Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Confirms It Shut Down iMessage for Android App Beeper Mini
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i honestly can’t believe how some people are reacting to this. there’s an ios elitism that some people have that i haven’t seen since like 2011 and it’s so embarrassing.
There's a lot to unpack here because this hinges on armchair lawyering lacking detail and context.
Reverse engineering is allowed for interoperability between two software programs (for which you have a license granting you legal permission to use) as defined in paragraph 4 of Section 103(f).
What the DMCA decidedly does not give you permission for is to use reverse engineering to package someone else's software or service and sell it.
It's also well established that EULAs that explicitly prohibit reverse engineering supersede the exception granted in the DMCA; see Bowers v. Baystate Technologies, 320 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Edit: just checked, both the OS license agreements as well as Apple’s Media Terms of Service explicitly prohibit reverse engineering, and you can't get to the parts that need reverse engineering without agreeing to them.
Then there's the matter that Beeper's pypush repository contains proprietary Apple code, which is decidedly not reverse engineering.
Lastly, even if reverse engineering was allowed, it still doesn't allow you to connect to other people's servers. The Computer Fraud Abuse Act of 1986 explicitly prohibits unauthorized access to computer systems, and the DMCA exception doesn't supersede the CFAA.
One manages copyright infringement, the other, manages what is colloquially called "computer trespass," with many state statutes mirroring the federal laws.
Last edited:
Lets hope Apple will release an Imessage android app and end these shenanigans once and for all, they could always make the android version subscription based !
Seems like it's always Android users complaining about the inferior messaging platforms they have access to.
That would be great. Would this mean Messengers, Signal, Telegram, etc. would also all be in one place, one app?
Update: And while we’re at it, why not also add Zoom, WebEx, Teams, and other videoconferencing software and force them to interoperate with each other. Anyone see an issue with that?
Last edited:
Indeed. Think about what Beeper actually did. It registered a phone number with iMessage and just started getting iMessages. No Apple ID or password was required.
While Beeper was registering the actual phone number of the user’s phone, there was nothing stopping a malicious version of the app from registering someone else‘s phone number and intercepting all messages to that number sent by Apple devices.
I agree, I want Imessage secure, not hacked and infiltrated by any gimp who feels like it.
Apple cares about privacy? I have confirmed Apple is using the microphone, camera and imessage on my iphone XR and iphone 12 to sell ads. I was talking about disney cruises with my wife in the car in a store parking lot and sure enough when I come home i see disney cruises play on youtube ads on the apple tv. I was texing my wife about changing car insurance plans at home and sure enough I’m getting youtube ads about car insurance. I was drinking beer and just happened to point my phone camera over a beer can and sure enough several youtube ads about beer companies. Tested in my home and car with everything off except my iphone. Removing facebook and youtube and other apps I thought were spying on me and came to the conclusion that Apple has a back door in the software where they can secretly record what you say, type or see with the camera and then sells the info. It’s either that or I have telepathic powers.
I'm sorry, are people with Android devices currently unable to communicate with iOS devices? Surely if such a situation existed you'd think there would have been more reporting on it!
Sideloaders just want to steal content and use pirated content. Forgive me for not caring about their 'plight'.
You can tell when devs don’t understand anything about business or have any tact. It’s impressive they discovered that exploit, but the fact that he still wants to work with Apple on a security review shows he has no business acumen or tact. Apple is not going to review anything. All attempts at circumventing iMessage will be blocked no matter what. He should let it go now before he digs himself into a blacklist.
Your arguments are sensational and characteristic arm chair lawyering, but they don’t support your claims of monopoly and anti-competition.
First of all, if those points had any merit, the US Justice Department would be using them to take action against the purported iMessage monopoly — like they did against Microsoft as you mentioned. They are not taking that action against Apple because the arguments do not support a claim of monopolistic practices because there is no monopoly.
Second, a business is not required to offer services or features that diminish market share of its offerings for purported “greater good”. That is not anti-competitive — that’s the definition of competition — you win or lose on the merit of your own actions and without requiring gracious assistance from your competition. It is also smart business practice consistent with a firm’s obligation to shareholders.
Net-net, the topic of monopoly and competition is complex and easily misunderstood by laypeople — so some very popular ideas can sound logical and meritorious, but that does not make them legally relevant. And legal relevance is what matters.
Last edited:
Yea, so that begs the question if there is a different agenda here
Doesn't your Android buddy have a cross-platform messaging app they use which you could send the photos on? (WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Signal, etc.)
Alternatively, you reverse-engineer Apple's technology and you have no reason to complain when Apple does to you what you did to them. Where do people get off thinking being a rebel is a cloak of invisibility?
Wow, that does suck. With all the EU regulation, they should crack down on that instead of forcing apple to make their OS less secure. Unlimited texting is pretty much standard here in the US. It's why people rarely answer their phone anymore. I make/answer maybe a couple dozen calls per year. Almost all other communication is done via iMessage or sms/mms to android folks.
As always with these threads there is a mix of accidental ignorance and lack of research.
Beeper weren't doing anything wrong. The DMCA allowed for the reverse engineering of Apple's protocols without litigation as we can see by the lack of any lawsuits. Their app was interacting directly with Apples servers just like an Apple device with no security holes.
Apple are quite right in protecting their IP and haven't done anything wrong by blocking Beeper. Remember: they haven't sued anyone.
But their security excuse is a bit laughable when they continue to support unencrypted SMS as the basis for cross-platform messaging. Beeper have proven that Apple could bring iMessage to Android; they just choose not to. I'm amazed they don't and charge users $5 a month for the privilege TBH. They'd make a fortune in the USA!
But outside the states iMessage isn't even in the top 10 messaging apps and is very low down the reasons anyone buys an iPhone, if it's on there at all. Apple has no reason not to port it so people actually use it.
Beeper weren't doing anything wrong. The DMCA allowed for the reverse engineering of Apple's protocols without litigation as we can see by the lack of any lawsuits. Their app was interacting directly with Apples servers just like an Apple device with no security holes.
Apple are quite right in protecting their IP and haven't done anything wrong by blocking Beeper. Remember: they haven't sued anyone.
But their security excuse is a bit laughable when they continue to support unencrypted SMS as the basis for cross-platform messaging. Beeper have proven that Apple could bring iMessage to Android; they just choose not to. I'm amazed they don't and charge users $5 a month for the privilege TBH. They'd make a fortune in the USA!
But outside the states iMessage isn't even in the top 10 messaging apps and is very low down the reasons anyone buys an iPhone, if it's on there at all. Apple has no reason not to port it so people actually use it.
You have a vague understanding of a few points but have the wrong end of the stick due to not fully grasping the matters you talk about.
That's, however, not the reality of the situation. "They did everything they can" in this context simply means they decided not to expend any efforts to create an Android version.
Inaction can never lead to antitrust issues, specifically not inaction to make things easier for the competition because there's no duty to help the competition.
It's the "pressuring manufacturers" part that got them in hot water.
Do you remember the DOJ losing their case on appeal and having to settle?
The reason why it didn't take off elsewhere was that overseas carriers weren't offering such unlimited plans and were charging €0.50+ per MMS if not outright charging per MB (I was there), leading WhatsApp to become the number one messaging app before iMessage even existed because initially high and later unlimited data bundles were more common.
Carriers overseas were then scratching their heads as to why no one was using the super expensive MMS option and eventually disabled MMS on their network. When iMessage came around, nobody wanted to switch over from WhatsApp because it was cross-platform and benefited from a heavy network effect.
The result in the US is that most people are still used to using their stock messaging app to communicate, and the result elsewhere is that people barely touch their stock messaging app other than to retrieve their 2FA token.
Google saw this and introduced their version of iMessage on Android that they conveniently market as "RCS," people now think that is what RCS is.
How you characterize it might bring it into antitrust territory if they went out of their way to use their might to kill competition.
That's, however, not the reality of the situation. "They did everything they can" in this context simply means they decided not to expend any efforts to create an Android version.
Inaction can never lead to antitrust issues, specifically not inaction to make things easier for the competition because there's no duty to help the competition.
No, I don't. I remember Microsoft being prosecuted for bundling Internet Explorer and refusing to issue Windows licenses unless manufacturers agreed not to install an alternative browser and make that the default.
It's the "pressuring manufacturers" part that got them in hot water.
Do you remember the DOJ losing their case on appeal and having to settle?
No, the reason why it's so popular here is that US carriers started offering unlimited SMS/MMS plans, and iMessage introduced an upgrade in messaging that worked seamlessly because people in the US were already using SMS and MMS in their day-to-day lives.
The reason why it didn't take off elsewhere was that overseas carriers weren't offering such unlimited plans and were charging €0.50+ per MMS if not outright charging per MB (I was there), leading WhatsApp to become the number one messaging app before iMessage even existed because initially high and later unlimited data bundles were more common.
Carriers overseas were then scratching their heads as to why no one was using the super expensive MMS option and eventually disabled MMS on their network. When iMessage came around, nobody wanted to switch over from WhatsApp because it was cross-platform and benefited from a heavy network effect.
The result in the US is that most people are still used to using their stock messaging app to communicate, and the result elsewhere is that people barely touch their stock messaging app other than to retrieve their 2FA token.
Google saw this and introduced their version of iMessage on Android that they conveniently market as "RCS," people now think that is what RCS is.
If it costs him £0.60 then he's in the UK which is no longer part of the EU and thus not subject to their regulation regime.
Thank you for the helpful, fact-based contribution to this discussion 🙏🏽.
Excellent idea! I’ll just shop around the marketplace of smartphone ecosystems and choose one that best suits my needs!
Oh, there’s only two? And iOS suits my needs better than Android? But I need to use a different app to communicate in a modernized fashion with friends who don’t use the same phone brand? Well that sucks — guess I’m gonna complain about it!
Seriously, why not just say “give up everything you like about iOS and switch to Android if you have this one complaint”? It’s that simple!
Samsung, xiaomi, huawei, oppo, etc. yep only two. You are certainly welcome to use any platform independent ecosystem you choose. Google comes to mind. There may be more.
It’s a legitimate wishlist item. I am not denying that. I am against government regulating a closed ecosystem as other than excessive regulation I don’t think anything good can come of it.