4 ms·

Apple is contractually forcing developers to not discuss the contract, in what way is that good for users? Apple can still have a walled garden without contrac

by Flimm 12y ago

Apple is contractually forcing developers to not discuss the contract, in what way is that good for users? Apple can still have a walled garden without contractually requiring developers to forgo their right to jailbreak their own device. DRM does not benefit users at all. It is not necessary to have DRM to have a walled garden.

sbuk 12y ago
"Apple is contractually forcing developers to not discuss the contract, in what way is that good for users?" What way isn't it? To what end does an end user need to know what the content of an agreement between to third parties is? "Apple can still have a walled garden without contractually requiring developers to forgo their right to jailbreak their own device." "It is not necessary to have DRM to have a walled garden." Where is the DRM in the App store? I ask because I genuinely don't know. I would like to know in simple terms as the EFF have a tendency to use emotive language that detracts from the point.
ctdonath 12y ago
"Good for users"? it's not the users' business to know details of contracts between developers & Apple. Jailbreak away - but Apple rightfully disavows any predicted or unforeseen consequences, and won't work with anyone who won't work with what Apple considers sensible rules facilitating development & usage. If you're going to bring bags of weed seeds (or anything else which predictably cause problems) into my walled garden, get out of my garden. DRM assures you can use your purchased products on the devices you want ... and that nobody else can, and that nobody is going to repackage apps to include malware.
- Retra 12y ago
  >"Good for users"? it's not the users' business to know details of contracts between developers & Apple. Who are you to say what a user's business is? If someone is engaging in unethical conduct, it is their customers' right to know about it. How are consumers supposed to make informed decisions if they do not even know what they are funding?
  - sbuk 12y ago
    What is unethical? What are they funding? Why the emotive language? Who are you or the EFF to say that it is anybody's business to know about two other third parties agreements? What difference will it make to consumers to know what the contract stipulates?
    - Retra 12y ago
      >What is unethical? What are they funding? That's exactly what the consumer wants to know. They are funding whatever is stipulated in those contracts. >Who are you or the EFF to say that it is anybody's business I am me, and I say what is my business.
      - ctdonath 12y ago
        Then work out a contract with the other two. If they don't agree to your terms, then it literally is not your business.
        Retra 12y ago
        Attempting to establishing a legal obligation to share information is pretty much that, I would think. Seems like that's the whole point of a democracy, no? To allow the people to make things their business? I mean, if Apple doesn't want their contracts (which are enforced by democratic American law) to be the business of the American people, then maybe they should leave the country.
        sbuk 12y ago
        "Attempting to establishing a legal obligation to share information is pretty much that, I would think. Seems like that's the whole point of a democracy, no? To allow the people to make things their business?" No! Absolutely not!!! How is that any different from the asinine mutterings of David Cameron over data encryption? Freedom of speech does not give you the right to no my, or anyone else's business. What about freedom of privacy? "I mean, if Apple doesn't want their contracts (which are enforced by democratic American law) to be the business of the American people, then maybe they should leave the country." So you agree that the NSA is right to snoop on the citizens of the US? It's exactly the same thing.

by Flimm 12y ago

sbuk 12y ago

"Apple is contractually forcing developers to not discuss the contract, in what way is that good for users?" What way isn't it? To what end does an end user need to know what the content of an agreement between to third parties is? "Apple can still have a walled garden without contractually requiring developers to forgo their right to jailbreak their own device." "It is not necessary to have DRM to have a walled garden." Where is the DRM in the App store? I ask because I genuinely don't know. I would like to know in simple terms as the EFF have a tendency to use emotive language that detracts from the point.

ctdonath 12y ago

"Good for users"? it's not the users' business to know details of contracts between developers & Apple. Jailbreak away - but Apple rightfully disavows any predicted or unforeseen consequences, and won't work with anyone who won't work with what Apple considers sensible rules facilitating development & usage. If you're going to bring bags of weed seeds (or anything else which predictably cause problems) into my walled garden, get out of my garden. DRM assures you can use your purchased products on the devices you want ... and that nobody else can, and that nobody is going to repackage apps to include malware.

Retra 12y ago
>"Good for users"? it's not the users' business to know details of contracts between developers & Apple. Who are you to say what a user's business is? If someone is engaging in unethical conduct, it is their customers' right to know about it. How are consumers supposed to make informed decisions if they do not even know what they are funding?
- sbuk 12y ago
  What is unethical? What are they funding? Why the emotive language? Who are you or the EFF to say that it is anybody's business to know about two other third parties agreements? What difference will it make to consumers to know what the contract stipulates?
  - Retra 12y ago
    >What is unethical? What are they funding? That's exactly what the consumer wants to know. They are funding whatever is stipulated in those contracts. >Who are you or the EFF to say that it is anybody's business I am me, and I say what is my business.
    - ctdonath 12y ago
      Then work out a contract with the other two. If they don't agree to your terms, then it literally is not your business.
      - Retra 12y ago
        Attempting to establishing a legal obligation to share information is pretty much that, I would think. Seems like that's the whole point of a democracy, no? To allow the people to make things their business? I mean, if Apple doesn't want their contracts (which are enforced by democratic American law) to be the business of the American people, then maybe they should leave the country.
        sbuk 12y ago
        "Attempting to establishing a legal obligation to share information is pretty much that, I would think. Seems like that's the whole point of a democracy, no? To allow the people to make things their business?" No! Absolutely not!!! How is that any different from the asinine mutterings of David Cameron over data encryption? Freedom of speech does not give you the right to no my, or anyone else's business. What about freedom of privacy? "I mean, if Apple doesn't want their contracts (which are enforced by democratic American law) to be the business of the American people, then maybe they should leave the country." So you agree that the NSA is right to snoop on the citizens of the US? It's exactly the same thing.