4 ms·

First, "mistreating the market" isn't a thing -- a store is under no obligation to continue to sell a product they don't want. There may be an anti-trust claim

First, "mistreating the market" isn't a thing -- a store is under no obligation to continue to sell a product they don't want. There may be an anti-trust claim to be made about walled gardens more generally, but there is no appetite among regulators to make it, and such a claim would be more properly directed toward Google on the basis of current antitrust thinking. Apple can give Tumblr preferential or worse terms for any reason or no reason at all. Second, as it relates to enforcement. Your post shadows the fact that you disagree more broadly with removing child pornography because of collateral damage. To be totally frank I find that line of argumentation viscerally disgusting. But it's also the wrong frame for the argument: you additionally claim that given Apple wants to crack down, they are cracking down the wrong way. I am not sure what the issue with selectivity is. Why is it a problem to apply higher standards to large, commercial applications who could easily be coerced to improve enforcement (as opposed to, like, Joe Random making some app that finds images online)? Why, when choosing among large commercial applications, should Apple not go after the worst offenders (in quantities of violation or currently enforcement protocols) first? This seems like an efficient use of enforcement resources on Apple's part. One target at a time, optimizing for those who are worst in complicity and most able to take action?

devwastaken 8y ago
"First, "mistreating the market" isn't a thing" It's clear what Apple and other app stores do. They are a market that makes plenty of money, and they mistreat it. There are losses of revenue over this mistreatment, and that should be actionable. Wether it is or isn't is a matter of law, but law doesn't cover what is and isn't right. "Your post shadows the fact that you disagree more broadly with removing child pornography because of collateral damage. To be totally frank I find that line of argumentation viscerally disgusting." That's a strawman. By that logic if I say taking down the internet because cp exists on it, is bad, then I'm defending it. I'm saying that tumblr is going on a spree of mass deletion to appease apple, not in any targeted manner to the initial problem, being that of cp found on their site. I'm saying that all platforms have this, and targeting tumblr for it in this improper way, removing the app, is doing far more harm than good. If Apple cared about solving the problem of cp they'd get in touch with Tumblr and tell them effective methods they should impliment that are fair with other apps, and if they don't do it, then they'll remove tumblr app. Instead, now those who were using Tumblr to share cp will take to a different site, instead of facing repercussions. If anything Apple could potentially be interferring with ongoing investigations of cp by their lack of cooperation. I think that form of illigal activity goes above the grain of just throwing things into chaos to set examples.

devwastaken 8y ago

"First, "mistreating the market" isn't a thing" It's clear what Apple and other app stores do. They are a market that makes plenty of money, and they mistreat it. There are losses of revenue over this mistreatment, and that should be actionable. Wether it is or isn't is a matter of law, but law doesn't cover what is and isn't right. "Your post shadows the fact that you disagree more broadly with removing child pornography because of collateral damage. To be totally frank I find that line of argumentation viscerally disgusting." That's a strawman. By that logic if I say taking down the internet because cp exists on it, is bad, then I'm defending it. I'm saying that tumblr is going on a spree of mass deletion to appease apple, not in any targeted manner to the initial problem, being that of cp found on their site. I'm saying that all platforms have this, and targeting tumblr for it in this improper way, removing the app, is doing far more harm than good. If Apple cared about solving the problem of cp they'd get in touch with Tumblr and tell them effective methods they should impliment that are fair with other apps, and if they don't do it, then they'll remove tumblr app. Instead, now those who were using Tumblr to share cp will take to a different site, instead of facing repercussions. If anything Apple could potentially be interferring with ongoing investigations of cp by their lack of cooperation. I think that form of illigal activity goes above the grain of just throwing things into chaos to set examples.