Live data from Hacker News

Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

rogueamoeba.com

51–60 of 97 posts

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#51
The talk about the DMCA and reverse engineering is a red herring - Apple is not taking legal action against Rogue Amoeba.

You're seeing the full power of Apple's control over the app store, though - they can stop distributing apps they don't like for any reason. The same power that Barnes & Noble has over the book market, and your cable provider has over your local TV market.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#52
post #42

Once more, a reminder that we - the hackers - should stop giving Apple our money. This is not the kind of computing environment we want to encourage. It's time for someone to re-edit Apple's 1984 commercial and swap the logos.

They would definitely sue you for doing that. Which would be pretty nice irony too.

They could try. Parody is protected.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#53
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

assuming we're talking about data that isn't under DRM; DRM is another issue Though AirPlay does work on DRM'ed streams, there's little advantage to using that over simply recording from the audio out from your computer and no advantage over using something like Audio Hijack Pro (another Rogue Amoeba product) or Soundflower to record the audio output of your computer.

The DRM exists to limit rights of unauthorized people to play content, not to limit the rights of authorized people to play content. If an authorized user initiates playing the content, DRM shouldn't prevent it from occurring.

>The DRM exists to limit rights of unauthorized people to play content, not to limit the rights of authorized people to play content.

On paper, yes. In practice, "unauthorized people" don't have to deal with it, and only "authorized people" have to struggle.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#54
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, controlling aftermarket parts is crucial to automakers. Add nitrous, void your warranty. Modify chip, void your warranty. Make a cosmetic change, no problem.

Is the warranty the issue here? Isn't it the right to add some functionality to the device? I could see your point if there was an argument between Amoeba and Apple about voiding warranties. But I don't see that being the issue.

A warranty is just a contract, much like the contract put in place that allows Rogue Amoeba to sell software on the iOS and Mac platforms.

Adding in support for AirPlay to an app and selling that won't void your or my iPhone's Warranty if we were to install it, but it can void the contract put in place between Rogue Amoeba and Apple, if even just for that singular app. Here is the real reason Apple threw this app out of the store: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4087666 RA was using a private key derived from a firmware update for the Apple Airport Basestations in order to encrypt the audio stream in accordance of the AirPlay protocol.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#55
post #12

This is going to backfire on Apple. It is absurd the lengths they are going to. Imagine if when you bought a car the manufacturer tried to control what stereo you could install. "We made this car, and you have to play by our rules." Insane.

Well, car manufacturers have certainly not been very aftermarket-friendly with their center stack over the past decade. It might actually be fairly similar after all: Want a custom stereo in your new car with a fancy center stack setup with a non-standard-size stereo and possibly even integrated AC/heater controls? You're going to have to jump through a lot of hoops. Want software with more functionality than Apple e…

Bought a Jetta in 2000. Best car I've ever owned. Didn't like the stereo though. Tried to replace it with an aftermarket system and was told that doing so would void the warranty on the door locks, the car alarm, everything wired into that cabling system. I lived with it for ten years til I sold the car, but it's one of the first things I ask about when researching a new car purchase.

It's one thing to make the center console non-standard, it's another to prevent the installation through warranty restrictions.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#56
post #2

I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here. They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key. Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been t…

It's Apple's store ergo their rules.

Subject to the rule of law, of course.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#57

Please entertain my crazy analogous thought processes for a minute... Imagine you were eating out at KFC one night, and using taste alone, you managed to work out their secret recipe. You then decided you wanted to get into the fried chicken business, but you didn't want the overhead of renting commercial space, or buying the kitchen/service equipment you need to run your own business. So you choose to walk into your…

Note: Just to make things clear, I support Apple's decision here. You're ignoring the fact that according to your analogy, our hypothetical KFC is already allowing people to make and sell different sorts of food with KFC branding from within their store (as long as you give them some of the proceeds and pay an annual fee, which was the case). In fact, a lot of people come to KFC precisely because they have an unmatch…

Congratulations on taking an initially-strained analogy to new heights of hypertension.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#58

Haha.. > "... Reverse engineering is, among other things, largely responsible for the PC revolution and the computing landscape we enjoy today. Should we stop providing users with products that work together simply because other vendors dislike competition?" We all know Apple loves reverse-engineering of its products, so I'm sure this kind of reasoning helps your case.

Reverse engineering for interoperability is protected by law, regardless of Apple's wishes. So it helps their case for legal purposes, just not in the app store court run by Apple.

The problem here is that Apple's wishes can be and are regularly applied in the app store regardless of whether they're actually good for the users(disallowing malware is good). This is a nasty side effect of the app store model and we'll be seeing more of such issues in the future with the Windows 8 Metro app store.

Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller

#59
post #44
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. This entire sentence applies to Rogue Amoeba. The Airplay protocol has been reverse engineered years ago: it's basically RTSP with an encrypted stream. Creating an AirPlay audio receiver is currently subject to a license, and requires a private key. This key has been extr…

Exactly. Despite Apple's schizophrenic application of their guidelines, Rogue Amoeba simply needs to take responsibility for everything you pointed out here. To continue to do otherwise is unprofessional and only hurts them in the end. Apple will continue to make billions. P.S. Who else had to Google clef-de-voûte? FYI: It basically means "most important component" or "key element." (via bab.la)

Why is it that in every thread discussing Apple's potential misbehavior, people bring up their extreme profitability as if that were somehow relevant to the question of right and wrong? Drives me nuts.
Post reply on HN