4 ms·

It was very conspicuous yesterday that Apple & Microsoft did not show up on the anti-SOPA NYTimes ad: http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/16/google-facebook-twitte

by rexf 15y ago

It was very conspicuous yesterday that Apple & Microsoft did not show up on the anti-SOPA NYTimes ad: http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/16/google-facebook-twitter-and-others-speak-out-against-the-stop/ http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/16/google-facebook-twitter-a...

guywithabike 15y ago
Also conspicuous that Y Combinator wasn't on the ad. It's clear and obvious that PG and Y Combinator are in full support of SOPA.
- monochromatic 15y ago
  Har har.
tikhonj 15y ago
Those were all internet companies--internet freedom really matters to them. Microsoft and Apple, on the other hand, make money by restricting users' freedom and do not rely on the internet nearly as heavily. Their covertly supporting SOPA does not really come as a surprise.
- Volpe 15y ago
  > Microsoft and Apple, on the other hand, make money by restricting users' freedom Umm, actually I think they make their money buy selling products. Consumers are rarely (ever?) driven by a "restrict my freedom" motive...
  - tikhonj 15y ago
    The two aren't mutually exclusive. Sure, only selling things makes revenue directly. However, policies abridging freedom help both companies scale--by attempting to lock users into their platforms and making it difficult or impossible to not buy their software when getting a new computer, both companies get more people to spend more money.
    - Volpe 15y ago
      Could you elaborate on how MS and Apple do this specifically? I find their revenue models very different, Apply making it on hardware + iTunes (Music, apps, movies, etc), MS making it on Software. How do you group them as the same? And call it 'Lock-in'? Edit: for clarity
      - lparry 15y ago
        well they obviously restrict our freedom to use their software without paying, which we should all be entitled to do /sarcasm
      - billpatrianakos 15y ago
        I think what his message is meant to be taken in the "Free Software" sense. You know, proprietary anything is evil, all software should be free, hippies rule the new utopia and all that. I won't speak for Microsoft as I'm not sure how they do it but what you mentioned with Apple and iTunes is pretty much it right there. What people who repeat this message forget is that this "lock-in" is not bad or evil to many people. Sure, the hackers want to install their own apps and use alternative app stores and all that in which case I'd say find another (or create another) platform. My mother and the vast majority of consumers want to tap their screens a couple of times and get a cool app. It's not lock-in to them. To them it's easy and convenient. Technology is for everyone, not just those l33t enough to hack.
podperson 15y ago
You know what those companies have in common? They don't sell software. If your business is basically running a website, what do you care about piracy? Not defending SOPA -- I don't have a clue about its intricacies -- but when a bunch of companies that don't sell software are against a bill that purports to try to do something about software piracy, I don't really see what the news is. In fact, these companies are all basically ad networks...
- wmf 15y ago
  SOPA is mostly about music and movie piracy and any site that allows you to upload audio, video, or files is a target.
  - wanorris 15y ago
    But the bill would give software companies the same tools to go after warez sites too. Why wouldn't Adobe want to be able to crack down on sites that distribute cracked copies of Photoshop? Or Microsoft with illegal copies of Windows or Office? That's not to say this is a good bill. It's not. But if it's in the interests of companies with significant IP to protect to support it, companies with significant IP to protect like Microsoft, Adobe, and Apple can be expected to support it. Their support is really that simple.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  Does that mean Microsoft and Apple have to support any anti-piracy bill, without any regard for its consequences? Because if that's true, then they are no better than RIAA and MPAA and they couldn't care less about the Internet and censorship, as long as they reduce the pirated copies by 10% (if that).
  - RexRollman 15y ago
    Companies, even those fighting this bill, only care about their own interests. That's why I think people who blindly trust companies to do the right thing are crazy.

by rexf 15y ago

guywithabike 15y ago

Also conspicuous that Y Combinator wasn't on the ad. It's clear and obvious that PG and Y Combinator are in full support of SOPA.

monochromatic 15y ago
Har har.

tikhonj 15y ago

Those were all internet companies--internet freedom really matters to them. Microsoft and Apple, on the other hand, make money by restricting users' freedom and do not rely on the internet nearly as heavily. Their covertly supporting SOPA does not really come as a surprise.

Volpe 15y ago
> Microsoft and Apple, on the other hand, make money by restricting users' freedom Umm, actually I think they make their money buy selling products. Consumers are rarely (ever?) driven by a "restrict my freedom" motive...
- tikhonj 15y ago
  The two aren't mutually exclusive. Sure, only selling things makes revenue directly. However, policies abridging freedom help both companies scale--by attempting to lock users into their platforms and making it difficult or impossible to not buy their software when getting a new computer, both companies get more people to spend more money.
  - Volpe 15y ago
    Could you elaborate on how MS and Apple do this specifically? I find their revenue models very different, Apply making it on hardware + iTunes (Music, apps, movies, etc), MS making it on Software. How do you group them as the same? And call it 'Lock-in'? Edit: for clarity
    - lparry 15y ago
      well they obviously restrict our freedom to use their software without paying, which we should all be entitled to do /sarcasm
    - billpatrianakos 15y ago
      I think what his message is meant to be taken in the "Free Software" sense. You know, proprietary anything is evil, all software should be free, hippies rule the new utopia and all that. I won't speak for Microsoft as I'm not sure how they do it but what you mentioned with Apple and iTunes is pretty much it right there. What people who repeat this message forget is that this "lock-in" is not bad or evil to many people. Sure, the hackers want to install their own apps and use alternative app stores and all that in which case I'd say find another (or create another) platform. My mother and the vast majority of consumers want to tap their screens a couple of times and get a cool app. It's not lock-in to them. To them it's easy and convenient. Technology is for everyone, not just those l33t enough to hack.

podperson 15y ago

You know what those companies have in common? They don't sell software. If your business is basically running a website, what do you care about piracy? Not defending SOPA -- I don't have a clue about its intricacies -- but when a bunch of companies that don't sell software are against a bill that purports to try to do something about software piracy, I don't really see what the news is. In fact, these companies are all basically ad networks...

wmf 15y ago
SOPA is mostly about music and movie piracy and any site that allows you to upload audio, video, or files is a target.
- wanorris 15y ago
  But the bill would give software companies the same tools to go after warez sites too. Why wouldn't Adobe want to be able to crack down on sites that distribute cracked copies of Photoshop? Or Microsoft with illegal copies of Windows or Office? That's not to say this is a good bill. It's not. But if it's in the interests of companies with significant IP to protect to support it, companies with significant IP to protect like Microsoft, Adobe, and Apple can be expected to support it. Their support is really that simple.
nextparadigms 15y ago
Does that mean Microsoft and Apple have to support any anti-piracy bill, without any regard for its consequences? Because if that's true, then they are no better than RIAA and MPAA and they couldn't care less about the Internet and censorship, as long as they reduce the pirated copies by 10% (if that).
- RexRollman 15y ago
  Companies, even those fighting this bill, only care about their own interests. That's why I think people who blindly trust companies to do the right thing are crazy.