Ruling Lets Owners Alter iPhone Software

Wallstreet Journal ^ | 7/27/16 | BEN WORTHEN And AMY SCHATZ

[Mr. Blonde]

Either the iOS is worth the limitations put on its use by Apple or it isn’t. Or you can buy a similar product from other sellers, Android and WinMo phones (which were going to have the same restrictions btw) from a variety of hardware makers, Symbian, BB OS, etc. Or you can decide that the iPhone and its OS are what best suit your needs. Most purchases come with tradeoffs.

I think it is clear that Apple wants to offer the best experience possible to as many consumers as possible. If you want to tinker and load apps of questionable origin on your phone then their product probably isn’t for you.

Like Antirepublicrat I don’t really think making it a criminal offense is a good idea, but I’m a big believer in freedom of contract.

[antiRepublicrat]

I’m a big believer in freedom of contract.

I'm a big believer in freedom of negotiated contracts. I'm not so hot on adhesion boilerplate contracts that we constantly enter into without benefit of an attorney, when the other side has had an army of attorneys making sure it's protected in the contract. It would be practically impossible for we the consumer to be properly represented in daily life.

Apple has a copyright on the software. Apple should be able to use that copyright to punish people who redistribute copies of Apple's software to others without permission. Apple should NOT be able to leverage that copyright to gain more powers through a contracted license than copyright granted Apple in the first place. Apple made the First Sale, after that it should be yours to do with as you please -- except to make and distribute copies of course.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

What this does is simply to open the playing field for others to compete with the App store. You could always buy third-party apps for your Mac, and now you'll be able to do it for your iPhone as well. Apple, however, might resist pressure to take any responsibility for broken apps due to iOS upgrades. Apple has always said that they warranted the phone to work only with Apple-approved apps. It remains to be seen if Apple takes the low road and uses Microsoft's "it isn't done until Lotus won't run" strategy.

Perhaps the competition for the App store will induce Apple to do more for its developers and/or to be less restrictive in its approval process. But Jobs claims that developers make good money, and few apps don't get approved within a week.

competition would have to sell developers on better terms and marketing (unlikely, it would seem) and/or sell users on functionality which Apple won't promote/sell.

[dangerdoc]

“If you want to tinker and load apps of questionable origin on your phone then their product probably isn’t for you.”

I find that statement rather astounding. That is the type of gross stereotyping that Apple fans have resisted for years. It is one step from that to the type of comments that have recently been forbidden on this site.

It is also rather astounding that a group of conservatives would feel that tinkering with your own phone should be discouraged by the full power of the US federal government. Wow!

My feeling is, buy whatever hardware you want. If you want to fiddle with the software, go for it, you own it.

[Mr. Blonde]

One step from the type of comments that have been forbidden? I didn’t attack anyone. I simply said that if you find the contract limitations to be too onerous then the product in question probably isn’t for you. Just like I would never live in a neighborhood like my cousin who can’t put a basketball hoop up in his driveway. And I don’t even like basketball.

You must not have read the last sentence of that post as I said I did not think that the behavior should be criminalized, but that contractually I think Apple should be free to make that stipulation on the sale. I’m not sure where exactly that is out of mainstream conservative thought. Please elaborate for me.

I’m pretty sure you never own the software of any company. You own a license to use the software. Some companies have more limitations on what you can do with that license and others have less.

[dangerdoc]

It is an easy step from saying that people who want to tinker with their gear should not buy Apple to the stereotypical comments that Apple buyers aren’t cabable of tinkering to Apple buyers are stupid people that have to live in a walled garden and have their hands held.

I was also commenting on the several people that were disappointed that the government would not be enforcing the no tinkering rule.

I think Apple should be free to make the warrantee null and void if you modify the software but should not have more power over the buyer than that.

If I buy a book, somebody else holds the copyrights. But in my copy, I should be able to make notes, draw figures, even cut out pages and throw them away. I cannot take the results of those edits and release my own version of the book but I can do what I want with the book. Those same laws should apply to software.