Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 10, 2023, 3:51 PM UTC

JimDabell wrote: post #171

smoldesu wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the ruling[0]: > As to count one, we agree that Corellium is shielded by the fair use doctrine. First, Corellium’s virtualization software is transformative—it furthers scientific progress by allowing security research into important operating systems. Second, iOS is functional operating software that falls outside copyright’s core. Third, Corellium didn’t overhelp itself to Apple’s software. And fourth, Corelli…

All you are quoting is a description of how Corellium’s use qualifies as fair use, which is what the person responding to you said. > The important part here is that it proves Apple does not have the defacto right to claim infringement on iOS. If your emulator is transformative, offers functionality beyond default iOS, doesn't abuse their services and doesn't threaten the iOS market (eg. iPhones) it should be conside…

Post by crazygringo » Wed, May 10, 2023, 4:10 PM UTC

fsckboy wrote: post #138

crazygringo wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this isn't a question of logic, it's a question of definition. And all the discussion I can find online say breaking a contract doesn't fall under the definition of "illegal". Do you have an authoritative source that defines it otherwise?

> all the discussion I can find online say breaking a contract doesn't fall under the definition of "illegal" I don't think this is the standard. I think the standard is, can you find definitions of illegal under which breaking a contract or a tort don't fall? And in the dictionaries I've looked in, there are many usage senses of the word illegal that do cover things that are not criminal. Contract law and the law of…

Post by lostlogin » Wed, May 10, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

scrollaway wrote: post #298

krger wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good job moving those goalposts.

Thanks, you too. I’m sorry but yeah, if you want a concrete solution that is on par with what google offers in terms of privacy and security, you can’t go with a random company and everything I said before stands. And in this scenario, fastmail IS a random company no matter how long you’ve used them.

Post by waboremo » Wed, May 10, 2023, 5:49 PM UTC

pb7 wrote: post #78

waboremo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has made billions (upwards of $300m in pure profit) from Fortnite. If you care about Epic's shitty qualities in that aspect (the case you're linking), surely you also care about Apple profiting off that exploitation as well?

Have you read the details of the judgment? Most of the dark patterns Epic used aren't possible on iOS. In fact, the reason they hate Apple's walled garden so much is because they add too much friction to the dark patterns they want to use, notably authentication for subsequent in-app purchases, so I don't know what exploitation profiting you're referring to. Apple protects consumers from shitty companies like Epic ab…

Post by jstarfish » Wed, May 10, 2023, 6:09 PM UTC

Gareth321 wrote: post #227

rollcat wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very fast moving target. Apple keeps rewriting and deprecating stuff faster than they can write the documentation. As a newcomer to native macOS development, I'm sometimes struggling to even find working examples.

I am convinced this is by design. Apple has leaned heavily into service based revenue. This means recurring revenue. So in their App Store, they heavily incentivise subscriptions over one-time purchases. One of their tools is frequent and rapid API deprecation. This breaks older apps which aren't maintained. Developers must therefore spend much more effort on maintaining software on iOS and macOS (I can still run sof…