4 ms·

Promoting interoperability with theft doesn't make interoperability very appealing to me. :/ If it was an FOSS project, instead of being sold to intelligence a

Promoting interoperability with theft doesn't make interoperability very appealing to me. :/ If it was an FOSS project, instead of being sold to intelligence agencies, I would call them gods instead of thieves and agree with what you’re saying.

zozbot234 7y ago
"Theft"? You think people are going to run Corellium VM's on their phones instead of buying iOS devices? The markets are entirely separate, Apple does not lose any appreciable revenue to Corellium VM's.
- vineyardmike 7y ago
  Just because you wouldn't buy an iphone instead, doesn't make it not theft.
  - sudosysgen 7y ago
    The only argument for copyright abuse bring theft that is even remotely reasonable is that it possibly causes lost revenue/sales. If it doesn't, and in this case it can't, then there is absolutely no argument for it being theft that holds any more water than a sieve.
  - tomrod 7y ago
    Eh, this is pretty myopic if not outrightly idealistic. Corellium likely adds value to Apple because they help to harden the ecosystem, something Apple clearly can't do 100%. Rather than open sourcing their OS, this really is a next best option security-wise. Therefore, Corellium's niche expands the Apple brand. Really just sounds like they're getting knocked for dealing with intelligence agencies.
  - Fnoord 7y ago
    Just because you keep calling it theft, doesn't change that we are discussing copyright infringement. Completely different law.
    - jjeaff 7y ago
      I think that most people would agree that copyright infringement is a subset of theft.
      - Fnoord 7y ago
        I don't agree with that, and I hope "most people" would not agree with that either. With copyright infringement, the original copy still exists. With theft, the original copy changed ownership. The harm and impact are very different and less obvious.
        jjeaff 7y ago
        You don't think that if I made copies of Disney movies and sold the copies on the roadside, that would be a form of theft?
        Fnoord 7y ago
        Copyright infringement is what it would be. Additionally, possibly counterfeiting if they are sold as the real thing. If you'd have stolen the copies, it would be theft and copyright infringement. I don't understand why we still have this discussion...
- ryanlol 7y ago
  People do buy iPhones for exactly the purpose they use Corellium for, Corellium has advertised themselves as an alternative to buying tens of iPhones. See the image in this tweet (can’t direct link from mobile) https://twitter.com/josephfcox/status/1189218066028216324 https://twitter.com/josephfcox/status/1189218066028216324 I don’t think you can reasonably make this argument.
saagarjha 7y ago
Corellium frequently provides security researchers with free access to their tools.
baq 7y ago
no such thing as theft in this area. not even a copyright infringement looks like. maybe a license violation and the judge will decide about circumvention of digital locks, which is, at best, a well-intentioned legislation.

zozbot234 7y ago

"Theft"? You think people are going to run Corellium VM's on their phones instead of buying iOS devices? The markets are entirely separate, Apple does not lose any appreciable revenue to Corellium VM's.

vineyardmike 7y ago
Just because you wouldn't buy an iphone instead, doesn't make it not theft.
- sudosysgen 7y ago
  The only argument for copyright abuse bring theft that is even remotely reasonable is that it possibly causes lost revenue/sales. If it doesn't, and in this case it can't, then there is absolutely no argument for it being theft that holds any more water than a sieve.
- tomrod 7y ago
  Eh, this is pretty myopic if not outrightly idealistic. Corellium likely adds value to Apple because they help to harden the ecosystem, something Apple clearly can't do 100%. Rather than open sourcing their OS, this really is a next best option security-wise. Therefore, Corellium's niche expands the Apple brand. Really just sounds like they're getting knocked for dealing with intelligence agencies.
- Fnoord 7y ago
  Just because you keep calling it theft, doesn't change that we are discussing copyright infringement. Completely different law.
  - jjeaff 7y ago
    I think that most people would agree that copyright infringement is a subset of theft.
    - Fnoord 7y ago
      I don't agree with that, and I hope "most people" would not agree with that either. With copyright infringement, the original copy still exists. With theft, the original copy changed ownership. The harm and impact are very different and less obvious.
      - jjeaff 7y ago
        You don't think that if I made copies of Disney movies and sold the copies on the roadside, that would be a form of theft?
        Fnoord 7y ago
        Copyright infringement is what it would be. Additionally, possibly counterfeiting if they are sold as the real thing. If you'd have stolen the copies, it would be theft and copyright infringement. I don't understand why we still have this discussion...
ryanlol 7y ago
People do buy iPhones for exactly the purpose they use Corellium for, Corellium has advertised themselves as an alternative to buying tens of iPhones. See the image in this tweet (can’t direct link from mobile) https://twitter.com/josephfcox/status/1189218066028216324 https://twitter.com/josephfcox/status/1189218066028216324 I don’t think you can reasonably make this argument.

saagarjha 7y ago

Corellium frequently provides security researchers with free access to their tools.

baq 7y ago

no such thing as theft in this area. not even a copyright infringement looks like. maybe a license violation and the judge will decide about circumvention of digital locks, which is, at best, a well-intentioned legislation.