This is about in-app purchases, not the app itself. If you're to the point where you want to spend money inside the app, you're already past the point of deciding whether you want it.
What, do the pirates want trials on in-app purchases now?
You're missing the point entirely, focusing instead on how to destroy the naughty people. People are naughty. That includes you and me too, even though you and I aren't naughty in the same manner as thus Russian youngster. Let's try to make something good come from this rather than beat a dead horse.
You're missing the point entirely, focusing instead on how to destroy the naughty people. Let's try to make something good come from this rather than beat a dead horse.
The good is the hole that is being patched. He discovered it, so he should be commended. He exploited it, so he should be vilified. Whether the damage evens out to indifference is left to be seen, but he certainly doesn't deserve applause for his behavior.
The good is the hole that is being patched. He discovered it, so he should be commended. He exploited it, so he should be vilified. Whether the damage evens out to indifference is left to be seen, but he certainly doesn't deserve applause for his behavior.
If you read through my original post again you will see that I plainly said he should be "condemned" just like Napster was to be condemned. The point that continues to be missed is the fact that not every situation should be viewed in a 100% negative light. We human beings all too often do that, without trying to see what positive and constructive things could come of the bad. My statement in no way encourages bad deeds. I am merely being an optimist versus a pessimist. I in no way seek to encourage theft or any criminal activity, as evidenced by what I have written already.
People there are basically divided in the same way as folks in this forum, with no one talking about the real problem or long-term solution. Everyone seems to be praising piracy or condemning it, or going off-topic on things like taxes.
There's nothing really to praise about the act of piracy itself. It's theft.
It's the debate over the actions of the person who figured out the loophole/flaw in the system and exposed it which is much more interesting. Which is where I got on the topic of comparing it to finding and exploiting loopholes in the taxation system for one's own gain. Just to remove a bit of the black and white thinking in regard to this particular scenario and see other areas where exploiting loopholes for personal gain might be considered "acceptable".
In this case, the motive he gave was rather uninteresting: he felt he was ripped off and wanted to get retribution/payback. An eye for an eye -- the oldest story in history.
As far as in-app purchases go -- I do agree that, in legitimate cases where one was mislead about the product or didn't get what was advertised, there should be a means to get a refund or credit. That's not the case here though.
As far as in-app purchases go -- I do agree that, in legitimate cases where one was mislead about the product or didn't get what was advertised, there should be a means to get a refund or credit. That's not the case here though.
Windows phone did offer a time limited try "before you buy", TBH I don't know if they have relaxed the rules now though
Even if you are downloading a mp3 version of a song that you previuosly purchased in another form....
How do you know the person you're downloading it from legally purchased it? Or that it's the exact version of the song (or even the same song period) which you previously purchased?
In the United Kingdom, making a private copy of copyrighted media without the copyright owner's consent is currently illegal,.
So if I own a LP and decide I want to store it on my computer, either "acquiring" a copy from the internet or ripping it from the vinyl will result in me breaking the law.
It was also illegal to store free to air tv programmes for more than a week or two (until relatively recently).
With With production/record companies imposing such draconion rules upon us I am not surprised that the general public has so much contempt for them and is so willing to pirate songs etc.
Assuming that apple come up with a fix for the exploit, can they force an OTA upgrade. If not, then surely anyone taking advantage of free apps will decline any OTA updates for as long as possible? Additionally is there anyway that apple can "undo" the process?
Presumably the fix will be included in newer devices as they appear. What happens atm is that when restoring to a new device you will still need to "re-purchase" (but aren't charged) the in-app purchase within each individual app.
Presumably the fix will be included in newer devices as they appear. What happens atm is that when restoring to a new device you will still need to "re-purchase" (but aren't charged) the in-app purchase within each individual app.
There's nothing really to praise about the act of piracy itself. It's theft.
Without a doubt, piracy is theft. Indeed, it is essentially the same kind of serious high-Dollar theft as the Blue Boxes that Jobs and Woz built (without which, Jobs strongly contended there would be no Apple today):
(We treat that past with a flippant attitude because (a) it happened so long ago and is irrelevant today, and (b) because it was done by Steve Jobs, someone who ultimately became that rich, famous, genius father of many products we so greatly love today. Nevertheless, such theft is a crime, whether it be done by Steven P. Jobs or by a Russian hacker.)
Again, the point is that we all too often are quick to cast the first stone of condemnation at these hackers and human renegades, and we jump to point out in detail how "illegal" such-and-such is (almost as if we are trying to pass the BAR exam), without considering how to view a situation in a more optimistic light.
Arguably, one should try to convince Apple to make improvements to its App store (for both buyers and developers alike) without resorting to illegalities. But it serves no constructive purpose to focus all our energies on bashing this russian fellow, refusing to consider any positive implications. It is possible to play the optimist without directly supporting piracy or illegal activities. I certainly don't ever want to see OS X or iOS plagued by viruses or hacker-criminals as is the case with Windows. But I do hope to see Apple greatly enhance the App Store experience. Try-before-you-buy for consumers and paid App Upgrades for developers is a major part of that.
Without a doubt, piracy is theft. Indeed, it is essentially the same kind of serious high-Dollar theft as the Blue Boxes that Jobs and Woz built (without which, Jobs strongly contended there would be no Apple today)
Ah, but there is a big difference between the act of inventing/creating a piece of hardware or software which has the potential be used for theft, and simply using it for that purpose.
The former requires a creative mind and/or hard work (assuming you aren't just knocking it off from someone else). The latter requires nothing but the desire for a free ride. Two very different paths -- one teaches a man to fish, the other simply gives a man a fish. In the long run, you hope the man who learns to fish does it in areas where it's legal to do so (as Jobs and Woz did when they moved from blue boxes to personal computers).
So if I own a LP and decide I want to store it on my computer, either "acquiring" a copy from the internet or ripping it from the vinyl will result in me breaking the law.
There's also another interesting gray area (especially with LPs): what if the song is out of print and the either the copyright holder is dead or the record label is defunct? I realize that there are provisions for transference of copyright, but if it's not legally possible to purchase the song, what then?
I realize that with rare music finding services like GEMM, it's easier than ever nowadays to find someone selling a used copy, but there are still sometimes cases where you just can't find it anywhere.
Ah, but there is a big difference between the act of inventing/creating a piece of hardware or software which has the potential be used for theft, and simply using it for that purpose.
Under that logic, we should swiftly and promptly release from jail all thieves who have Jobsian style creative minds.
Theft is a crime no matter how some try to spin it. Therefore if one tries to make excuses for Jobs and Woz, one has an equal moral obligation to make a similar defense for this Russian hacker, simply because an arrestible offense is an arrestible offense.
The point is that we Apple lovers would do well to stop selectively casting that first stone. If you want to stone a thief, then consistently stone them all. We must not allow bribe-taking (e.g., allow love of a computer) to stop justice, otherwise we ourselves would then be guilty of a crime.
Under that logic, we should swiftly and promptly release from jail all thieves who have Jobsian style creative minds.
Theft is a crime no matter how some try to spin it. Therefore if one tries to make excuses for Jobs and Woz, one has an equal moral obligation to make a similar defense for this Russian hacker, simply because an arrestible offense is an arrestible offense.
The point is that we Apple lovers would do well to stop selectively casting that first stone. If you want to stone a thief, then consistently stone them all. We must not allow bribe-taking (e.g., allow love of a computer) to stop justice, otherwise we ourselves would then be guilty of a crime.
But creating something which can be used for theft isn't the same as actually committing the act of theft, now is it? AFAIK, it's not illegal to create and sell blue boxes -- only the act of using them to obtain free phone calls is illegal. Obviously they serve no other purpose, though one could make the faint argument that they could be educational to someone who wants to learn about how the telephone system works.
Now, if Jobs and Woz were caught using their blue boxes (which, I'm sure they did, but I doubt that's provable), then they should have faced the same punishment as anyone else.
Comments
The good is the hole that is being patched. He discovered it, so he should be commended. He exploited it, so he should be vilified. Whether the damage evens out to indifference is left to be seen, but he certainly doesn't deserve applause for his behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW
People there are basically divided in the same way as folks in this forum, with no one talking about the real problem or long-term solution. Everyone seems to be praising piracy or condemning it, or going off-topic on things like taxes.
There's nothing really to praise about the act of piracy itself. It's theft.
It's the debate over the actions of the person who figured out the loophole/flaw in the system and exposed it which is much more interesting. Which is where I got on the topic of comparing it to finding and exploiting loopholes in the taxation system for one's own gain. Just to remove a bit of the black and white thinking in regard to this particular scenario and see other areas where exploiting loopholes for personal gain might be considered "acceptable".
In this case, the motive he gave was rather uninteresting: he felt he was ripped off and wanted to get retribution/payback. An eye for an eye -- the oldest story in history.
As far as in-app purchases go -- I do agree that, in legitimate cases where one was mislead about the product or didn't get what was advertised, there should be a means to get a refund or credit. That's not the case here though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
As far as in-app purchases go -- I do agree that, in legitimate cases where one was mislead about the product or didn't get what was advertised, there should be a means to get a refund or credit. That's not the case here though.
Windows phone did offer a time limited try "before you buy", TBH I don't know if they have relaxed the rules now though
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
There's nothing really to praise about the act of piracy itself. It's theft.
Even if you are downloading a mp3 version of a song that you previuosly purchased in another form....
But that's not piracy then, so why bring that up?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover
Even if you are downloading a mp3 version of a song that you previuosly purchased in another form....
How do you know the person you're downloading it from legally purchased it? Or that it's the exact version of the song (or even the same song period) which you previously purchased?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
But that's not piracy then, so why bring that up?
Errr... because where I live it is illegal.
In the United Kingdom, making a private copy of copyrighted media without the copyright owner's consent is currently illegal,.
So if I own a LP and decide I want to store it on my computer, either "acquiring" a copy from the internet or ripping it from the vinyl will result in me breaking the law.
It was also illegal to store free to air tv programmes for more than a week or two (until relatively recently).
With With production/record companies imposing such draconion rules upon us I am not surprised that the general public has so much contempt for them and is so willing to pirate songs etc.
In the United Kingdom, making a private copy of copyrighted media without the copyright owner's consent is currently illegal,.[/QUOTE]
Ah, sorry; figured US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover
Errr... because where I live it is illegal.
In the United Kingdom, making a private copy of copyrighted media without the copyright owner's consent is currently illegal,.
Ah, sorry; figured US.
Apologies accept. BTW most people in the uk don't even know that they are breaking the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover
Assuming that apple come up with a fix for the exploit, can they force an OTA upgrade. If not, then surely anyone taking advantage of free apps will decline any OTA updates for as long as possible? Additionally is there anyway that apple can "undo" the process?
Presumably the fix will be included in newer devices as they appear. What happens atm is that when restoring to a new device you will still need to "re-purchase" (but aren't charged) the in-app purchase within each individual app.
Quote:
Originally Posted by longfang
Presumably the fix will be included in newer devices as they appear. What happens atm is that when restoring to a new device you will still need to "re-purchase" (but aren't charged) the in-app purchase within each individual app.
thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
There's nothing really to praise about the act of piracy itself. It's theft.
Without a doubt, piracy is theft. Indeed, it is essentially the same kind of serious high-Dollar theft as the Blue Boxes that Jobs and Woz built (without which, Jobs strongly contended there would be no Apple today):
(We treat that past with a flippant attitude because (a) it happened so long ago and is irrelevant today, and (b) because it was done by Steve Jobs, someone who ultimately became that rich, famous, genius father of many products we so greatly love today. Nevertheless, such theft is a crime, whether it be done by Steven P. Jobs or by a Russian hacker.)
Again, the point is that we all too often are quick to cast the first stone of condemnation at these hackers and human renegades, and we jump to point out in detail how "illegal" such-and-such is (almost as if we are trying to pass the BAR exam), without considering how to view a situation in a more optimistic light.
Arguably, one should try to convince Apple to make improvements to its App store (for both buyers and developers alike) without resorting to illegalities. But it serves no constructive purpose to focus all our energies on bashing this russian fellow, refusing to consider any positive implications. It is possible to play the optimist without directly supporting piracy or illegal activities. I certainly don't ever want to see OS X or iOS plagued by viruses or hacker-criminals as is the case with Windows. But I do hope to see Apple greatly enhance the App Store experience. Try-before-you-buy for consumers and paid App Upgrades for developers is a major part of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW
Without a doubt, piracy is theft. Indeed, it is essentially the same kind of serious high-Dollar theft as the Blue Boxes that Jobs and Woz built (without which, Jobs strongly contended there would be no Apple today)
Ah, but there is a big difference between the act of inventing/creating a piece of hardware or software which has the potential be used for theft, and simply using it for that purpose.
The former requires a creative mind and/or hard work (assuming you aren't just knocking it off from someone else). The latter requires nothing but the desire for a free ride. Two very different paths -- one teaches a man to fish, the other simply gives a man a fish. In the long run, you hope the man who learns to fish does it in areas where it's legal to do so (as Jobs and Woz did when they moved from blue boxes to personal computers).
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover
So if I own a LP and decide I want to store it on my computer, either "acquiring" a copy from the internet or ripping it from the vinyl will result in me breaking the law.
There's also another interesting gray area (especially with LPs): what if the song is out of print and the either the copyright holder is dead or the record label is defunct? I realize that there are provisions for transference of copyright, but if it's not legally possible to purchase the song, what then?
I realize that with rare music finding services like GEMM, it's easier than ever nowadays to find someone selling a used copy, but there are still sometimes cases where you just can't find it anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Not clear which side you are on here ...
I almost fell over laughing! haha.
Still, that is perspective justice
Under that logic, we should swiftly and promptly release from jail all thieves who have Jobsian style creative minds.
Theft is a crime no matter how some try to spin it. Therefore if one tries to make excuses for Jobs and Woz, one has an equal moral obligation to make a similar defense for this Russian hacker, simply because an arrestible offense is an arrestible offense.
The point is that we Apple lovers would do well to stop selectively casting that first stone. If you want to stone a thief, then consistently stone them all. We must not allow bribe-taking (e.g., allow love of a computer) to stop justice, otherwise we ourselves would then be guilty of a crime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW
Under that logic, we should swiftly and promptly release from jail all thieves who have Jobsian style creative minds.
Theft is a crime no matter how some try to spin it. Therefore if one tries to make excuses for Jobs and Woz, one has an equal moral obligation to make a similar defense for this Russian hacker, simply because an arrestible offense is an arrestible offense.
The point is that we Apple lovers would do well to stop selectively casting that first stone. If you want to stone a thief, then consistently stone them all. We must not allow bribe-taking (e.g., allow love of a computer) to stop justice, otherwise we ourselves would then be guilty of a crime.
But creating something which can be used for theft isn't the same as actually committing the act of theft, now is it? AFAIK, it's not illegal to create and sell blue boxes -- only the act of using them to obtain free phone calls is illegal. Obviously they serve no other purpose, though one could make the faint argument that they could be educational to someone who wants to learn about how the telephone system works.
Now, if Jobs and Woz were caught using their blue boxes (which, I'm sure they did, but I doubt that's provable), then they should have faced the same punishment as anyone else.