penalty. How about we stop cracking down on EVERYONE rights and take away the rights of the people doing this. What do yout hink would happen if we had strict enforcement of a law where if you are caught over the limit (by NORMAL means, i.e. police getting off their ass and patrolling) then you get your car crushed and spend a week in jail. None of those pay 1000 dollars and get away scott free thing.
        Agilis
        • 3 Years Ago
        @detox440
        Why are you calling your friend up and saying, 'Hey, there is a checkpoint if you head north on main street - be careful?' I think you miss the point and so did the majority of people who are against this ruling. If it's crowd sourced, there's no limit on the amount & type of information submitted. So, not only are check points, it would be abused and could out point out 'other' types of locations. Also, if certain types of people use these types of apps to mark check points like it was designed, then, it's not too hard to fathom that these same types of people can find an alternate route to get home, bypassing the check points while still driving under the influence. Those who are against this need to drop thinking everything is black and white, and instead stop ignoring the shades of gray and think outside the box for once.
          Agilis
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Agilis
          I realized I made many typos and will paste this again with those typos removed. Also revised the OP... ------ Why are you calling your friend up and saying, 'Hey, there is a checkpoint if you head north on main street - be careful?' Why should your friend need to be careful if your friend is obeying his/her limits? I think you missed the point and so did the majority of people who are against this ruling. If it's crowd sourced, there is no limit on the amount & type of information submitted. So, not only are check points submitted, it would be abused and could point out 'other' types of sensitive locations. Hint: Use imagination. Also, if this app was used like it was purposed for, it's not too hard to fathom that the types of people that rely on the information submitted through this app could use it to find an alternate route to get home, bypassing the check points while still driving under the influence endangering innocent drivers Those who are against this need to stop thinking everything is black and white, and instead look at the shades of gray and think outside the box for once.
          apple4ever
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Agilis
          Because he may want to avoid his rights being violated because he hasn't been drinking. Look, nobody is FOR drunk driving. In fact, law enforcement is REQUIRED to publish checkpoints, so there is nothing wrong with these apps. And the fact is that DUI checkpoints are ineffective at stopping drunk driving. Roving patrols are much better.
      airchompers
      • 3 Years Ago
      I'm 100% against drunk driving. But I think these checkpoints are a clear violation of the 4th amendment. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." but in these days of large, incompetent government, what is the DUI check point?
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @airchompers
        I agree. Unfortunately people in this country have become a bunch of scared cats willing to sacrifice their freedom for a sense of security. It amazes me that more people don't seem to mind randomly being forced to prove their innocence.
      Timothy Tibbetts
      • 3 Years Ago
      Luckily we now have the Android OS. I have had every iPhone since day one and even had to replace a couple bringing the total to 7 iPhones owned and I am switching at the end of the year. There are other reasons too, but overall I am sort of tired of being told what I can and can't do with my phone (without voiding the warranty) It's getting old.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Timothy Tibbetts
        [blocked]
        Mike K
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Timothy Tibbetts
        If you develop a problem just flash it back to a stock ROM and return it...
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        • 3 Years Ago
        [blocked]
      Dr. Feelgood
      • 3 Years Ago
      Are people really THIS selfish? Oh wait...maybe only until your own wife or kid is killed by a drunk driver do you start caring? I really don't wanna completely lose faith in humanity but...SMH
      unsivilaudio
      • 3 Years Ago
      The hilarious thing about this is...if you are coherent enough to use a dui-checkpoint app on your phone before/while driving. You're probably ok to drive.
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @unsivilaudio
        One would think, but it does not take much to blow over a .08.
          SheldonRoss
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          But there in line lies the problem, blowing over .08 does not mean you're not ok to drive.
          You guy
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          BAC doesn't show any indication of impairment.
          LUSTSTANG S-197
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          It used to be .12, but sensationalists such as MADD keep wanting to lower it. I have heard that some want to lower the limit to .04. With them, it is no longer about catching drunks. If they had it their way, they would want to throw any one with such much as a hint of alcohol on their breath behind bars and throw away the key. Enforcing the law and keeping the streets safe is understandable, but that's not to say it can't be taken too far.
      LUSTSTANG S-197
      • 3 Years Ago
      Apple needs to grow a backbone and help put these cowboys in their place. I would have payed anything for this app, so I can avoid being harassed by a bunch of overzealous cops at a checkpoint.
      Dr. Feelgood
      • 3 Years Ago
      Are people really THIS selfish? Oh wait...maybe only until your own wife or kid is killed by a drunk driver do you start caring, eh? I really don't wanna completely lose faith in humanity but...SMH
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dr. Feelgood
        The vast majority of people they bust are for things totally unrelated. Even those who are under the influence they catch are not on their way to killing someone. Most don't even realize they are over the limit.
          LUSTSTANG S-197
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          How do I know that? Because half the people I know have had DUIs, and none of them were drunk, just made a wrong turn into a checkpoint and blew over the limit. Unfortunately, it's people like them taking the fall for the few drunks out there, or people who take it too far. There are different ways to go about this issue, and sensationalism and incriminating everyone is not it.
          Dr. Feelgood
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          "Even those who are under the influence they catch are not on their way to killing someone." How do you know that? "Most don't even realize they are over the limit." Exactly. And they need to be made to realize that.
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dr. Feelgood
        Yes, if something like that happened to someone I cared about, I would want to see the person responsible stoned death, but that's not really rational now is it. If we based every law on raw emotion, we would be living under martial law in a police state.
          Dr. Feelgood
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          *This is a reply to the post above this one. Autoblog wouldn't let me reply directly to it.* "Because half the people I know have had DUIs, and none of them were drunk, just made a wrong turn into a checkpoint and blew over the limit." Just because they say they weren't drunk doesn't mean they weren't. Of course that's what they'd say. Offenders are the last ones I'd trust about being honest about their drinking and mental status. If fact, a lot of people are genuinely not aware of how drunk they are precisely because of the impaired judgment due to the alcohol! "Unfortunately, it's people like them taking the fall for the few drunks out there, or people who take it too far." No, they did not take the fall for anybody. They drank alcohol and drove, and there was evidence that their blood alcohol was over the legal limit. They broke the law, plain and simple. They knew better to not be driving after drinking any alcohol AT ALL. If they did not end up hurting others or themselves because they were caught (and maybe prevented them from doing it again), then the law did its job. It is after all a PREVENTIVE measure, not a corrective one. And there has to be legal limit that can be used for OBJECTIVE assessment. Whether or not one is "drunk enough" even when one is over the limit is immaterial. If we used your very arbitrary and subjective method of just the "feeling" that one is "not drunk enough" to be be still be able to drive (or the cop just assessing by mere observation), it would be pure madness/stupidity and much worse than the "police state" you are irrationally afraid of.
          Dr. Feelgood
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          Your analogies are way off base and hyperbolic. First of all, laws should be enforced and judgments meted out rationally and with no regard for passions and emotions. These complaints pander to exactly the latter. These measures are far from being in a police state. LOL. They are more slight inconveniences - that I, as a citizen who never drinks and drives, would gladly subject myself to if it makes the roads safer - than being a stoning-to-death or a real martial law situation (I lived in a country where that was imposed and, believe me, this is a nothing to complain about). Come on now. My issue is more about effectivity. If it is proven by studies that they really do not work, then by all means abolish them. But until there is none of that and the laws are still in place, then the laws should be respected and not be gamed by apps such as this.
          LUSTSTANG S-197
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          That is where you and I differ. I am not willing to subject myself to these people ever. It is people with your mindset who think they have nothing to hide. I have been down that road too, then am surprised when they do find something to cite me for.
          Dr. Feelgood
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          *This is a reply to the post above this one. Autoblog wouldn't let me reply directly to it.* "Because half the people I know have had DUIs, and none of them were drunk, just made a wrong turn into a checkpoint and blew over the limit." Just because they say they weren't drunk doesn't mean they weren't. Of course that's what they'd say. Offenders are the last ones I'd trust about being honest about their drinking and mental status. If fact, a lot of people are genuinely not aware of how drunk they are precisely because of the impaired judgment due to the alcohol! "Unfortunately, it's people like them taking the fall for the few drunks out there, or people who take it too far." No, they did not take the fall for anybody. They drank alcohol and drove, and there was evidence that their blood alcohol was over the legal limit. They broke the law, plain and simple. They knew better to not be driving after drinking any alcohol AT ALL. If they did not end up hurting others or themselves because they were caught (and maybe prevented them from doing it again), then the law did its job. It is after all a PREVENTIVE measure, not a corrective one. And there has to be legal limit that can be used for OBJECTIVE assessment. Whether or not one is "drunk enough" even when one is over the limit is immaterial. If we used your very arbitrary and subjective method of just the "feeling" that one is "not drunk enough" to be be still be able to drive (or the cop just assessing by mere observation), it would be pure madness/stupidity and much worse than the "police state" you are irrationally afraid of.
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dr. Feelgood
        "Exactly. And they need to be made to realize that." A fine would be sufficient for the overwhelming majority of cases. Back on subject, if someone is aware enough to drive safely, but unaware they are over the legal limit, they are not drunk, and therefore, of no danger to anyone. That said, these checkpoints have very little to do with actual safety, and more to do with an image of such.
          Dr. Feelgood
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          "if someone is aware enough to drive safely, but unaware they are over the legal limit, they are not drunk, and therefore, of no anger to anyone." This is exactly the kind of thinking that leads people to drink and drive. But read my reply above as I discussed why this mindset is so dangerous.
          Dr. Feelgood
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          "these things happen to normal, law abiding citizens, not "boogy men" in dark capes." There you go again with your hyperbole and pandering to emotions. If you tested over the limit, you are not a law abiding citizen. Nobody broke the law for them; they didn't take the fall for others; they broke the law themselves, period. Drunk drivers are not "boogy men in dark capes" either. LOL. You watch too many movies. Most of them are ordinary people who are otherwise "normal" in other aspects of their lives, just like the nice soccer coach you never suspected was a child molester. "The people I know have no reason to lie to me, nothing to gain." As I discussed previously, they may not have even been lying to you. Alcohol impairs normal judgment and they may have genuinely believed they didn't "feel drunk" at all, which is even more dangerous than somebody who is aware of it. "It's easy for you to judge from afar, but until it happens to you, or someone close to you, then come back and talk. " It sure as hell ain't gonna happen to me and if a friend or a loved one was caught with DUI, I would feel the same way as I have with a few people I know. "I would argue the harsh punishments, and difficulty finding a job, or getting insured with this on your record does more harm than good." Punishments need to be commensurate with the potential consequence of an action, which in DUI's case, is serious injury or killing of other people. Waiting until it happens to you or a loved one before you change your opinion is NOT rational at all.
          LUSTSTANG S-197
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          Contrary to what MADD and law enforcement agencies will have you believe, these things happen to normal, law abiding citizens, not "boogy men" in dark capes. The people I know have no reason to lie to me, nothing to gain. It's easy for you to judge from afar, but until it happens to you, or someone close to you, then come back and talk. I would argue the harsh punishments, and difficulty finding a job, or getting insured with this on your record does more harm than good.
    • Load More Comments