Creating Problems For iPhone Hackers

[siorai]

There's a couple pretty simple facts that many devs just don't seem to grasp:

Many people who pirate your app almost definitely would never have bought it in the first place. This especially holds true when you're talking about a 99 cent app. At least when you're talking about games and software that's $50 and up the argument of "Oh I just can't afford it" can come into play, but 99 cents? Anyone can afford 99 cents. So these people have no intention of paying because they almost definitely have the means to do so, but choose not to.

No money lost for the dev here because they were never going to get any money out of that person in the first place.


There's also the side of the argument that the music industry tried: people who pirate don't purchase. Wrong. It's been shown time and time again that music sale have in fact risen partly due to piracy. Piracy introduces people to new artists that they might not have heard of before. The same can probably hold true for apps. Someone is more apt to try out a wide variety of games and apps if they can download a cracked version first. If they like them, they might just buy them.

Money made for the dev because of people trying out full versions (then purchasing), not hampered "lite" versions, if they even exist in the first place.


There will always be the people who pirate and never purchase. These are the people you just simply need to forget about. They are not lost revenue because they were never going to be part of the revenue stream in the first place.

 

[fleshman03]

http://hackulo.us/forums/index.php?showtopic=3757&hl=Hacklab

Thanks for the info. I'm actually still in the process of reading it, but thought I should note something...

Someone created a user name here and posted on this thread. The created name was FleshmanO3. (Ohh and not zero.) They blasted all my comments, was rude and generally combative.

One of the Admins here deleted the account and the posts. (Thanks again, btw.)

This brings me to the point of this post. It seems to fit the Modus Operandi (M.O) of David Zimmerman, AKA Zippher, AKA Haklab.

 

[Rusalka]

Acting like a child when things don't go his way and begging for attention through ridiculous means? Yeah, certainly sounds like a certain person named Hacklab...

 

[marksman]

I gave some instruction in the other thread. While this is fun, it is not sustainable and they will work around you.

You need to focus on their sites and have them take your application down. If they don't comply then have their registrar shut their site down.

the providing companies in the US take the DMCA extremely seriously as it is the only thing that keeps them from getting sued for every little violation that happens on the internet.

 

[hexonxonx]

Its a waste of time.
You're one, they're thousands.
Its not even going to make a dent.
Request a program to be removed from one server and will be posted on 10 different ones within hours.

And don;t forget about Usenet. You can't really get something pulled from there.

 

[firewood]

And don;t forget about Usenet. You can't really get something pulled from there.

No, but you can flood it with so much cr*p that the percentage of people who use it heads asymptotically towards zero.

 

[bitslap47]

Developers could always submit working copies of their apps that phone home with the device UDID along with some personally identifiable information.

This information can then be passed directly to the proper people.

Maybe someone can put up a server that consolidates the information in a format an organization like the FBI would like to have it in and give them access to the data to view/download as they please for filler(on a slow day with no murders/drug cases.)

Probably just a report that says:

App Name | Developer | Service | # Installs

That one would work to determine damages owed the developer by a specific supplier/service.

Another with more detail:

App Name | Developer | Service | Device UDID | Cell # | Carrier| User Name |

This one would allow identification of the individuals receiving the stolen applications from the supplier services (e.g. Napster.)

This type of reporting would also show Apple how prevalent it is, and maybe encourage them to help protect developers more if possible.

This is all of course if you are serious about bringing attention to the situation.

 

[Applejuiced]

I dont think apps are allowed to collect personal information and submit them to a 3rd party.

Developers could always submit working copies of their apps that phone home with the device UDID along with some personally identifiable information.

 

[ppc750fx]

Developers could always submit working copies of their apps that phone home with the device UDID along with some personally identifiable information.

How does this help combat piracy? Any decent release will have this crap stripped out, so the only folks you're really going to be spying on will be the legitimate users...

 

[Phil A.]

So these people have no intention of paying because they almost definitely have the means to do so, but choose not to.

No money lost for the dev here because they were never going to get any money out of that person in the first place.
[snip]
There will always be the people who pirate and never purchase. These are the people you just simply need to forget about. They are not lost revenue because they were never going to be part of the revenue stream in the first place.

Whilst I agree with your assertion that there is probably no revenue lost, I don't think devs should just forget about them - from a personal point of view I'd rather people who hadn't paid for my apps weren't using them, even if I haven't lost any revenue through their piracy

 

[bitslap47]

How does this help combat piracy? Any decent release will have this crap stripped out, so the only folks you're really going to be spying on will be the legitimate users...

The developer can cut a release that looks/feels/runs the same with the same version number as the item in the legit app store with these added features.

The developer themselves would submit the binary...like a dye test of the distribution network.

The more I look into it, something similar to what I am describing seems to be already being done by a few devs... Just implemented differently.

 

[iPhoneVic]

You can't win Zippher

Microsoft, Apple and other major corporations still get their software hacked, Music is still getting hacked and you think your .99 cent app will make any difference in the world of hacking?

 

[ppc750fx]

The developer can cut a release that looks/feels/runs the same with the same version number as the item in the legit app store with these added features.

The developer themselves would submit the binary...like a dye test of the distribution network.

Interesting. And that will probably work great the first time someone tries it. As soon as it's found out, that'll be the end of that...

 

[Sparky9292]

Won't work....

Want to see it in action? I posted a link to a fake large database on Appscene yesterday and as of this posting over 21k people have downloaded my junk. Here is the link: http://www.appscene.org/download.php?id=197343828

If enough of us do this, we can discredit their website and cause them problems.

Ha! This explains alot. *cough* A friend of mine *cough* found that a couple of apps didn't install. ITunes complained that they weren't iPhone apps.

However, people post bad links pretty fast on Hackulous and they get removed pretty fast.

But yeah this idea is old and lame. The RIAA and MPAA tried to poison the eDonkey and Bittorrent networks by uploading bogus albums and movies. Heck even Madonna uploaded a "fake" album where she just cusses out downloaders. People loved that so much they made mixes and mash-ups from her voice clip. http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1471321/20030416/madonna.jhtml

 

[Steven89]

This post is completely and entirely incorrect.
It is completely legal to convert your DVDs into videos that could be viewed on an iPhone or iPod.
When you buy a DVD, you're not actually buying the DVD, you're buying the right to view the content of the DVD at any time.

Sorry, but wrong. When you buy a CD, you agree that the CD is only to be used by you, using that CD, on that CD, in your CD player. If you want to put music on your iPod or iPhone legally, the only way to do it is to buy it from the iTunes store.
When you buy a DVD, you agree to the same terms but on a different level because it's a movie and essentially not just sound.

The government sees the copying of ANY product within the technological world as an illegal act, no matter what its use (to use for yourself, to give to a friend, etc. etc. etc.).
Here is the legality of the issue in black and white: http://www.fbi.gov/ipr/
"Unauthorized reproduction or distribution" means if you aren't the one who made the movie, music, or product otherwise, you can not reproduce it for any means and consider it a legal act. Putting the things onto your iPhone and iPods is reproducing it, because you can just as easily buy the product again (which is what you're supposed to do).

 

[bytethese]

Sorry, but wrong. When you buy a CD, you agree that the CD is only to be used by you, using that CD, on that CD, in your CD player. If you want to put music on your iPod or iPhone legally, the only way to do it is to buy it from the iTunes store.
When you buy a DVD, you agree to the same terms but on a different level because it's a movie and essentially not just sound.

The government sees the copying of ANY product within the technological world as an illegal act, no matter what its use (to use for yourself, to give to a friend, etc. etc. etc.).
Here is the legality of the issue in black and white: http://www.fbi.gov/ipr/
"Unauthorized reproduction or distribution" means if you aren't the one who made the movie, music, or product otherwise, you can not reproduce it for any means and consider it a legal act. Putting the things onto your iPhone and iPods is reproducing it, because you can just as easily buy the product again (which is what you're supposed to do).

Unfortunately you are incorrect. Making a copy of your CD is authorized under fair use clause in the DCMA. DVD's have copy protection in them and that's where the legal gray area arises. Some feel that it's fair use like CD's to make a copy for iPod/iPhone yet cracking CSS encryption is a violation of the DCMA.

 

[jalpert]

Two wrongs don't make a right. Breaking the TOA of the appstore is not okay to "catch" people who might be stealing your app.

Developers could always submit working copies of their apps that phone home with the device UDID along with some personally identifiable information.

This information can then be passed directly to the proper people.

Maybe someone can put up a server that consolidates the information in a format an organization like the FBI would like to have it in and give them access to the data to view/download as they please for filler(on a slow day with no murders/drug cases.)

Probably just a report that says:

App Name | Developer | Service | # Installs

That one would work to determine damages owed the developer by a specific supplier/service.

Another with more detail:

App Name | Developer | Service | Device UDID | Cell # | Carrier| User Name |

This one would allow identification of the individuals receiving the stolen applications from the supplier services (e.g. Napster.)

This type of reporting would also show Apple how prevalent it is, and maybe encourage them to help protect developers more if possible.

This is all of course if you are serious about bringing attention to the situation.

 

[organsoup]

It's already been said, and I'm sure someone will come up with a counterargument... but it can't be stopped. Even if you are successful in shutting down one site, another one will replace it fairly soon. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

Any security measures anyone can come up with will be broken, period. Also, can we stop using the word Hacker when we really mean Cracker? The media already does enough to make 'hackers' look bad.

 

[whooleytoo]

It's all about the numbers.

If enough people did 'attack' these websites, it would become a chore trying to weed out the fake apps continuously, and downloaders would get tired of it too.

It takes a fair bit of effort to set up a new website to share pirated apps, and probably a lot less effort to post some fake links to it.

 

[rjohnstone]

"Unauthorized reproduction or distribution" means if you aren't the one who made the movie, music, or product otherwise, you can not reproduce it for any means and consider it a legal act. Putting the things onto your iPhone and iPods is reproducing it, because you can just as easily buy the product again (which is what you're supposed to do).

When you buy a movie or album regardless of media type (Cassette, Vinyl Record, Video tape, CD, DVD, etc.), you are authorized under "Fair Use" to make reproductions for "personal use".

Next time you want to quote law, read ALL of it first to make sure you are presenting your information in proper context.

The FBI reference you quoted above is on regards to piracy and counterfeiting, not personal use.

 

[fleshman03]

Unfortunately you are incorrect. Making a copy of your CD is authorized under fair use clause in the DCMA. DVD's have copy protection in them and that's where the legal gray area arises. Some feel that it's fair use like CD's to make a copy for iPod/iPhone yet cracking CSS encryption is a violation of the DCMA.

Eh Mem - first sale doctrine. You are totally wrong.

Also - the Librarian of Congress can grant whatever exception he wants to the DMCA's restrictions. They have done it with breaking encryptions on cell phones. I'm not sure if there has been a test yet with DRM or DVDs. I'm imagine that it would be legal regardless as long as it falls under the fair use guidelines.

Why the heck did you digg this up after almost 3 months??

 

[Vegastouch]

Sorry, but wrong. When you buy a CD, you agree that the CD is only to be used by you, using that CD, on that CD, in your CD player. If you want to put music on your iPod or iPhone legally, the only way to do it is to buy it from the iTunes store.
When you buy a DVD, you agree to the same terms but on a different level because it's a movie and essentially not just sound.

The government sees the copying of ANY product within the technological world as an illegal act, no matter what its use (to use for yourself, to give to a friend, etc. etc. etc.).
Here is the legality of the issue in black and white: http://www.fbi.gov/ipr/
"Unauthorized reproduction or distribution" means if you aren't the one who made the movie, music, or product otherwise, you can not reproduce it for any means and consider it a legal act. Putting the things onto your iPhone and iPods is reproducing it, because you can just as easily buy the product again (which is what you're supposed to do).

Um, no that is not correct at all.

 

[army91c]

This sounds like a great idea, I think..... oh wait, need to go check appulo for some more apps...

 

[Steven89]

bytethese, More recently, CDs have wound up with copy protection also. I bought a CD for my grandmother recently ("Mi Tiempo" by Chayenne), and the CD can not be copied to another CD or into her hard drive or put into her iPod. Legally, you're supossed to stop and buy a digitized copy of the CD from iTunes, but why should I have to pay twice?
When you buy media, you buy a single copy, and if you want it in multiple places or devices in today's digital world and want to abide by the laws, you must buy it multiple times.

rjohnstone, the FBI's anti-piracy link I put in my post includes all types of copying, which are considered piracy. The RIAA does not consider backing up or copying CDs "fair use", and the government has come out in support of these statements.

Vegastouch, when I alluded to iTunes I meant buying music in general, not specifically from iTunes.

 

[Steven89]

Why the heck did you digg this up after almost 3 months??

Sorry, I'm still sorta new here... figured I was doing right by getting it started again than start a new topic and be linked back to this thread.