4 ms·
From what I read, Apple isn't agreeing to, they may be compelled to by the judge. You are correct, apple isn't selling users the software on the devices, they a
by rodyancy 17y ago
From what I read, Apple isn't agreeing to, they may be compelled to by the judge. You are correct, apple isn't selling users the software on the devices, they are licensing it, and the terms of that license likely stipulates that users have no right to the code (I don't know for sure, because I've never read the license, even as I type this from my iPhone).
In this case the license isn't the issue. The court isn't bound by the license, and if it deems it necessary for evidentiary purposes, over and above any objections Apple raises, then it will order Apple to turn over the code.
- tptacek 17y agoIf you Google "trade secrets discovery", you'll find that courts appear to tend to defer to trade secret holders, and that there are numerous alternatives available to the court besides revealing trade secrets to satisfy discovery claims. I am guessing that these guys: http://www.hoffmanandlazear.com/ who represent the plaintiffs, who are asking for "not less than 600 million dollars" for having their hacked iPhones bricked, are going to lose to Apple's lawyers in High Comedic Fashion.
- rodyancy 17y agoI'm inclined to agree. Trade secret would be one of the compelling objections I left room for in my my comment.