4 ms·

A few things... The CEO of Google quitting the Apple board is way different from what you describe. The actions you described would cost companies thousands i

A few things... The CEO of Google quitting the Apple board is way different from what you describe. The actions you described would cost companies thousands if not millions of dollars and that's not going to happen. Injustice is the denial of justice and justice is defined as "the quality of being just or fair". Denying people their rights is an injustice but only because it's unfair to do it. In the end the issue is still fairness. Again, you use the example of dictating the plot of a Harry Potter book as why the Government shouldn't intervene. But that would be the Government telling a company HOW to run. I specifically said this isn't about that. It's about making the company define how they interact with the public. A better analogy would be the government making it illegal to put the cover of the new Harry Potter book on copies of older ones to sell copies (which in fact is illegal)

drewcrawford 17y ago
It's in Google's interest to stop dealing with Apple. They're in half the same markets. Far from costing millions of dollars, making the iPhone less attractive would be a good technical move, and positing as the open option would be a good market play. You're confusing fairness with equality. Apple isn't being equal--it's treating some developers differently than others. But it's certainly being fair--following the terms it laid out in the SDK agreement. This isn't about "making the company define how they interact with the public". Developers aren't the public. We're talking about publishing terms between developers and apple, and consumers only enter into the picture as an (albiet necessary) third party.