3 ms·

App Store Only: Section 7.2 makes it clear that any applications developed using Apple's SDK may only be publicly distributed through the App Store, I think th

by kqr2 16y ago

App Store Only: Section 7.2 makes it clear that any applications developed using Apple's SDK may only be publicly distributed through the App Store, I think this is the most relevant section. Any distribution mechanism that bypasses Apple's app store is strictly verboten.

joubert 16y ago
So you can then still port it and install on your own device.
- kqr2 16y ago
  In your original comment: make the code freely available so others with app store accounts can also build & install on their devices. If you make the code freely available so others can install it on their devices, then you would have a distribution mechanism that bypasses the app store. You can do it, however, it violates your agreement with apple.
  - joubert 16y ago
    Yes, I realized, after I writ my first comment, that sharing the source code would constitute an alternative distribution mechanism (if i just share with a couple of friends, does that constitute "public distribution"?). Hence, my comment to which you responded focused on the first part of my original comment, which pointed out that it is entirely possible for one, if one is so inclined, to port emacs and run on your device. Perhaps not practicable, but possible. EDIT: actually, I'm thinking about this some more: are you saying that iPhone source code (for code modules, frameworks, etc) available online are violating the prohibition on alternative distribution?
    - rsl7 16y ago
      hang on. Distributing an xcode project is not the same as distributing an app.
chronomex 16y ago
The GPL requires that the source code be made available to people to whom you distribute the program. It does not require that it be publicly availble for everyone in the whole world. Therefore, I believe that bundling the source code with the application, such that they are both purchased at once, would suffice.
demallien 16y ago
Not really, you're not distributing an app, you're distributing source code, which is not the same thing. Of course, IANAL...

by kqr2 16y ago

joubert 16y ago

So you can then still port it and install on your own device.

kqr2 16y ago
In your original comment: make the code freely available so others with app store accounts can also build & install on their devices. If you make the code freely available so others can install it on their devices, then you would have a distribution mechanism that bypasses the app store. You can do it, however, it violates your agreement with apple.
- joubert 16y ago
  Yes, I realized, after I writ my first comment, that sharing the source code would constitute an alternative distribution mechanism (if i just share with a couple of friends, does that constitute "public distribution"?). Hence, my comment to which you responded focused on the first part of my original comment, which pointed out that it is entirely possible for one, if one is so inclined, to port emacs and run on your device. Perhaps not practicable, but possible. EDIT: actually, I'm thinking about this some more: are you saying that iPhone source code (for code modules, frameworks, etc) available online are violating the prohibition on alternative distribution?
  - rsl7 16y ago
    hang on. Distributing an xcode project is not the same as distributing an app.

chronomex 16y ago

The GPL requires that the source code be made available to people to whom you distribute the program. It does not require that it be publicly availble for everyone in the whole world. Therefore, I believe that bundling the source code with the application, such that they are both purchased at once, would suffice.

demallien 16y ago

Not really, you're not distributing an app, you're distributing source code, which is not the same thing. Of course, IANAL...