3 ms·

That's the end user license. What's relevant is the app store developer agreement, and what app submitters agree to.

• jbk 16y ago
  App submitter and developer agreement signing person are not related to the VideoLAN project. The problem the FSF is rising is about users rights, nothing else... I don't see your point, I am afraid.
  • jonhendry 16y ago
    The submitter agreed for the app to be distributed in the App Store way, as is pretty well understood at this point. If the FSF has a problem, they should take it up with the app's submitter, not Apple. Did VideoLan misrepresent the app to Apple as being compatible with the App Store? That's the crux of the matter.
    • jbk 16y ago
      VideoLAN did not submit any application. A company named Applidium did.
      • jonhendry 16y ago
        Then it's Applidium's problem.
• tzs 16y ago
  It's the end user license that the FSF says is the problem.
  • jonhendry 16y ago
    If there's a problem, why was the app submitted? Did the problem appear after the app was submitted? If not, if the problem existed at the time the app was submitted, then the app ought not to have been submitted.