How Long Would You Think Before Approving a Game Called "Baby Shaker"?

Apple has apologized for -- and removed from its iTunes store -- a $0.99 iPhone application called "Baby Shaker" (quiet a crying baby by shaking the device until red x marks appeared over each of the baby's eyes!). It took only two days for the "game" to be introduced and removed, but honestly, don't you think two days is about 47 hours, 59 minutes, and 58 seconds too long?

The BBC reported that the "game" was developed by a company called Sikalosoft, and that Apple would not answer questions about who approved the application for sale, nor how many people had downloaded it. The original application did apparently carry a caveat that one should, in fact, never shake a baby.

Sikalosoft.com is a place-holder website, which acknowledges that the "game" was "greatly lacking in taste".

I'm mildly interested in who at Sikalosoft thought that such a game concept would be "entertaining", but I'm much more interested in who at Apple approved its sale. What processes exist that would let something like this happen in the first place?

I believe in "disaster training" for companies. I don't mean that only in the sense of the traditional fire drill (though they're a smart idea!), but in the sense of, What's the worst piece of news that could hit our company, and how would we handle it?

Companies tend to come out with far-fetched answers and then dismiss the whole subject. A car company, for example, might answer flippantly that someone invents a teleportation device, thereby obviating the need for vehicles to get us from point A to point B. But by dismissing the likelihood that bad news could strike unexpectedly, a company loses the opportunity to think proactively about what it does, what it says, and the processes by which decisions are made. I'm sure Apple is rethinking the approval-for-sale process now.

Do I hear a barn door being locked after the horses are gone?