Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
Apple’s complete abuse of Notarization is going to be the reason the EC comes down hard on them, and it’s wild how ignorant they are 
They just truly don’t give a flying fuck about indie developers
https://mastodon.social/@maczydeco/113527850662678715
@rileytestut They really are playing a game of chicken that they started, and I don’t think the EU is going to be first to flinch.
@caseyliss @rileytestut Why would Apple not reject vMac for all of these cited reasons? Force the EC to rule, in writing, that the DMA means Apple is not allowed to protect its trademarked named, trademarked logos, and the MacOS license agreement.
@gruber @caseyliss @rileytestut The DMA lays out exactly for which very few reasons Apple can reject. Its not interpretation whether this is one of the cleared reasons, its not. They just play with fire for no reason. Its like committing murder for the sake of finding out whether your home country will imprison you for it…
@Jann @caseyliss @rileytestut Comparing the rejection of an app from notarization to murder seems a bit strong. If the EC disagrees they’ll overrule and fine Apple as they deem appropriate. Or perhaps they’ll remove Apple’s notarization step from the process entirely. Let’s see. But it’s certainly Apple’s right to object and stand up for what they believe.
@gruber @caseyliss @rileytestut I solely meant the clarity of this not complying with law.
And I have to disagree heavily: at which law does someone’s right to object and just do something that is clearly illegal end? There is no guidance by lawmakers “these are the laws where you can test us a little 
“ 
@gruber @Jann @caseyliss that is not how the law works John, you do not have a right to defy laws you disagree with — but you’re right that that is how people like Elon, Trump, and Tim Cook think the law works though
@rileytestut @gruber @Jann @caseyliss Laws only work when they’re enforced.
@rileytestut @gruber @Jann @caseyliss I’d say it can be how the “law” works when it’s a nebulous new set of rules with no concrete guidelines.
@Strwpok this must be your first time dealing with laws about technology 
@rileytestut Well I’ve worked in IT for decades and that’s included working at companies being sued for all kinds of frivolous things.
@rileytestut @gruber @Jann @caseyliss when the law protects megacorps: “it’s the law after all!”
When the law protects individuals/small groups: “megacorps have the right to object!”
@rileytestut @gruber @Jann @caseyliss « you’re right that that is how people like Elon, Trump, and Tim Cook think the law works though »
And a bunch of American governors who have declared they'll defy the Trump administration's presumed efforts to enforce immigration laws.
@bgeerdes @rileytestut @gruber @Jann that’s a false equivalence. Governors are government. Corporations/CEOs are not. Despite what Elon in particular thinks.
@caseyliss @rileytestut @gruber @Jann I would think governors would be *more* obligated to obey laws. 
But seriously, we don't necessarily a "right" to disobey laws we disagree with but sometimes we have an *obligation* to challenge laws we find illegitimate. (Civil disobedience, anyone?)
Not that I think Apple and the EC rise to this level. But the EC isn't passing laws, is it? Regardless, Apple can play this game however they want. Per Riley and Casey, it probably won't end well for them.
@rileytestut @Jann @caseyliss Riley that's not true at all. I wouldn't call it a "right" but everyone, from individuals to the decision makers at large multinational corporations, has free will. If you're found to violate the law, you suffer the consequences. But it's a choice.
@gruber @rileytestut @Jann @caseyliss In Riley’s defense, you *did* call it a right a couple of posts back. This is a better way to put it.
@drdrang @gruber @rileytestut @Jann @caseyliss The post in question.
