Theuntenable directionof the iPhone app ecosystem , shepherded exclusively by Apple , has been evident to developers for a long time . But coming to a point , it seems , are n’t the older problems of reviewer capriciousness — we’retalkingstraightdollars .
https://gizmodo.com/the-app-store-effect-are-iphone-apps-headed-for-oblivi-5378390
Piracy of apps has been a problem virtuallysince the commencement of the App Store . While the $ 450 million loss to pirate apps floated today is doubtless too high , asothers have write , plagiarisation isrampant , and given the size of the ecosystem ( literally 1000000000000 of apps download ) we are talk about jillion of dollars , even considering that many pirated apps would ’ve never been a sales agreement in the first place . Pirating apps being what I ’d call “ direct ” looting .
https://gizmodo.com/iphone-app-store-games-hacked-all-apps-hackable-5030139
On the other side , whichPeter Kafka labour into today , is what I ’d call indirect looting — masquerade apps , like one that cost 99 cent and repackages the NYT ’s roving content , even though the legit NYT app is very much free . No one ’s “ stealing ” the NYT app , but they are profit off of its free content .
Here ’s the thing : Apple is not merely the exclusive means by which an app enters theApp Store , but by extension , Apple see to it the only legitimate way for an app to reach an iPhone . This is very different from , say , Macs , where they have most no ascendancy over what applications are installed or how they get there .
So it ’s curious , to say the least , that this is their situation on IP infringement in the App Store , as told to Peter Kafka :
As an IP holder ourselves , we understand the grandness to developers of protecting their IP . We have a operation in the App Store for developers to alert us to potential IP violation . When we ’re apprise , our policy include the removal of the infringe app until a resolution is reached between the party .
As he indicate out , this passive — versus aggressive hunt - and - kill offenders — position , is the same means Google handles IP infraction on YouTube . ( Which we all recognise is essentially a caper , and why we still go to YouTube . ) The conflict of interest is , not coincidentally , the same as Google ’s : Apple makes money ( 30 percent ) on masquerade apps , the same fashion Google commit in ad dollars on infringing video .
The reason to more seriously consider the two problems is that , if some rumor and speculation are true , the Apple Tablet will use essentially the same mannikin as the iPhone for applications , with Apple as the single distributer via the App Store . And if the tablet is The Next Thing in computing , the trouble are just commence . Perhaps an appropriately nuclear response to app infringement is just waiting for the situation to demand it , or will be announced before long .
Pirated computer software obviously is n’t a new affair , or exclusive to the iPhone ( Photoshop anyone ? ) . The spot is simply that by making itself the God of iPhone applications , Apple ’s put itself in a immensely unlike position than , say , Microsoft is , when it add up to hijack apps on Windows — one that seems imbued with some sentiency of duty to app developer . ( I entail they ’re approving these apps for sale . ) So it ’s strange to see , at least on the font of things , it ’s not as zealously blocking IP infringement as it has pinhead and dirty Word of God in apps . [ ReadWriteWeb , MediaMemo ]
App StoreAppleiPhoneiPhone Apps
Daily Newsletter
Get the skillful tech , skill , and cultivation news in your inbox daily .
News from the future , bear to your present .
You May Also Like
