4 ms·
That's .. unexpectedly broad? A strict interpretation of that would mean no gaming consoles and certainly no iPhones. Their fundamental promise is a gatekeeper
by xorcist 1y ago
That's .. unexpectedly broad? A strict interpretation of that would mean no gaming consoles and certainly no iPhones.
Their fundamental promise is a gatekeeper that restricts a lot of things that are not only legal but many customers want to do, including trivial things like writing their own software.
- qnleigh 1y ago> Government actions that restrict the ability to privately own or make use of computational resources If the government tried to block you from installing certain apps on your phone, that would fall under this law. Apple as a private company can still block whatever they want.
- XorNot 1y agoIt does get a little interesting to imagine the interface here though: if I circumvent those restrictions, a strict reading would be that I'm allowed to because the mechanism by which Apple would stop me would be through the State. Which in turn would put it in conflict with the DMCA.
- anikom15 1y agoThere’s no conflict. DMCA trumps state law.
- benatkin 1y agoThat seems like a correct interpretation and I don't like seeing it spelled out like this in a law. It seems more like a CAN-SPAM act than a step in the right direction.