4 ms·
Poor abused broker argument is invalid while Apple prevents side loading. Yes consoles prevent side loading too, and it's exactly as wrong there too, though, I
by Brian_K_White 3y ago
Poor abused broker argument is invalid while Apple prevents side loading.
Yes consoles prevent side loading too, and it's exactly as wrong there too, though, I would also say there is an argument that a phone is in a different class of necessity than a game console, and could easily be argued to require different rules and consumer/society protections. A phone not only is a central and practically required part of general life today, companies like Apple and Google go further and perform many many actions to insinuate and embed and integrate and entangle their phone and their attached ecosystem into as many aspects of the users life as possible. They are not neutral, and the resulting user entrapment is not of their users own choice and creation, even though there are no guns to any heads. Apple and Google are absolutely equivalent to Phillip Morris when it comes to the users voluntarily consuming a product that is bad for them.
Point of all that is, phones are not game consoles, and not only would that be true naturally just because of how one is a necessary tool for conducting life, while the other is not, the valid culpability of the phone maker is even more compounded when you factor their own actions to amplify the users dependence on them. They actively seek it and do many different things to get it and strengthen it, from advertising to policy to tech functionality. You can't do that, and still be innocent of responsibility for it's effects.
The only valid thing I see is the argument that if Epic agree to the same deal from MS and Sony, meaning all the same significant factors not just the cost, then it will require some non-trivial argument to claim that Apple has harmed them.
- Andrex 3y agoGame consoles should be considered appliances, phones as general purpose computing devices.
- gruez 3y agoIs "general purpose computing devices" a relevant factor with current legislation? Is this yet another area where people want activist judges when it suits their agenda?
- PawgerZ 3y agoIt is in right-to-repair legislations going on right now. "general purpose computing devices" and "gaming consoles" are two legally distinct classes of electronics.
- filleduchaos 3y agoGame consoles are general purpose computing devices.
- PawgerZ 3y agoMost right-to-repair legislation is singling gaming consoles out as excluded while general purpose computing devices are not. Legally, gaming consoles are not general purpose computing devices at the moment.
- filleduchaos 3y agoI know they legally aren't, my point is more that the difference between a PS5 and an iPhone when it comes to general purpose computing capability is entirely arbitrary. If Sony is allowed to claim that their perfectly normal desktop tower running their proprietary flavour of Linux is not a general purpose computing device because reasons, then Apple should be free to claim the same for their phones (and vice versa).
- nemothekid 3y agoIt seems ironic to argue that Apple shouldn't get the same treatment as Sony/MS because phones are not game consoles, when the primary litigator in this case is Epic. Apparently there is a societal need for Fortnite to not have to pay the Apple Tax.
- Brian_K_White 3y agoMildly.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- musicale 3y agoWell, Epic pays Nintendollars to Nintendo, which are cheaper than Apple's Timcoins, so it makes sense that Apple should charge lower platform fees.