Comments on: Apple control freakiness http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/ Same old blog, brand new place Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:14:31 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Ben http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-192689 Ben Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:11:01 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-192689 Yep, hopefully the long-run will be short until the control gets loosened up. Still, I think Apple is playing it pretty smart here, keeping control of their apps until they have reason to change. And as you mentioned above, they've brought the phone industry into the 21st century, so we should probably cut them a little slack :) I'll be eager to see what happens. Yep, hopefully the long-run will be short until the control gets loosened up. Still, I think Apple is playing it pretty smart here, keeping control of their apps until they have reason to change. And as you mentioned above, they’ve brought the phone industry into the 21st century, so we should probably cut them a little slack :) I’ll be eager to see what happens.

]]> By: Mahallo Media http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-182991 Mahallo Media Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:16:49 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-182991 "4) The iPhone is BOTH an internet device and a telephone." It's so true :)) “4) The iPhone is BOTH an internet device and a telephone.”

It’s so true :) )

]]> By: Mimi Hui http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-181068 Mimi Hui Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:11:20 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-181068 Ok Doc, You got me. I'm in HK recovering from what might be Swine Flu (no joke) and this blog entry just made me crack up. fantastic! Glad you're not too highbrow to want to use sphincter + Apple in the same sentence. btw, this just came to my attention. Apologies if it's a repeat but wanted to share. http://www.buzzmachine.com/2009/06/19/new-business-models-for-news-project/ Mimi Ok Doc,

You got me. I’m in HK recovering from what might be Swine Flu (no joke) and this blog entry just made me crack up. fantastic! Glad you’re not too highbrow to want to use sphincter + Apple in the same sentence.

btw, this just came to my attention. Apologies if it’s a repeat but wanted to share.

http://www.buzzmachine.com/2009/06/19/new-business-models-for-news-project/

Mimi

]]> By: Doc Searls http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179808 Doc Searls Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:18:38 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179808 synthmeister, Color me strange, but I don't want to have to go to an app store to get an application for a device. synthmeister,

Color me strange, but I don’t want to have to go to an app store to get an application for a device.

]]> By: synthmeister http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179658 synthmeister Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:37:42 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179658 So Apple shouldn't have removed the "Baby Shaker" App from the app store? And BTW, those other "open" app store aren't as open as you might think. And the Apple app store is actually further ahead of the competition then the original iTunes store was at a comparable point in time. The other app stores have a huge mountain to climb, and that mountain is going to get bigger with OS 3.0 and when China comes online. So Apple shouldn’t have removed the “Baby Shaker” App from the app store? And BTW, those other “open” app store aren’t as open as you might think.
And the Apple app store is actually further ahead of the competition then the original iTunes store was at a comparable point in time. The other app stores have a huge mountain to climb, and that mountain is going to get bigger with OS 3.0 and when China comes online.

]]> By: Doc Searls http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179619 Doc Searls Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:35:58 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179619 Greg, I think the App Store could succeed even if it were not the only place one could get apps for the iPhone. And I suspect that, once the iPhone gets better competition, especially from more open platforms, it will reposition the App Store as the most trustworthy place to get apps for the phone. Greg, I think the App Store could succeed even if it were not the only place one could get apps for the iPhone. And I suspect that, once the iPhone gets better competition, especially from more open platforms, it will reposition the App Store as the most trustworthy place to get apps for the phone.

]]> By: Doc Searls http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179618 Doc Searls Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:32:44 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179618 Matthew, Apple has taken on an enormous responsibility here: bringing the phone industry into the 21st century (to name just one sisyphean task at which they've excelled). For this they deserve much gratitude, if not also praise. They have done many things well with the iPhone itself, and some things poorly. This is one of them. Obviously they made a mistake in this case, and corrected it. Meanwhile, the EFF's concerns are well-taken and important. Apple being itself is not a good enough reason to be silent about censorship (or bad policy), nor is being among "a few individuals" or "a handful of developers." As for painting Apple with a broad brush, I'll cop to that. Hey, maybe their taste isn't "the best in the world" after all. Matthew,

Apple has taken on an enormous responsibility here: bringing the phone industry into the 21st century (to name just one sisyphean task at which they’ve excelled). For this they deserve much gratitude, if not also praise. They have done many things well with the iPhone itself, and some things poorly. This is one of them. Obviously they made a mistake in this case, and corrected it. Meanwhile, the EFF’s concerns are well-taken and important. Apple being itself is not a good enough reason to be silent about censorship (or bad policy), nor is being among “a few individuals” or “a handful of developers.”

As for painting Apple with a broad brush, I’ll cop to that. Hey, maybe their taste isn’t “the best in the world” after all.

]]> By: Jim Stead http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179598 Jim Stead Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:46:22 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179598 Censorship is when an overriding authority (governments, warlords) prevent you from speaking your piece *anywhere* within their jurisdiction. There are plenty of places for speech or porn; private individuals and companies are not required to provide a platform for you just because you want it. Make your own. Censorship is when an overriding authority (governments, warlords) prevent you from speaking your piece *anywhere* within their jurisdiction. There are plenty of places for speech or porn; private individuals and companies are not required to provide a platform for you just because you want it. Make your own.

]]> By: Steve W http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179597 Steve W Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:41:59 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179597 Welcome to the wonderful world of convergence devices. Here is a topic for your next blog: 1) Obscenity is not protected under the First Ammendment. 2) The Supreme Court has blocked attempts by Congress to prevent the distribution of obscenity over the Internet. 3) The Supreme Court has upheld laws prohibiting the distribution of obscentiy over the telephone. 4) The iPhone is BOTH an internet device and a telephone. 5) The Supreme Courts test for obscenity: "I know it when I see it" - Justice Potter Stewart in "Jacobellis v. Ohio". So, what's an App Store to do? 1) Should they use the "I know it when I see it" test, or some codifiable standard? 2) Should they rule some Apps "wi-fi only" or should the require that all Apps be "3G safe"? Welcome to the wonderful world of convergence devices. Here is a topic for your next blog:

1) Obscenity is not protected under the First Ammendment.

2) The Supreme Court has blocked attempts by Congress to prevent the distribution of obscenity over the Internet.

3) The Supreme Court has upheld laws prohibiting the distribution of obscentiy over the telephone.

4) The iPhone is BOTH an internet device and a telephone.

5) The Supreme Courts test for obscenity: “I know it when I see it” – Justice Potter Stewart in “Jacobellis v. Ohio”.

So, what’s an App Store to do?

1) Should they use the “I know it when I see it” test, or some codifiable standard?

2) Should they rule some Apps “wi-fi only” or should the require that all Apps be “3G safe”?

]]> By: Web Media Daily – Tues. June 16, 2009 | Reinventing Yourself... http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/06/16/apple-control-freakiness/comment-page-1/#comment-179589 Web Media Daily – Tues. June 16, 2009 | Reinventing Yourself... Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:59:27 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1717#comment-179589 [...] Apple control freakiness [...] [...] Apple control freakiness [...]

]]>