3 ms·
I suspect they didn't mention it because they see the lock-in to their product as a feature. Mentioning OpenID might give the impression that Apple would be int
by cmiles74 7y ago
I suspect they didn't mention it because they see the lock-in to their product as a feature. Mentioning OpenID might give the impression that Apple would be interested in interoperability (to some degree).
- merb 7y agothey didn't mention it because if they did, they would need to be a member of the openid foundation and pay the 15k$.
- jogux 7y agoThere's no requirement to be to a member of the OpenID Foundation to describe your implementation as OpenID; the trademark rules are here: https://openid.net/intellectual-property/trademark-license/ https://openid.net/intellectual-property/trademark-license/ The main requirement therein I would say is that you can't use OpenID to describe an implementation unless it implements the mandatory-to-implement parts of the relevant protocol specification (and all the specifications are 100% free; e.g. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html ). That's more about interoperability than anything else.