Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> The Original iPhone didn’t have any apps and Apple later created their own ecosystem with an end user agreement which supersedes the ads.

The whole "user agreement" thing is one of the biggest problems, because it means Apple thinks you buying an iPhone doesn't inherently entitle you to the advertised functionality of it.

Which is, to out it mildly, highly misleading and potentially illegal. The "small print" shouldn't contradict the big picture. You can't pretend you're selling a device and then turn around and declare that those sales were only about raw hardware and not actual functionality. That's not how products work, and most importantly, not how consumer protection laws see it.

The reason why Apple is so adamant in this line of reasoning is clear once you factor in the App Store rationale. From that perspective, any time a third-party app runs on a user's device and calls iOS APIs in order to actually function, it's not part of what the user actually paid money for. Any execution of any software that uses those APIs is an additional transaction altogether, dealt with separately through the iOS EULA. In short, Apple's position is that any time iOS does anything, either by default or powering a third-party app, it's not actually part of the functionality that was paid for in full by the iPhone's owner, because the owner never paid for ANY functionality at all, only the hardware.



It's called EULA Roofie. I think Apple will eventually fade away and be replaced by another company that has a more free and open platform. My main concern throughout this discussion is how we're drifting from regulating the digital market place itself. Preventing things like EULA Roofies etc. where somebody can track your personal life and sell it to others to manipulate you.

According to the App Store policies, if I remember correctly, technically all the customers belong to Apple. Although, the developers are also correct to see it the other way around as well.

The ecosystem was built on the assumption that hardware would be sold with its own profit margin and software would have its own separate profit margin to sustain its own operations, tools, and libraries.

The DMA made the entire software branch unsustainable and everybody thinks that Apple earned enough and they should give the software for free. Well, it's their platform and they're entitled to profit from it as they're pleased. Even the European Commission admitted that as well, because saying otherwise is akin to confiscating their intellectual property. I wouldn't bet the house on it but I think Apple would give up the European market before the core technology fee.


> Well, it's their platform and they're entitled to profit from it as they're pleased. Even the European Commission admitted that as well, because saying otherwise is akin to confiscating their intellectual property.

It is not a violation of someone's IP for a 3rd-party dev to make an app that interacts with that someone's OS. Software interacting with (and being compatible with/depending on) another doesn't touch the IP domain at all.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: