Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 614 posts

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#531

Post by colejohnson66 »

Kuinox wrote: post #508
colejohnson66 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t Epic initially go around the Play Store and require you to download an installer from their website? And then it turned out that it was a good malware vector? That’s what I fear will happen if we get alternate stores: lax security leading to malware.

Make it that you must sign the binaries. Google distribute/manage the keys, but are not allowed to veto legal things.

That serves no purpose. If Google can’t veto any signature requests, it’s no different than having no signature at all; You’ll just have signed malware.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#532

Post by balls187 »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #179
balls187 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is that I, a user of an iPhone, should be able to install whatever software I want. And, likewise, Apple, as the platform owner, should be able to deny access whatever software they want. You can of course, jailbreak your iphone, or install PWA's that work.

I am just waiting untill car companies as "platform owners" start preventing you from driving to areas they don't like, or exceeding speed limit. Afterall, you just paid for the car, they still own the software that controls the engine.

> Afterall, you just paid for the car, they still own the software that controls the engine.

They do this to an extent already.

Aftermarket ECU Tunes can often invalidate your warranty.

Most OEM infotainment headunits are not user upgradable.

GPS Maps must be refreshed through the dealer.

In the US there is a governor that limits how fast a car can go.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#533

Post by balls187 »

ezconnect wrote: post #202
balls187 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is that I, a user of an iPhone, should be able to install whatever software I want. And, likewise, Apple, as the platform owner, should be able to deny access whatever software they want. You can of course, jailbreak your iphone, or install PWA's that work.

Wait till your microwave oven doesn't want to cook the food you want and paid for.

Then I use the stove?

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#534

Post by balls187 »

LegitShady wrote: post #180
balls187 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is that I, a user of an iPhone, should be able to install whatever software I want. And, likewise, Apple, as the platform owner, should be able to deny access whatever software they want. You can of course, jailbreak your iphone, or install PWA's that work.

imagine saying this about microsoft when they were dominant

Apple is far from dominant.

Android is by far the most dominate mobile platform worldwide.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#535

Post by sem000 »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #441
sem000 wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! HN is a small subset of Apple customers. The largest piece of the pie don’t care about any of this stuff besides that it works. I specifically bought Apple vs Android for these reasons. I run my life and business form my phone, I trust Apple to provide me with a working experience and support when needed. Imagine having to use another App Store outside Apples control, and an app causes my phone to crash. Who…

Why is this any different from Apple saying that you can't download other software on your Macbook, unless you pay Apple 30% and buy it from their exclusive store?

Well, we're not talking about the Macbook here... we're talking about the iPhone.

As far as the MacBook goes, it's a different target market. MacBooks are targeted for professionals that do all sorts of things with them.

Instead they are beefing up the iPad, which has the same target market as the iPhone. That target market doesn't care about all this crap and just wants their tech to work.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#536

Post by stale2002 »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #407
stale2002 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should they not have that right? Because the phone belongs to the consumer, and the courts have already said that it is perfectly legal to jailbreak your phone, even though apple attempted to sue people who were doing this. It is pretty horrible that Apple was trying to sue people, for modifying property that the consumer owned, and it required the courts to get involved, to clarify that it is perfectly legal t…

All products even with ownership come with rules and regulations. Houses can’t be arbitrarily changed. Cars have governors. Scissors shouldn’t be run with. Ownership of an iPhone is not different. It just has special rules attached. If you don’t mind breaking the warranty, please jailbreak your iPhone and install whatever apps you’d prefer.

The US courts have consistently held that it is perfectly legal to do anything to your privated owned things that are not public.

Your house example is wrong, because that has public viewing concerns on a plot of land.

And your car example is incorrect. I could make any changes at all to a car, that is not put on public roads.

That has nothing to do with the manufacturer putting restrictions on your car.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#537

Post by sem000 »

simion314 wrote: post #447
sem000 wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! HN is a small subset of Apple customers. The largest piece of the pie don’t care about any of this stuff besides that it works. I specifically bought Apple vs Android for these reasons. I run my life and business form my phone, I trust Apple to provide me with a working experience and support when needed. Imagine having to use another App Store outside Apples control, and an app causes my phone to crash. Who…

>Imagine having to use another App Store outside Apple... Don't use one, install only Apple approved content from Apple approved stores but don't force everyone to do so. If you want to pay 15-30% more for stuff from the Apple Store then you are free to do so. On PC you can use only Steam, if say you want to buy Fallout 3 today and is 75% of on GOG you are not forced to buy it from GOG, you can buy it from Steam and…

The problem with this logic is that every company is going to set up their own App Store. Microsoft, Epic, etc. Then for every app that I use right now on my iPhone I would have to source from several App Stores. It will make my experience very cumbersome.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#538

Post by stale2002 »

DonaldPShimoda wrote: post #482
stale2002 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't buy a new Tesla from any local dealership; you can only get them directly from Tesla's stores. No, not really. I am pretty sure that it is perfectly legal for other people to buy and then resell teslas. I do not believe that Tesla is suing people who resell Teslas. > the global majority of smartphone users In the USA, the Iphone has about 50% of the smart phone market. And when it comes to US anti-trust l…

> I am pretty sure that it is perfectly legal for other people to buy and then resell teslas. We're not talking about reselling — we're talking about people selling brand-new product. Most people don't buy a Toyota new from Toyota directly; they go to a local Toyota dealership. But you can't buy a new Tesla through a dealership, because Tesla doesn't allow it. You can only buy a new Tesla through Tesla directly. > In…

> we're talking about people selling brand-new product.

And tesla does not prevent someone from buying a Tesla that is brand new, and selling it.

> because Tesla doesn't allow it.

False. it would be perfectly legal to immediately sell a new tesla that you just purchased. That would be a brand new tesla.

Thats brand new, that would be no different than buying from tesla.

> I was saying that Android is a viable alternative to iOS,

Apple has ~50% of the market share in the US. Anti trust law does not require a literal, singular monopoly, in order for certain anti-competitive behavior to be illegal. Instead, 50% of the market, is within the realm of when certain behavior can become illegal.

> If the policies of iOS are not to your liking

If the policies are anti-competitive, then Apple can be sued for having illegal policies, due to their market share. 50% of the market, is wihin the realm where anti-competitive practices become illegal.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#539

Post by yazaddaruvala »

dylan-m wrote: post #503
kalleboo wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Houses can’t be arbitrarily changed. Cars have governors. Scissors shouldn’t be run with. None of these regulations are decided by the company that manufactured the device, they are all decided democratically by an elected state. How about... Houses can't have arbitrary appliances installed that weren't made by someone approved by the house-builder Cars can't fill up gas from a stand not paying 30% by the car manuf…

> Scissors can't cut paper sold by someone unaffiliated by the scissor manufacturer. Of course, going by evidence in these threads, people would defend Scissors Corp to the death , arguing "but that's a feature which makes these scissors safe so people don't injure themselves, and sure they own half of the scissors (and paper) market but you can always bring your own scissors (and paper) and avoid interacting with pe…

If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper, thickness or proprietary paper, I wouldn’t later complain about their inability to cut all paper.

“Ownership” of a tool has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it. This entitlement over the tools Apple creates, accurately advertises, and legal sells is the only problem I see.

[1] https://www.sliceproducts.com/safety-scissors

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#540

Post by stale2002 »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #539
dylan-m wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Scissors can't cut paper sold by someone unaffiliated by the scissor manufacturer. Of course, going by evidence in these threads, people would defend Scissors Corp to the death , arguing "but that's a feature which makes these scissors safe so people don't injure themselves, and sure they own half of the scissors (and paper) market but you can always bring your own scissors (and paper) and avoid interacting with pe…

If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper, thickness or proprietary paper, I wouldn’t later complain about their inability to cut all paper. “Ownership” of a tool has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it. This entitlement over the tools Apple creates, accurately advertises, and legal sells is the only problem I see. [1] https://www.sliceproducts.com/…

> If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper

If there was a scissors duopoly, in which a company that controls 50% of the market, implemented practices that are anti-competitive, then this could be illegal.

> has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it.

Actually, no. Once you purchased the item, you can do whatever you want with it, regardless of what the manufacture wants.

> This entitlement

This is about anti-trust law. Apple should follow the law. They are not entitled to break the law, without consequences.

Post reply on HN