4 ms·

I imagine he crossed some terms of service with obvious legal clarity... so, I guess I’m not sure Apple should separate his “official” and “unofficial” actions.

I imagine he crossed some terms of service with obvious legal clarity... so, I guess I’m not sure Apple should separate his “official” and “unofficial” actions. IDK. Maybe I’m just big into personal responsibility and knowing that you shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds you. He did a thing, and now pays a price. I guess I don’t see a lot of gray area. Could you make the argument that Apple’s walled garden has issues, sure. But this guy clearly broke his contract so why would he or I be surprised when he was kicked out?

deogeo 7y ago
Lets not conflate 'personal responsibility' with slavishly obeying terms of one-sided contracts. Neither is it the 'hand that feeds you'. 'The hand that has placed itself in control of your market' is more apt.
izacus 7y ago
I know you didn't think it through directly, but you're now basically supporting the ability of a multi-billionare corporation to financially attack a developer and disable their device over criticism. Just how chilling effect is that? Not being able to criticise and freely talk about a corporation and its product due to fear of having your company financially destroyed or even your personal Apple ID killed over saying something bad over a corporate product. Are you sure you're defending that?
- ThrowawayR2 7y ago
  "My house (or in this case, walled garden) , my rules." As people are fond of pointing out, Apple is not a monopoly therefore he has plenty of other places to sell his software.
  - wool_gather 7y ago
    This is like saying that if your neighbors are awful you should simply take your house and put it somewhere else. Completely ignoring the cost of porting software written for one platform to another.
    - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
      Invalid analogy, since it's Apple's house, not his. Nobody forced him to write software for Apple's platform and nobody forced him to agree to the developer agreement Apple requires. He did it of his own free will.
      - izacus 7y ago
        Except that this is not a single persons house, but a mega corporation with monetary power of states. It's not "a person throwing you out of his house", it's "your governor forcing you to leave your state because you dared critcize him". Power makes a difference.
        marcus_holmes 7y ago
        No, because you have to live somewhere, but you don't have to write apps. Another analogy: it's like someone having a big "please wipe your shoes" sign on their front door, and you walk in with muddy boots and track mud everywhere. They'd be entitled to be annoyed and ask you to leave because you broke the terms of their invitation.
        Steko 7y ago
        No it's more like taking a dump in the middle of wal-mart and then being shocked when asked to leave.
- SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  No. That wasn’t what I basically support at all. Thanks for the strawman. You should absolutely be able to critique anything at all. Are you saying leaking preproduction software against your contract to not do that is a first amendment issue? I do believe no one has tried to silence his speech, as proven by this post about it. He broke a contract and now isn’t allowed to use their tools.
  - izacus 7y ago
    > I do believe no one has tried to silence his speech, as proven by this post about it. He broke a contract and now isn’t allowed to use their tools. Are you really claiming that being cut off from financials due to criticism is not an attempt to punish criticism? > No. That wasn’t what I basically support at all. Thanks for the strawman. It's not a strawman if you don't understand why being financially punished for criticising a corporation is hugely problematic. You really want to live in the world where you're afraid of having your devices rendered useless and your company blocked from market because you dared say anything against Facebook, Google, Apple and other behemoths?
    - 205guy 7y ago
      The problem is that the OP seems to have used his dev account to get access to information and divulge it against the TOS. He used his financial source to profit in other ways against the interests of his financial source. If my company had a meeting where I learned about quarterly results ahead of any public disclosure, and then I published them somehow, I wouldn't have grounds to complain when they find out and terminate me. If the OP had a totally clean use of his dev account, and he published articles critical of Apple without inside info, and then had his dev account terminated, then I'd be worried about Apple's overreach and dangerous power. But that's NOT what appears to have happened here.
wool_gather 7y ago
Not sure if I agree or disagree. But if it's so clear cut, why wouldn't Apple just tell him the reason?

deogeo 7y ago

Lets not conflate 'personal responsibility' with slavishly obeying terms of one-sided contracts. Neither is it the 'hand that feeds you'. 'The hand that has placed itself in control of your market' is more apt.

izacus 7y ago

I know you didn't think it through directly, but you're now basically supporting the ability of a multi-billionare corporation to financially attack a developer and disable their device over criticism. Just how chilling effect is that? Not being able to criticise and freely talk about a corporation and its product due to fear of having your company financially destroyed or even your personal Apple ID killed over saying something bad over a corporate product. Are you sure you're defending that?

ThrowawayR2 7y ago
"My house (or in this case, walled garden) , my rules." As people are fond of pointing out, Apple is not a monopoly therefore he has plenty of other places to sell his software.
- wool_gather 7y ago
  This is like saying that if your neighbors are awful you should simply take your house and put it somewhere else. Completely ignoring the cost of porting software written for one platform to another.
  - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
    Invalid analogy, since it's Apple's house, not his. Nobody forced him to write software for Apple's platform and nobody forced him to agree to the developer agreement Apple requires. He did it of his own free will.
    - izacus 7y ago
      Except that this is not a single persons house, but a mega corporation with monetary power of states. It's not "a person throwing you out of his house", it's "your governor forcing you to leave your state because you dared critcize him". Power makes a difference.
      - marcus_holmes 7y ago
        No, because you have to live somewhere, but you don't have to write apps. Another analogy: it's like someone having a big "please wipe your shoes" sign on their front door, and you walk in with muddy boots and track mud everywhere. They'd be entitled to be annoyed and ask you to leave because you broke the terms of their invitation.
      - Steko 7y ago
        No it's more like taking a dump in the middle of wal-mart and then being shocked when asked to leave.
SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
No. That wasn’t what I basically support at all. Thanks for the strawman. You should absolutely be able to critique anything at all. Are you saying leaking preproduction software against your contract to not do that is a first amendment issue? I do believe no one has tried to silence his speech, as proven by this post about it. He broke a contract and now isn’t allowed to use their tools.
- izacus 7y ago
  > I do believe no one has tried to silence his speech, as proven by this post about it. He broke a contract and now isn’t allowed to use their tools. Are you really claiming that being cut off from financials due to criticism is not an attempt to punish criticism? > No. That wasn’t what I basically support at all. Thanks for the strawman. It's not a strawman if you don't understand why being financially punished for criticising a corporation is hugely problematic. You really want to live in the world where you're afraid of having your devices rendered useless and your company blocked from market because you dared say anything against Facebook, Google, Apple and other behemoths?
  - 205guy 7y ago
    The problem is that the OP seems to have used his dev account to get access to information and divulge it against the TOS. He used his financial source to profit in other ways against the interests of his financial source. If my company had a meeting where I learned about quarterly results ahead of any public disclosure, and then I published them somehow, I wouldn't have grounds to complain when they find out and terminate me. If the OP had a totally clean use of his dev account, and he published articles critical of Apple without inside info, and then had his dev account terminated, then I'd be worried about Apple's overreach and dangerous power. But that's NOT what appears to have happened here.

wool_gather 7y ago

Not sure if I agree or disagree. But if it's so clear cut, why wouldn't Apple just tell him the reason?