If they aren't using any code belonging to Apple why should Bluestacks be sued by Apple? .
Perhaps copyright violation. Copyright includes the right to distribute and broadcast content. Developers sign over these rights re: the iOS versions when they submit to the store. What Bluestacks is doing could be sign as distributing without the right to do so. Thus law suit
And it's highly unlikely that they could do this without using any code from Apple. No matter what they claim
I'm not a developer, and I don't write any apps, but aren't many iOS apps written using parts of Apple's code, such as accessing various API's? And aren't the apps made with Apple's software?
Maybe Apple can revise their developer contracts and make it clear that any iOS developer that offers their app for this emulation console is eligible to be banned for life from the Apple appstore. Where would you rather have your app? On the appstore, selling to hundreds of millions of iOS users, or on some niche emulation console, made by an unknown company, which will only sell in limited quantities, and to a small amount of users.
I think you guys are getting tripped up here by a bit of misinformation.
Take the word "iOS" out of the article.
Then it becomes:
Developer makes game platform that will run android games and game written in objective-C.
This isn't so radical is it? Now it's just developers using XCode to make games for a game platform. There's no reason to expect a lawsuit here.
Apple owns iOS. This machine which "has no apple code" is obviously not running iOS.
Someone making a game console that supports the objective-c runtime, and makes porting iOS apps to it relatively easy (especially games which don't use much of the iOS UI Anyway, and usually have their own UI) is no big deal.
I believe that APIs themselves are not copyrightable, and at any rate, the Foundation and Appkit APIs have been emulated by GNUSTEP for about 2 decades now, so if Apple was going to sue, they already would have.
So, there's not much stopping someone from making a cocoa-like, objective-c runtime gaming console that makes it easy for iOS developers to port their games.
I think Apple probably won't even care. Can't sweat the small stuff.
This is assuming the article is true and they aren't using any of Apple's software.
FFS, you miss my point entirely with your spin. It's not about the freedom of devs to have their apps/games run on multiple platforms, it's about whether it's legal for a company to leech off the work done by another company by emulating the technology they've created.
FWIW, I do create apps for iOS (as well as other platforms), so I'm well aware of the effort it takes to port apps. I'm wholly supportive of anything which makes that easier. I'm just not supportive of doing it at the expense of others because I also know how difficult it is to build something from scratch.
Perhaps copyright violation. Copyright includes the right to distribute and broadcast content. Developers sign over these rights re: the iOS versions when they submit to the store.
This is not in the least bit true. While the developer agreement is under NDA and I won't go into details, it is not as you described. It gives Apple a license to *distribute* the software via the appstore. The developers retain all copyrights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Maybe Apple can revise their developer contracts and make it clear that any iOS developer that offers their app for this emulation console is eligible to be banned for life from the Apple appstore.
Think about the implications of what you're proposing here. If Apple were going to do that, they'd say you can't port your app to android. There are many big name apps on both platforms. People wouldn't like that at all, and Apple would look kinda silly if they did that. Emulating Apple's APIs might be a legal grey area but it's not a slam dunk. There's nothing that stops you from using Apple's tools -- Xcode, etc-- to make software for other platforms.
Emulating how iOS works would constitute tapping in my books. It certainly saves a lot of time and money over creating a platform from scratch.
If some of you will do a little research outside of AI you may quickly discover you don't understand how the process works. If Apple were to sue I'll be surprised.
A quick link that explains what's going on a whole lot better is over at 9to5. Just replace the xxx with mac after the 5 in the link due to a silly AI grudge.
Emulating how iOS works would constitute tapping in my books. It certainly saves a lot of time and money over creating a platform from scratch.
I think there's not enough detail to really debate this issue here. You and your opponent are both projecting your own guesses onto what the announcement means and what they're doing and then reaching different conclusions.
If they are copying that Apple UI and recreating iOS much the way samsung did, then they likely run afoul of apple patents.
If they're just providing a game console with an Objective-C and FoundationKit based API, then one would be hard pressed to say that they're ripping Apple off (especially since Objective-C is a language whose compilers are open source, Apple gives away Xcode for free with no restrictions on how you use it, and Apple has released foundationkit as open source.)
Do I really have to post the dancing image again? Stop playing stupid.
Because you have no clue. As long as the app isn't pirated or somehow obtained by circumventing the app store and Apple's revenue then what's the problem?
I'm no expert, but I'm fairly sure that you can't legally virtualise an OS without the permission of the OS owners. It's not about who owns the code underneath the virtualisation, it's about being allowed to run the OS in that way at all.
I wouldn't worry about it anyway as the device seems kinda crappy and it's aimed at a very tiny segment of the market (people who like iOS and the games but are somehow still needing a physical controller instead of using the on-screen controls). In other words, mostly old-school gamers, people who rip off games and use emulators etc. This is also a shrinking market segment, so even if it gets off the ground it won't last long.
I suspect you are correct. I still have a an older version of VMWare Fusion somewhere that accidentally allowed any OS X version to run, not just OS X Server. VMWare fixed it and apologized in a day or two and explained Apple did not allow this.
Maybe in your books, but I'm not sure if method signatures can be patented...
We'll have to see how they've done it. If they've actually created an Objective-C runtime and implemented API compatibility with iOS (similar to what Cocotron provides for Windows and Linux), then they'll have a case. However, if they've just created a binary emulator, then, at very least, they'll be nailed with a number of iOS patent violations for duplicating functionality.
We'll have to see how they've done it. If they've actually created an Objective-C runtime and implemented API compatibility with iOS (similar to what Cocotron provides for Windows and Linux), then they'll have a case. However, if they've just created a binary emulator, then, at very least, they'll be nailed with a number of iOS patent violations.
You can't create something which duplicates the patented functionality of something else (via emulation or otherwise).
No doubt. But if there's no legal risk they'll probably not comply.
Is it worth fighting Apple in court with the billions it has? Sometimes lawsuits are used to drain the resources of the defendant to make them comply or settle. I'm not saying Apple would do this.
We'll have to see how they've done it. If they've actually created an Objective-C runtime and implemented API compatibility with iOS (similar to what Cocotron provides for Windows and Linux), then they'll have a case. However, if they've just created a binary emulator, then, at very least, they'll be nailed with a number of iOS patent violations for duplicating functionality.
"Sharma said that the company virtualizes the platforms on the applications programming interface level. If an app makes a call to a menu item within Apple’s platform, then it goes to an iOS library in order to draw the appropriate menu. Bluestacks intercepts the call and draws the menu instead.
Comments
Perhaps copyright violation. Copyright includes the right to distribute and broadcast content. Developers sign over these rights re: the iOS versions when they submit to the store. What Bluestacks is doing could be sign as distributing without the right to do so. Thus law suit
And it's highly unlikely that they could do this without using any code from Apple. No matter what they claim
I'm not a developer, and I don't write any apps, but aren't many iOS apps written using parts of Apple's code, such as accessing various API's? And aren't the apps made with Apple's software?
Maybe Apple can revise their developer contracts and make it clear that any iOS developer that offers their app for this emulation console is eligible to be banned for life from the Apple appstore. Where would you rather have your app? On the appstore, selling to hundreds of millions of iOS users, or on some niche emulation console, made by an unknown company, which will only sell in limited quantities, and to a small amount of users.
I think you guys are getting tripped up here by a bit of misinformation.
Take the word "iOS" out of the article.
Then it becomes:
Developer makes game platform that will run android games and game written in objective-C.
This isn't so radical is it? Now it's just developers using XCode to make games for a game platform. There's no reason to expect a lawsuit here.
Apple owns iOS. This machine which "has no apple code" is obviously not running iOS.
Someone making a game console that supports the objective-c runtime, and makes porting iOS apps to it relatively easy (especially games which don't use much of the iOS UI Anyway, and usually have their own UI) is no big deal.
I believe that APIs themselves are not copyrightable, and at any rate, the Foundation and Appkit APIs have been emulated by GNUSTEP for about 2 decades now, so if Apple was going to sue, they already would have.
So, there's not much stopping someone from making a cocoa-like, objective-c runtime gaming console that makes it easy for iOS developers to port their games.
I think Apple probably won't even care. Can't sweat the small stuff.
This is assuming the article is true and they aren't using any of Apple's software.
What do you mean "at the expense of others"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Doesn't seem like they're tapping into anything Apple created.
Emulating how iOS works would constitute tapping in my books. It certainly saves a lot of time and money over creating a platform from scratch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
What do you mean "at the expense of others"?
The general lack of understanding this concept is exactly why so few tech companies actually bother innovating these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
Emulating how iOS works would constitute tapping in my books. It certainly saves a lot of time and money over creating a platform from scratch.
Maybe in your books, but I'm not sure if method signatures can be patented...
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Perhaps copyright violation. Copyright includes the right to distribute and broadcast content. Developers sign over these rights re: the iOS versions when they submit to the store.
This is not in the least bit true. While the developer agreement is under NDA and I won't go into details, it is not as you described. It gives Apple a license to *distribute* the software via the appstore. The developers retain all copyrights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Maybe Apple can revise their developer contracts and make it clear that any iOS developer that offers their app for this emulation console is eligible to be banned for life from the Apple appstore.
Think about the implications of what you're proposing here. If Apple were going to do that, they'd say you can't port your app to android. There are many big name apps on both platforms. People wouldn't like that at all, and Apple would look kinda silly if they did that. Emulating Apple's APIs might be a legal grey area but it's not a slam dunk. There's nothing that stops you from using Apple's tools -- Xcode, etc-- to make software for other platforms.
How do you get the iOS applications onto the console exactly..?
If some of you will do a little research outside of AI you may quickly discover you don't understand how the process works. If Apple were to sue I'll be surprised.
A quick link that explains what's going on a whole lot better is over at 9to5. Just replace the xxx with mac after the 5 in the link due to a silly AI grudge.
http://9to5xxx.com/2013/06/07/android-game-console-gamepop-does-the-unthinkable-brings-ios-games-to-tv-with-looking-glass/
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
Emulating how iOS works would constitute tapping in my books. It certainly saves a lot of time and money over creating a platform from scratch.
I think there's not enough detail to really debate this issue here. You and your opponent are both projecting your own guesses onto what the announcement means and what they're doing and then reaching different conclusions.
If they are copying that Apple UI and recreating iOS much the way samsung did, then they likely run afoul of apple patents.
If they're just providing a game console with an Objective-C and FoundationKit based API, then one would be hard pressed to say that they're ripping Apple off (especially since Objective-C is a language whose compilers are open source, Apple gives away Xcode for free with no restrictions on how you use it, and Apple has released foundationkit as open source.)
Because you have no clue. As long as the app isn't pirated or somehow obtained by circumventing the app store and Apple's revenue then what's the problem?
I suspect you are correct. I still have a an older version of VMWare Fusion somewhere that accidentally allowed any OS X version to run, not just OS X Server. VMWare fixed it and apologized in a day or two and explained Apple did not allow this.
No doubt. But if there's no legal risk they'll probably not comply.
So rather than tossing out riddles explain it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnbiasedDave
Maybe in your books, but I'm not sure if method signatures can be patented...
We'll have to see how they've done it. If they've actually created an Objective-C runtime and implemented API compatibility with iOS (similar to what Cocotron provides for Windows and Linux), then they'll have a case. However, if they've just created a binary emulator, then, at very least, they'll be nailed with a number of iOS patent violations for duplicating functionality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
So rather than tossing out riddles explain it.
Here you go...
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
We'll have to see how they've done it. If they've actually created an Objective-C runtime and implemented API compatibility with iOS (similar to what Cocotron provides for Windows and Linux), then they'll have a case. However, if they've just created a binary emulator, then, at very least, they'll be nailed with a number of iOS patent violations.
You can't create something which duplicates the patented functionality of something else (via emulation or otherwise).
Is it worth fighting Apple in court with the billions it has? Sometimes lawsuits are used to drain the resources of the defendant to make them comply or settle. I'm not saying Apple would do this.
"Sharma said that the company virtualizes the platforms on the applications programming interface level. If an app makes a call to a menu item within Apple’s platform, then it goes to an iOS library in order to draw the appropriate menu. Bluestacks intercepts the call and draws the menu instead.
This is possible, Sharma, said because the basic functions on iOS and Android have moved closer together. Both use the Open GL graphics protocol and both ARM-based processors."
http://venturebeat.com/2013/06/07/finally-finally-finally-bluestacks-will-let-you-play-apple-iphone-games-on-your-big-screen-tv/