3 ms·

The public API they are referring to is a Mac OS X API. They assert that it is alright to transfer the image provided by that API to another device and display

The public API they are referring to is a Mac OS X API. They assert that it is alright to transfer the image provided by that API to another device and display it there. This may or may not be the case but in my opinion, the argument could be a non sequitur. Just because one system provides you the means of getting a certain bitmap does not automatically entitle you to use that bitmap somewhere else. It's silly that Apple accepted it before and refuses the bug-fix release. And RA is right to be mad at them for that. However, for me the "it's a public API on the Mac so we are allowed to use the bitmap returned by that function on the iphone" -argument does not hold.

dchest 17y ago
While this is not a legal document, NSImage class docs have the following text for some constants: Images representing standard artwork and icons that you can use in your applications Drag images you can use in your applications. Images representing sharing permission icons that you can use in your applications. http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/ApplicationKit/Classes/NSImage_Class/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000344-SW84 http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/R... However, NSImageNameComputer, which Rogue Amoeba uses, doesn't have "you can use in your applications": Images representing Finder items. Though, it has the following text: You should use these images to reflect specific elements of the Mac OS X environment. For example, you might use the burnable folder icon if your software allows the user to organize content for burning onto an optical disk. The appearance of images can change between releases. If you use an image for its intended purpose (and not because of how it looks), your code should look correct from release to release. Does Rogue Amoeba use these images to reflect specific elements of the Mac OS X environment? I guess so.
- Timothee 17y ago
  Thanks for finding this. I think the issue is that this doc is for the Mac API. So it's fine to show these images on the application running on the Mac but that's it, not on the iPhone app. (at least, I imagine that's Apple's point)
- voidpointer 17y ago
  "Does Rogue Amoeba use these images to reflect specific elements of the Mac OS X environment? I guess so." I would agree they do, but them they don't do it in the Mac OS X environment but using it on the iphone... (Apple managed to create such a seamless integration of the environments that even seasoned developers are getting confused) It feels very silly to argue about user experience matters like they were laws - but that seems to be where those lawyers are getting us :( What if they took (or bought) a photograph of an imac etc. by themselves (maybe remove the apple logo as is normally done in stock photography in order not to infringe on trademarks) wouldn't that have been the most customer serving move on RA's part?
Timothee 17y ago
I would agree. At first, I was completely behind their point, but where there might be a gray area is that, as you said, the Mac OS X API function gives an image to the application running on the Mac. Then, I can only assume that Airfoil for Mac is sending the image to the iPhone app, basically making a copy of it and sending it over the air. This copy is probably unauthorized as regard to copyright. That being said, I'm not saying that it's right, and the question of VNC clients is relevant as well.
- lutorm 17y ago
  You'd be making a copy just by calling the function, another by displaying it. Ephemeral copies are legio in software and though people have tried I don't think anyone has ruled that those copies are infringing. It's like saying that when you play a CD you are making a copy into the air pressure pattern and thus playing a CD would be infringement.
  - regularfry 17y ago
    Not only that, but by this logic Mozilla are liable every time I view the CNN logo on the CNN web site. This seems odd.

dchest 17y ago

While this is not a legal document, NSImage class docs have the following text for some constants: Images representing standard artwork and icons that you can use in your applications Drag images you can use in your applications. Images representing sharing permission icons that you can use in your applications. http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/ApplicationKit/Classes/NSImage_Class/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000344-SW84 http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/R... However, NSImageNameComputer, which Rogue Amoeba uses, doesn't have "you can use in your applications": Images representing Finder items. Though, it has the following text: You should use these images to reflect specific elements of the Mac OS X environment. For example, you might use the burnable folder icon if your software allows the user to organize content for burning onto an optical disk. The appearance of images can change between releases. If you use an image for its intended purpose (and not because of how it looks), your code should look correct from release to release. Does Rogue Amoeba use these images to reflect specific elements of the Mac OS X environment? I guess so.

Timothee 17y ago
Thanks for finding this. I think the issue is that this doc is for the Mac API. So it's fine to show these images on the application running on the Mac but that's it, not on the iPhone app. (at least, I imagine that's Apple's point)
voidpointer 17y ago
"Does Rogue Amoeba use these images to reflect specific elements of the Mac OS X environment? I guess so." I would agree they do, but them they don't do it in the Mac OS X environment but using it on the iphone... (Apple managed to create such a seamless integration of the environments that even seasoned developers are getting confused) It feels very silly to argue about user experience matters like they were laws - but that seems to be where those lawyers are getting us :( What if they took (or bought) a photograph of an imac etc. by themselves (maybe remove the apple logo as is normally done in stock photography in order not to infringe on trademarks) wouldn't that have been the most customer serving move on RA's part?

Timothee 17y ago

I would agree. At first, I was completely behind their point, but where there might be a gray area is that, as you said, the Mac OS X API function gives an image to the application running on the Mac. Then, I can only assume that Airfoil for Mac is sending the image to the iPhone app, basically making a copy of it and sending it over the air. This copy is probably unauthorized as regard to copyright. That being said, I'm not saying that it's right, and the question of VNC clients is relevant as well.

lutorm 17y ago
You'd be making a copy just by calling the function, another by displaying it. Ephemeral copies are legio in software and though people have tried I don't think anyone has ruled that those copies are infringing. It's like saying that when you play a CD you are making a copy into the air pressure pattern and thus playing a CD would be infringement.
- regularfry 17y ago
  Not only that, but by this logic Mozilla are liable every time I view the CNN logo on the CNN web site. This seems odd.