But as numerous comments on the Infurious Comics blog point out, there's no yardstick by which content creators can assess the offensiveness or acceptability of their work. Apple appears to be working with a definition of "offensive" that borrows from Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's working definition of obscenity: "I know it when I see it."
Compounding the issue is the apparent inconsistency of Apple's censorship. Many comments cite music and videos available through iTunes that are more offensive than Murderdrome.
"The material -- as pointed out by others -- is clearly less contentious than television, movie, and music content offered by Apple...so I can only assume the best-case scenario is a prejudice against the form itself," a post attributed to John Westgarth says.
But the issue isn't so much whether or not Murderdrome is available -- frankly, I can't say I much care for it. The issue is whether Apple should be involved in censorship without transparency. If Apple must police content -- and there is a plausible rationale for doing so -- let it do so in a consistent way across different media. Let Apple used established ratings systems and provide an appeals process for content creators who believe they've been treated unfairly.
But really, Apple shouldn't turn its devices into gated Disney theme parks, where certain types just aren't welcome. Apple should stick to selling content creation and communication devices. Content creators don't need Apple to be the authoritative arbiter of artistic merit. Leave that job to the market.