Cydia Files Appeal in Higher Court in Legal Battle Against Apple

[webkit]

But your description doesn't reflect what happened in the past. Again, a summary of the issues in the Microsoft case are described on the FTC website that I linked to. It has all the components that I quoted. Apple's situation does not.

What will likely happen is that new laws will be drafted to take away some of Apple's platform power just like we see in Europe. Again, new laws. Not antitrust actions based on current laws.

The government came down on Microsoft for their Windows restrictions which could quite fairly be described as "excess control" as I stated but there’s no point in continuing to go back and forth on this.

What will happen to Apple remains to be seen.

 

[Jake James]

and for the 101th time, why should Apple provide you access to the IP source code?
how many companies allow or do that?
it's where their value lies... and not allowing access can have security benefits so people can't exploit loopholes easily.

and exactly what list of features are you planning to add?
and let's see your code to do it?
or are you going to keep your code secret and not share it?

I didn't mean access to the source code, I meant access to the code that runs in the CPU, in other words the ability to run arbitrary code. I know how to reverse engineer, I don't need Apple's source code

 

[Jake James]

Distribution and derivative works are separate exclusive rights under copyright law. Not distributing a derivative work doesn't make it legal.

I didn't say not distributing, it *is* being distributed, but it's not a derivative work. A tweak is its own thing, it's a plugin written 100% from scratch, not based in any way on someone else's work.

Again, jailbreaking is legal only for a specific purpose defined by the DMCA exemption.

That is, the ability to run code without Apple's approval as long as said code doesn't violate copyright. Tweaks don't violate copyright, as I said above.

 

[BaldiMac]

I didn't say not distributing, it *is* being distributed, but it's not a derivative work. A tweak is its own thing, it's a plugin written 100% from scratch, not based in any way on someone else's work.


That is, the ability to run code without Apple's approval as long as said code doesn't violate copyright. Tweaks don't violate copyright, as I said above.

No one is saying the tweaks are a derivative work. Tweaks that modify iOS are creating a derivative work by definition. This isn't a gray area. It's straightforward copyright law.

 

[Jake James]

No one is saying the tweaks are a derivative work. Tweaks that modify iOS are creating a derivative work by definition. This isn't a gray area. It's straightforward copyright law.

> a work based on or derived from one or more already exist- ing works

Definition of derivative work according to copyright.gov. Tweaks aren't based on or derived from iOS. They're their own thing, their own idea and their own code, and their developers have the full copyright to them.

 

[BaldiMac]

> a work based on or derived from one or more already exist- ing works

Definition of derivative work according to copyright.gov. Tweaks aren't based on or derived from iOS. They're their own thing, their own idea and their own code, and their developers have the full copyright to them.

That is absolutely correct. As I said in my last post, no one is saying that the tweaks are derivative works. However, tweaks that modify iOS create a derivative work of iOS.

 

[Jake James]

That is absolutely correct. As I said in my last post, no one is saying that the tweaks are derivative works. However, tweaks that modify iOS create a derivative work of iOS.

I meant to include *all* tweaks in that statement, because all tweaks fundamentally serve the same purpose.

Do you even know what a tweak is? A tweak is not an app. A tweak is a piece of code that the jailbreak injects into a specific app or iOS process.

So the purpose of tweaks *is* to modify iOS or apps. But tweaks don't do that themselves, hence why no tweak is a derivative work. Tweaks are injected to a process by the jailbreak.

Think of tweaks like a (biological) virus, only it doesn't reproduce and doesn't harm you. It's not an alive being by its own, but when injected into a cell, it tells it "do this thing instead". Calling a tweak a derivative work is like saying "the influenza virus is based on human DNA" when it clearly isn't.

 

[BaldiMac]

I meant to include *all* tweaks in that statement, because all tweaks fundamentally serve the same purpose.

Do you even know what a tweak is? A tweak is not an app. A tweak is a piece of code that the jailbreak injects into a specific app or iOS process.

So the purpose of tweaks *is* to modify iOS or apps. But tweaks don't do that themselves, hence why no tweak is a derivative work. Tweaks are injected to a process by the jailbreak.

Think of tweaks like a (biological) virus, only it doesn't reproduce and doesn't harm you. It's not an alive being by its own, but when injected into a cell, it tells it "do this thing instead". Calling a tweak a derivative work is like saying "the influenza virus is based on human DNA" when it clearly isn't.

I'm already aware of and completely agree with your description of a tweak.

I don't think you read my post very carefully. You ignored the part that I emphasized in bold. Twice.