Live data from Hacker News

Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

arstechnica.com

1–10 of 208 posts

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#3
I work on DMCA exemption issues every few years due to my involvement with iOS jailbreaking and pushing back on companies like Apple, and the App Association would always be there seemingly trying to throw their all into preventing any DMCA exemptions or painting jailbreaking in a negative light... only, to me, the really interesting is always that their arguments are so low quality.

In one case they argued people primarily jailbreak over-the-top set top video streaming boxes so they can watch pirated content... but the website and software being linked to explicitly said that you didn't have to jailbreak your device to either install or use their app, as you could just sideload it on a normally set up device (as clearly any normal app can play video ;P). It is as if they are just hoping no one bothers to check their references.

(Another time--and I honestly am not 100% sure this one was the App Association, as I am just remembering this one as opposed to having it in my notes on this, but I am pretty sure I remember it being the same guy--showed up to the hearing with a giant stack of evidence against me/Cydia trying to show I was actively involved in piracy, and it essentially lost them their credibility as I was able to quickly show every single reference in the stack was to scammers using my trademarks for fake software and that I had even had a lawyer going around trying to shut them down. They either couldn't tell what was real and what wasn't, or hoped they could pull a fast one on the panel as maybe I wouldn't be there to set it all straight.)

In another case they (definitely the App Association) tried to argue that jailbreaking devices for purposes of repair (where the device is left back in a locked state for the user but the jailbreak let you replace some part or update some software or something) should not be allowed because repair manuals are copywritten, but that argument was essentially a non-sequitur as I don't think Kyle was using original manuals (much less stealing them ;P); and, even if he had somehow gotten a copy, the protection mechanism certainly wasn't protecting the manual.

Honestly, I am pretty sure I could make a better argument against me for them, and it felt like whomever all was funding them must be wasting their money without realizing it; for a while I had thought about doing a big "exposé" of them with the goal of convincing people who were funding them "y'all's money is going to waste on this" in the hope that maybe the companies who were members didn't even realize what the App Association was spending their time on... but I hadn't ever realized it was (according to Bloomberg here) mostly Apple anyway (lol).

FWIW, as far as I could ever tell, the App Association was essentially (in terms of who actually puts together and argued these opinions) just the one person: Morgan Reed (who is the President and is quoted in that article). I highly recommend looking around at the myriad areas of random politics and regulation that he is trying to manipulate, as they make sure to get involved--no matter how low effort--whenever there is an opportunity for public comment.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#4
I’m a longtime user and former employee and I can’t begin to summon any words to excuse this shitty look. Apple under Stelv Jobs may sometimes warrant a side-eyed glance. Apple under Tim Cook keeps coming up slimey af. I used to admire the man. I now think he’s slowly killing a company that I used to love.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#7

I’m a longtime user and former employee and I can’t begin to summon any words to excuse this shitty look. Apple under Stelv Jobs may sometimes warrant a side-eyed glance. Apple under Tim Cook keeps coming up slimey af. I used to admire the man. I now think he’s slowly killing a company that I used to love.

You think Steve Jobs would be morally above doing something like this? His personal history is full of stuff like this.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#8

I’m a longtime user and former employee and I can’t begin to summon any words to excuse this shitty look. Apple under Stelv Jobs may sometimes warrant a side-eyed glance. Apple under Tim Cook keeps coming up slimey af. I used to admire the man. I now think he’s slowly killing a company that I used to love.

Is there something about Steve that would indicate he wouldn't do this?

I don't know of anything in his history that would lead me to believe that, but I'm hardly his biographer or anything.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#9

I’m a longtime user and former employee and I can’t begin to summon any words to excuse this shitty look. Apple under Stelv Jobs may sometimes warrant a side-eyed glance. Apple under Tim Cook keeps coming up slimey af. I used to admire the man. I now think he’s slowly killing a company that I used to love.

You think Steve Jobs would be morally above doing something like this? His personal history is full of stuff like this.

This claim is well supported by the numerous emails from court cases that have become public recently.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#10
post #3

I work on DMCA exemption issues every few years due to my involvement with iOS jailbreaking and pushing back on companies like Apple, and the App Association would always be there seemingly trying to throw their all into preventing any DMCA exemptions or painting jailbreaking in a negative light... only, to me, the really interesting is always that their arguments are so low quality . In one case they argued people p…

Thank you for your hard work.

On the DMCA realm, I cannot wait for the Green v. DOJ case to bear fruit. If it succeeds, the DMCA anti-circumvention and anti-trafficking provisions will be ruled unconstitutional altogether.

Last we heard about the case was the oral argument for the appeal on 9/12, but it left a sour taste in my mouth.

The judges were most focused on whether Green had standing to bring the case (because the government said he would not be prosecuted for doing what he wanted to do) and on whether the appeal itself was adequate at the motion to dismiss stage.

They barely even discussed the issues of fair use and constitutional balance that the 1st amendment requires for copyright law to exist (established by SCOTUS in Eldred and Golan)

I don't know what to think with this new development, honestly.

Post reply on HN