Apple Asks Supreme Court to Review App Store Contempt Ruling

[Kr0019]

No. That’s a spurious argument.

A better analogy would be to imagine that all medicinal professionals (i.e, app developers ) have to work on contract for a singel comp oration that owns all the hospitals.

The reply to the argument that “you can just go to a different hospital chain” doesn’t work, as, in this case, it it the equivalent of saying, “we’ll, just move to another country”, as you are tellin people to migrate from one environment / ecosystem to another.

Extending the analogy, to look at pharmaceutical patents, these patents have a limited lifespan, so that, after R&D costs have been recouped (which they need to be - development of medicines and treatments cost money), the medicine and treatment is no longer manufactured and distributed by a single company.

There is no debate on whether Apple holds a monopoly on app distribution. That’s simply a fact. That alternative App Store have been allowed in certain countries or regions has had little effect on that monopoly (nad now it’s worth check what the world “monopoly” is legally defined as), but it does give an option for alternatives.

Tell us how Apple have a monopoly on the Google play store? Or Playstation, Nintendo, Microsoft, etc etc etc. I think your understanding of what the meaning of the word monopoly really means is sadly lacking.

The Veruca Salts of this world just can't have what they want, or have it now.

You can de-Google any phone and install graphene, then you can have whatever you want. Good choice, no?

 

[shapesinaframe]

When someone installs a compromised app (that was sideloaded or hosted on a third party store) and it harvests their contacts, it’s not just their data at risk; it’s everyone in their address book who never consented to anything. When someone gets phished through a sideloaded app and their iMessage or email account gets compromised, the people they communicate with are now receiving convincing social engineering attacks from a trusted contact. “My device, my risk” doesn’t work when the risk isn’t contained to you.

You know, any app on the App Store can ask for access to your contacts and do this. It’s not something you’re protected from by using the App Store.

 

[surferfb]

You know, any app on the App Store can ask for access to your contacts and do this. It’s not something you’re protected from by using the App Store.

Yes, I am aware that any app can request contacts access, and I also know App Review isn’t perfect. But there’s a meaningful difference between “an app that passed review, is attributable to a known developer, and can be pulled remotely if it’s caught misusing data” and “an app with no review and no kill switch.”

I trust apps on the App Store aren’t going to use that contact information for malicious purposes (opinions on tracking non withstanding). I don’t want the creators of the malicious version of iOS’ WhatsApp app that infected hundreds of EU citizens to have that data.

Fake WhatsApp Clone Used in Spyware Campaign, Meta Warns

A counterfeit WhatsApp application was used in a targeted spyware campaign affecting around 200 users — primarily in Italy, Meta has warned.

www.bitdefender.com

Unlike traditional app-based threats distributed through official stores, this fake version was sideloaded — meaning victims were tricked into installing it outside of their official app store.

It’s not shocking this happened in one of the jurisdictions that opened up iOS. I’ve been personally accused of spreading FUD for saying it might. Not expecting apologies though 🤣

 

[applefella]

How can Tim Sweeny be so annoying that his case goes to the supreme court?

I'm genuinely sick of this guy... I'm so tired about reading anything related to his B.S.

He's not exempt from Apple's terms. Everyone else pays fees... So should he.

Publishers have the right to not publish something. Apple's App store is basically the same thing as a book publisher. They reserve the right to not publish Sweeny's app for whatever reason.

Sweeny does not have a "right" to have his App published on the App store.

He's so entitled.

 

[eifelbube]

When your choice affects those who wish not to have a less secure platform then what choice is there?

So, BBEdit 16.0 for Mac bought directly at the Barebones website makes Mac OS less secure than BBedit 16.0 bought at the Mac App Store?

Talking about choice: Apple offers BBEdit as a $49 annual subscription whereas Barebones sells a $59 perpetual license.

 

[Kr0019]

So, BBEdit 16.0 for Mac bought directly at the Barebones website makes Mac OS less secure than BBedit 16.0 bought at the Mac App Store?

Talking about choice: Apple offers BBEdit as a $49 annual subscription whereas Barebones sells a $59 perpetual license.

macOS and iOS are two completely different platform, but don’t let that stop you from making false equivalences.

 

[eifelbube]

Yes, I am aware that any app can request contacts access, and I also know App Review isn’t perfect. But there’s a meaningful difference between “an app that passed review, is attributable to a known developer, and can be pulled remotely if it’s caught misusing data” and “an app with no review and no kill switch.”

I trust apps on the App Store aren’t going to use that contact information for malicious purposes (opinions on tracking non withstanding). I don’t want the creators of the malicious version of iOS’ WhatsApp app that infected hundreds of EU citizens to have that data.

Fake WhatsApp Clone Used in Spyware Campaign, Meta Warns

A counterfeit WhatsApp application was used in a targeted spyware campaign affecting around 200 users — primarily in Italy, Meta has warned.

www.bitdefender.com

It’s not shocking this happened in one of the jurisdictions that opened up iOS. I’ve been personally accused of spreading FUD for saying it might. Not expecting apologies though 🤣

A. Maybe Apple needs to improve iOS to become less vulnerable to malware?
B. From what I have seen, the Italy case is an isolated incident on the malware front since Apple had to allow 3rd party stores in the EU. Has it spread across the rest of Europe?
C. Fake apps make it into the Apple App Store too.

Kaspersky finds 26 fake crypto wallet apps on Apple's App Store that can drain digital assets

Kaspersky Threat Research identified multiple fraudulent applications mimicking legitimate crypto wallets on the Apple App Store. Once opened, the apps redirect users to phishing pages which impersonate the App Store and deliver trojanized wallet applications capable of draining cryptocurrency...

www.kaspersky.com

 

[surferfb]

A. Maybe Apple needs to improve iOS to become less vulnerable to malware?
B. From what I have seen, the Italy case is an isolated incident on the malware front since Apple had to allow 3rd party stores in the EU. Has it spread across the rest of Europe?
C. Fake apps make it into the Apple App Store too.

Kaspersky finds 26 fake crypto wallet apps on Apple's App Store that can drain digital assets

Kaspersky Threat Research identified multiple fraudulent applications mimicking legitimate crypto wallets on the Apple App Store. Once opened, the apps redirect users to phishing pages which impersonate the App Store and deliver trojanized wallet applications capable of draining cryptocurrency...

www.kaspersky.com

A) Apple is always doing that. And if the answer was “just make the OS more secure” Android would have solved their malware issue years ago.
B) The EU forced Apple open, and now we see active malware that didn’t come from the App Store on iOS in Europe. That’s all you need to know.
C) No one is claiming the App Store is perfect, but we are arguing that opening iOS up is worse for most users’ security. Which it undeniably is. You’re essentially saying “because this fake ID got past our bar’s bouncer, we should share an entrance with the bar next door that doesn’t card.”

If your argument is “well some fakes/scams get through review, so it’s ok to force Apple to open up,” what’s your prediction for the rate of malware and scam apps when there’s no review at all?