"YOUR UNAUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTION OF PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RELATING TO PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE (INCLUDING THE POSTING OF SCREEN SHOTS)"
did you not understand?
Literacy should be a prerequisite for posting on the forums.
This is a good move by Apple and it is necessary to prevent OS-X from going down the path of Windows.
I don't understand this comment at all. I also fail to see how Appe is going to prove damages in court. _Anyone_ can get an ADC membership - I don't see what's so frickin' secret.
I don't understand this comment at all. I also fail to see how Appe is going to prove damages in court. _Anyone_ can get an ADC membership - I don't see what's so frickin' secret.
Anyone can buy a piece of software in a box for $100, that doesn't mean it's okay to pirate it, just because everyone can buy it.
I objected to the terms in the NDA in which Apple reserves the right to sue you if you post a screen shot. That's legal hardball language in what is essentially a contract of adhesion (which is legalspeak for "we are a billion-dollar corporation, you are one person, we are dictating terms, your only choice is Accept or Reject. Resistance is futile. We may never sue you, but we can, because we say so, and if we do, defending the suit will cost you so much money that we will bankrupt you if you do not bend over.").
Okay so far? The language is in the comment you quoted. In caps, as supplied by Apple.
CharlesS responds, sarcastically, that posting a Tiger alpha on Bittorrent is more serious than posting a screenshot. The reader's face is rubbed in the dripping sarcasm by use of the . In so doing, CharlesS manages to ignore completely the cited language in the NDA.
Still OK? Should I go slower?
My response to the sarcasm and willful ignorance is a matter of record, and quoted by you.
"PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE IS APPLE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. YOUR UNAUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTION OF PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RELATING TO PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE (INCLUDING THE POSTING OF SCREEN SHOTS) MAY SUBJECT YOU TO BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION OF YOUR ADC MEMBERSHIP."
So could anyone IM me the latest version of this? Sounds tasty.
There are several different ways to interpret what is going on here, but first I want to offer my support to the guys involved in this mess. I wish them the best of luck.
However, they did break the NDA they agreed to with Apple. It's plain and simple. Despite not having "signed" anything, the NDA is one of the prerequisite pieces of information you need to agree to prior to gaining access to Apple's Developer Connection. In fact, Apple reserves the right to terminate your membership at anytime if they suspect you've broken the NDA or any of the other terms and conditions associated with membership. That is there in black and white. Now, I cannot remember if I detected any veiled legal threats in the T&Cs when I registered, but I think the language is clear enough for what you can and cannot do.
Second to this, I pay $3,500 a year for my Premier-tier membership to ADC. When people like those named in this suit spread the file over BitTorrent, they impact my investment. Apple, in future, could decide to stop seeding pre-release software altogether. I know my $3,500 would never be refunded, so I lose the primary purpose of my investment. And so do others. It may be one thing to argue that distributing Tiger builds will help enhance the overall stability of the product, but truth be told, it doesn't. These individuals do not have access to RadarWeb or any other Apple bug-tracking application. Sure, they could end up developing on the platform, but the real purpose of these builds is two-fold: report bugs into Apple to fix them prior to GM, and also to put tools in the hands of developers. I highly doubt that those individuals who download seeds via BT are phoning or e-mailing back to their buddies saying "Mail doesn't do this right, can ya file a bug for me?" In fact, I doubt they do anything more than brag to their friends that they have the latest build.
Sure, putting Tiger into the hands of thousands of people can in some respects be considered a good thing. Especially if some developer out there who cannot yet afford to access ADC is putting together The Next Best Thing? for OS X. However, this harkens back to the two-fold programme purpose. If this developer creates a killer app, but hits a snag, say, in the form of a bug, he cannot report it. He also misses out on direct access to Apple's developer tools that are provided to paid ADC members. So he's back to the drawing board, and now has to hope that someone else reports the bug. For Apple's part, they can argue both sides of this, and will I'm sure.
I really do not think $500 a year is such an enormous price to pay for what you get with ADC. There are dozens of reasons that Apple does not release beta software to anyone. ADC is targeted specifically to developers who will make a difference. The price tag helps to weed out those that would just have Tiger to say they have Tiger. It's an investment, and the investment helps prove the worth of the programme to Apple. When I see torrents of ADC files made available, it's a slap in the face. It's saying to me that I just paid $3,500 so some brat can get his hands on Tiger - free. Sure, I could jump on the illegal piracy bandwagon, but I don't. I agree with many that software is overpriced and underdeveloped. But until open source catches up fully with commercial development, what other choice do I have?
As for the screenshots conundrum, I have to agree with Apple on this, too. I was guilty of it once, and was warned. I didn't think it was a big deal (considering nothing new and notable was revealed), but I nearly lost my ADC membership. I've come to know that even the smallest of things can make a big impact. Screenshots that do show features, such as those we see here on AppleInsider, can potentially be damaging, even from within the Apple community. Developers and corporations are always copying each others' ideas to try and rush to market first. Even though it is static, many screenshots tell the story of how something works. With Tiger under development, some other individual or business could come out with a rival product long before Apple does. Chances are people will flock to that new product because it hit market first.
So with that all said, I don't want to come down too hard on the chaps involved in this suit, but I have to say "What were you thinking?". The NDA is clear and you violated it tit-for-tat. You also moved to piss off other developers who have paid for the privilege to access these files. Your actions could now prevent us from having access to seeds in future, and it's almost as if you stole $3,500 from us. I think this is where Apple will centre their argument, as it makes most sense. The damages not only affect Apple, but the Apple developer community as a whole.
It never ceases to amaze me how such an 'innocent' action can have such widespread consequences. But it can. And does. Agreements are there for a reason, and Apple has recourse to take action at any time if it sees fit to.
Wow, jaronbrass, you sound like someone who has completely knuckled under to authority.
While I agree that it's never a good idea to provoke Apple in legal matters, saying it was okay for Apple to threaten you for posting screenshots or that it's like someone stole $3500 from you because they posted some unfinished software is ridiculous.
I can't swallow a vague comment like "bad things can happen" without coughing up a "like what?" Getting sued? Yeah, we know! But is Apple really in danger? No, it's merely a fit of pique from a secretive company run by a meglomaniac. Legally, but far from morally correct.
As for the developers, they should have had their membership revoked, but I don't think suing them is good for anyone, particularly a company that has always had a contentious relationship with its developers.
I don't understand this comment at all. I also fail to see how Appe is going to prove damages in court. _Anyone_ can get an ADC membership - I don't see what's so frickin' secret.
Easy. Bring in a bunch of experts who say the damage is $x million dollars.
Apple doesn't have to win any huge number. Just enough so that people out there think twice about putting torrents of their IP. People do this stuff freely because they think there is no repercussions. It's why people will download music all night but won't shop lift a CD out of a store. You worry about getting arrested at the store.
Finally, it really doesn't matter if anyone can get an ADC membership or what your personal opinion is on what is a secret. It's Apple's property, people agree not to release information about it, and they have the right to go after you if you break the contract.
It's like any contract. You don't get to break it just because you want to. The time for deciding you are not going to live up to a contract is before you agree to it.
Comments
Originally posted by Qo'noS
Uh, what part of
"YOUR UNAUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTION OF PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RELATING TO PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE (INCLUDING THE POSTING OF SCREEN SHOTS)"
did you not understand?
Literacy should be a prerequisite for posting on the forums.
Sheesh.
What part of 'sarcasm' don't you understand?
Originally posted by talksense101
This is a good move by Apple and it is necessary to prevent OS-X from going down the path of Windows.
I don't understand this comment at all. I also fail to see how Appe is going to prove damages in court. _Anyone_ can get an ADC membership - I don't see what's so frickin' secret.
Originally posted by the cool gut
I don't understand this comment at all. I also fail to see how Appe is going to prove damages in court. _Anyone_ can get an ADC membership - I don't see what's so frickin' secret.
Anyone can buy a piece of software in a box for $100, that doesn't mean it's okay to pirate it, just because everyone can buy it.
Originally posted by Placebo
What part of 'sarcasm' don't you understand?
Okay, back to square 1.
I objected to the terms in the NDA in which Apple reserves the right to sue you if you post a screen shot. That's legal hardball language in what is essentially a contract of adhesion (which is legalspeak for "we are a billion-dollar corporation, you are one person, we are dictating terms, your only choice is Accept or Reject. Resistance is futile. We may never sue you, but we can, because we say so, and if we do, defending the suit will cost you so much money that we will bankrupt you if you do not bend over.").
Okay so far? The language is in the comment you quoted. In caps, as supplied by Apple.
CharlesS responds, sarcastically, that posting a Tiger alpha on Bittorrent is more serious than posting a screenshot. The reader's face is rubbed in the dripping sarcasm by use of the
Still OK? Should I go slower?
My response to the sarcasm and willful ignorance is a matter of record, and quoted by you.
And you wonder if *I* don't understand sarcasm.
Right.
Originally posted by Placebo
Anyone can buy a piece of software in a box for $100, that doesn't mean it's okay to pirate it, just because everyone can buy it.
I can understand that, but that doesn't seem to be Apple's complaint.
"PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE IS APPLE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. YOUR UNAUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTION OF PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RELATING TO PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE (INCLUDING THE POSTING OF SCREEN SHOTS) MAY SUBJECT YOU TO BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION OF YOUR ADC MEMBERSHIP."
So could anyone IM me the latest version of this? Sounds tasty.
J/K!
Originally posted by Hobbes
So, what, did IT Inquirer get special permission from Apple to post their 15-or-so-part series on Tiger, full of screenshots....?
The Inquirer said that they never sign any NDA, so they cant get sued for breaking a acontract they have never signed
However, they did break the NDA they agreed to with Apple. It's plain and simple. Despite not having "signed" anything, the NDA is one of the prerequisite pieces of information you need to agree to prior to gaining access to Apple's Developer Connection. In fact, Apple reserves the right to terminate your membership at anytime if they suspect you've broken the NDA or any of the other terms and conditions associated with membership. That is there in black and white. Now, I cannot remember if I detected any veiled legal threats in the T&Cs when I registered, but I think the language is clear enough for what you can and cannot do.
Second to this, I pay $3,500 a year for my Premier-tier membership to ADC. When people like those named in this suit spread the file over BitTorrent, they impact my investment. Apple, in future, could decide to stop seeding pre-release software altogether. I know my $3,500 would never be refunded, so I lose the primary purpose of my investment. And so do others. It may be one thing to argue that distributing Tiger builds will help enhance the overall stability of the product, but truth be told, it doesn't. These individuals do not have access to RadarWeb or any other Apple bug-tracking application. Sure, they could end up developing on the platform, but the real purpose of these builds is two-fold: report bugs into Apple to fix them prior to GM, and also to put tools in the hands of developers. I highly doubt that those individuals who download seeds via BT are phoning or e-mailing back to their buddies saying "Mail doesn't do this right, can ya file a bug for me?" In fact, I doubt they do anything more than brag to their friends that they have the latest build.
Sure, putting Tiger into the hands of thousands of people can in some respects be considered a good thing. Especially if some developer out there who cannot yet afford to access ADC is putting together The Next Best Thing? for OS X. However, this harkens back to the two-fold programme purpose. If this developer creates a killer app, but hits a snag, say, in the form of a bug, he cannot report it. He also misses out on direct access to Apple's developer tools that are provided to paid ADC members. So he's back to the drawing board, and now has to hope that someone else reports the bug. For Apple's part, they can argue both sides of this, and will I'm sure.
I really do not think $500 a year is such an enormous price to pay for what you get with ADC. There are dozens of reasons that Apple does not release beta software to anyone. ADC is targeted specifically to developers who will make a difference. The price tag helps to weed out those that would just have Tiger to say they have Tiger. It's an investment, and the investment helps prove the worth of the programme to Apple. When I see torrents of ADC files made available, it's a slap in the face. It's saying to me that I just paid $3,500 so some brat can get his hands on Tiger - free. Sure, I could jump on the illegal piracy bandwagon, but I don't. I agree with many that software is overpriced and underdeveloped. But until open source catches up fully with commercial development, what other choice do I have?
As for the screenshots conundrum, I have to agree with Apple on this, too. I was guilty of it once, and was warned. I didn't think it was a big deal (considering nothing new and notable was revealed), but I nearly lost my ADC membership. I've come to know that even the smallest of things can make a big impact. Screenshots that do show features, such as those we see here on AppleInsider, can potentially be damaging, even from within the Apple community. Developers and corporations are always copying each others' ideas to try and rush to market first. Even though it is static, many screenshots tell the story of how something works. With Tiger under development, some other individual or business could come out with a rival product long before Apple does. Chances are people will flock to that new product because it hit market first.
So with that all said, I don't want to come down too hard on the chaps involved in this suit, but I have to say "What were you thinking?". The NDA is clear and you violated it tit-for-tat. You also moved to piss off other developers who have paid for the privilege to access these files. Your actions could now prevent us from having access to seeds in future, and it's almost as if you stole $3,500 from us. I think this is where Apple will centre their argument, as it makes most sense. The damages not only affect Apple, but the Apple developer community as a whole.
It never ceases to amaze me how such an 'innocent' action can have such widespread consequences. But it can. And does. Agreements are there for a reason, and Apple has recourse to take action at any time if it sees fit to.
While I agree that it's never a good idea to provoke Apple in legal matters, saying it was okay for Apple to threaten you for posting screenshots or that it's like someone stole $3500 from you because they posted some unfinished software is ridiculous.
I can't swallow a vague comment like "bad things can happen" without coughing up a "like what?" Getting sued? Yeah, we know! But is Apple really in danger? No, it's merely a fit of pique from a secretive company run by a meglomaniac. Legally, but far from morally correct.
As for the developers, they should have had their membership revoked, but I don't think suing them is good for anyone, particularly a company that has always had a contentious relationship with its developers.
Originally posted by the cool gut
I don't understand this comment at all. I also fail to see how Appe is going to prove damages in court. _Anyone_ can get an ADC membership - I don't see what's so frickin' secret.
Easy. Bring in a bunch of experts who say the damage is $x million dollars.
Apple doesn't have to win any huge number. Just enough so that people out there think twice about putting torrents of their IP. People do this stuff freely because they think there is no repercussions. It's why people will download music all night but won't shop lift a CD out of a store. You worry about getting arrested at the store.
Finally, it really doesn't matter if anyone can get an ADC membership or what your personal opinion is on what is a secret. It's Apple's property, people agree not to release information about it, and they have the right to go after you if you break the contract.
It's like any contract. You don't get to break it just because you want to. The time for deciding you are not going to live up to a contract is before you agree to it.
It really is that simple.