3 ms·
In the case cited in the Reddit link, having files you legitimately own DRMed, replaced, or deleted seems like a pretty clear illegal act. I think the argument
by mikece 4y ago
In the case cited in the Reddit link, having files you legitimately own DRMed, replaced, or deleted seems like a pretty clear illegal act. I think the argument could be made that Apple could be charged with something worse than ransomware (since that merely encrypts your files and doesn't change, delete, or prevent them from being used as before once they are unencrypted).
- nopenopenopeno 4y ago
- nonrandomstring 4y agoDidn't see your comment before making mine - but yes - I think it is indistinguishable from a ransomware attack in every way except for who is doing it and the fact that unlike cybercriminals to whom you can pay bitcoin to restore your files, Apple will almost certainly refuse and prosecute you for trying to restore your data. So yes, worse than a ransomware attack. I simply cannot understand how big tech companies get away with their behaviour.
- dagmx 4y agoIn this case, the user is mistaken. It didn’t replace their local files. They synced the files to a different machine, and the service as stated, gives you what it considers de-duplicated files. It’s not a music backup service, and it’s very clear about that. It’s an “upload your own stuff, and we’ll only host what’s not already in our library” Granted it does overly aggressively match songs sometimes, but it still doesn’t delete your content.