Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#401

Post by _jal » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 8:12 PM UTC

dane-pgp wrote: post #169

_jal wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a mob or a single unaccountable low-level account reviewer may declare someone an "out law" I take it you prefer that power to be reserved for those with high status?

That's a false dichotomy, but I'll offer this for an answer: "Yes, it should be reserved for those with high status, and high status should be reserved for people who are chosen by and accountable to the people over whom they have power."

See, I strongly disagree. I believe that, whatever my status, I have the right to associate with whomever I please. Which means I can shun whomever I please. I can also talk with whomever I please, including about people I'm avoiding.

So you can have a 1st Amendment, or you can have your Designated Excommunicators, but you can't have both.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#402

Post by ungamedplayer » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:36 AM UTC

jstummbillig wrote: post #174

Diggsey wrote: post #17

IMO it wouldn't matter if they'd used the word "Rent" or "Licence" instead: it would still be unreasonable. Account termination is entirely at Apple's discretion, meaning the term of your "rental" is not known when you actually pay for the content. For most people the term will be "forever", so that is the expectation. It's simple: if apple want to terminate your account, they need to refund you for any content you l…

> It's simple: if apple want to terminate your account, they need to refund you for any content you lose access to as a result of that termination. Well, not quite that simple, since a lot of people would de facto also lose access to their hardware and all work which relies on this software-hardware-combination.

Sounds simple to me. Would suck to be apple though.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#403

Post by Dracophoenix » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 3:27 PM UTC

jdbernard wrote: post #397

Dracophoenix wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with removing DMCA protections for circumventing DRM instead of outlawing or creating legislative disincentives for DRM outright (that would be a can of worms). However, it still doesn't sound like a full solution. Registration of the sort you propose, if done correctly, could work for e-books or movies. But what does that kind of registration look like for server- or cloud-based content (e.g. MMOs, subscript…

I can think of a number of possible solutions (update the DRM-free copy the LoC has as you push patches out, for example). I think more interesting is the broader principle of withholding legal protection unless the company proactively provides a solution. Trying to mandate behavior by companies seems difficult to achieve politically, and leaves the government with the responsibility of enforcement. The enforcement/c…

The moment legal protection is withheld on disagreeable terms is the moment that copyrights become a less popular vehicle for defending a holder's rights. Despite what you might you might think, that's not a good thing. Copyrights are positive incentives for disclosure (but not necessarily for continued availability) of information. It is in the interest of a government for one to publicly disclose information on the sciences and the useful arts. Preemptively neutering a holder's defense to his copyright doesn't disincentives DRM. On the contrary, it encourages stronger, broader trade secret protections as well as non-disclosure and exclusion agreements with regards to both the content and DRM. That would be a blow to libraries just as much as it would archival sites.