Slashdot Mirror
Apple Cuts Off Under-18 Darwin Developer
Crispyking writes "Finlay Dobbie has been a leading contributor to the Darwin project, most notably
helping track down the infamous PPP-hang bug. He's been nominated to become a Darwin contributor (which comes with limited check-in privileges) but when going through the process, Apple found out he's under 18 years old, and not only refused to let him be a contributor to this 'open source' project, but canceled his
Apple Developer Connection membership (which gives him download access to the source code) on the grounds that because he's under 18, he can't be legally bound to the small-print agreement." Update: 03/26 00:26 GMT by P : Finlay wrote in email that he wasn't getting the Darwin source through his ADC account, but through a third party development project, which he resigned from as a result of all the red tape and the ADC account being disabled.
They're throwing away his donated code then right?
Not bound to fine print eh.. does that mean he could do whatever he wanted with purchased software, ignoring EULAs since he's not bound?! perfect! reverse engineering and hacking for everybody!
This sounds like such a boneheaded descision, though, that it must have come from their legal department.
Go Badgers! -- #include "std/disclaimer.h"
Now with most laws, he could get his parents to sign the contract releasing such problems, but, he obviously violated the TOS. The government has said that anyone under 18 can't make decisions for themselves, and must have parental consent. Get that consent, problem solved.
Don't go ragging on Apple for this - if they weren't taking these steps, I'm sure a case could be made for child labour law violations.
Apple has a point here. In most places minors can not enter into legally binding agreements. This brings up an interesting point. What about licenses like the GPL, the Artistic License, or the Apache License, to name a few. If a minor releases software under one of these licenses, do the licenses apply or are they invalid since the minor can't enter into a legal agreement? How does the law treat a minor's ability to control how their work is treated?
Couldn't a parent or guardian co-sign the NDa agreement to make it legally valid?
-Karl
It seems that this could set quite a precedent for a lot of kiddies to abuse any EULA for almost anything.
What a great time to be under 18... no restrictions on your software usage, it would be unenforceable!
Fine play their game.
Send a bill for your work. Sue for illegal distribution of your work.
You obviously weren't able to legally transfer any copyrights to them, nor work without renumeration.
This could be good leverage, either treat you like a person, or don't, not only the stuff that is to their advantage.
It just pisses me off to see "minors" treated like they have no rights, when "adults" don't take responsibility for their actions either.
But he had already had a contract with another part of Apple for earlier development, with his parents co-signing, and Apple was fine with it. They seem to be deliberately screwing him rather than making arrangements like before (and screwing themselves... Finlay's a force to be reckoned with, he's put a lot of effort into OSX).
WWJD? JWRTFM!!!
When I was working at Apple there was a 17 year old kid working there on Copland (MacOS 8.0 1.0) What's the difference? Oh maybe Apple is no longer an anything goes college dorm. (do they still do the weekly beer bash?)
I always tought the lawyers at apple were BAD. but that story is really the cherry on the cake.
Before lawyers ruled apple, they KNEW the 12 years old useless kid MIGHT become a professional developer and contribute to the apple world.
I know first hand, I WAS one of those. I received free copies of 'confidential' documentations, free access to some developer resources, a bunch of encouragment, LOTS of patience and ultimately a few friendship with some apple people that date back like.. 20 years now!
But then, I spent the last 20 years as a die-hard mac developer, writing many shelf software. so it DID pay to humor me when I was a useless and fuckingly curious kid.
And now, the morronic lawyers decide to stick by their fucking law books and ENFORCE that to everyone with the sense to realize that age has very little importance.
Burn them!
The issue here is that heisn't 18, and thus cannot be bound by an NDA. Apple is in the business of making money and creating new ideas. In that situation, they have a very real need for NDAs, which he cannot legally be bound by.
Because he is not 18, he cannot be bound by the agreements that are required of anyone to join the Darwin Project or the Developer Connection. Given that, it isn't at all unreasonable that Apple cut him off.
The real problem is that somewhere along the way, he ignored a Terms of Service that demanded that he be over the age of 18. It is a shame that a talented developer can't contribute in all the ways he wants to because of his age, but that is just the way things are.
As usual, the Slashdot community is a little confused about just exactly what the words "Freedom" and "Fairness" actually mean. No surprise there. What exactly, rhetoric aside, is Apple supposed to have done wrong here, besides covering their IP? Regardless of your personal views on intellectual property, do you really think it is so ridiculous for a company to take steps to protect the results of its own R&D?
Specifically, it can even be used (in Florida) to only apply to a particular contract, a copy of which is included with the forms. It came up when we were fighting the curfew laws here (my little brother, who is a US citizen, was the first person in North Palm Beach to get hit with them - the judge threw out the case, calling the law "ridiculous". Gotta love the three branch system).
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Does anybody remember that this same issue came up when Corel released their beta distribution a few years ago. If memory serves correctly, they were crucified for it; lets see if Apple is held to the same standard.
'Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.' B. Pascal
I should have been more clear...
Under US law, minors cannot agree to the GPL. Therefore they cannot modify or distribute code licensed under the GPL, because:
Now it's not entirely clear what modification of the software means (the same can be said of distribution). Obviously modifying the source code applies. An interesting question is if configuration files included with the distribution qualify. IANAL, but an argument could be made that such configuration files do apply (configuration files that are not included with the software are a different matter).
The end result is that, legally speaking, nobody under 18 can modify or distribute a GPL work. So if you're 17 and give your friend a Debian CD, the FSF could technically go after you for distribution without the right to distribute. If you're 14 and posting patches to the LKML, Linus could file suit against you for a GPL violation.
Granted, this is unlikely to occur. The press would be horrible. But is the law.
The way around this is simple, have your parents "sign" for you. I would imagine that an affidavit stating that they bind you to the terms of the GPL would be sufficient, but again, IANAL.
I started developing when I was 9 yrs old. Because of California law, I wasn't able to actually get paid for my work until I was 14. At the time I was working as a developer for my Great Uncle's insurance agency doing corporate database development.
;) Anyways, I see both sides of this story. I feel that I was being shafted while under 18, but I also used it to my advantage.
This corporation is run by the books, so basically they told me I could do what I wanted, but that they wouldn't be able to pay me for my work until I turned 14.
I've also been an active member of the development community for the product that I develop with (www.dataaccess.com). I have given many speeches, even submitted source that was incorporated into the language, all while under the age of 18. Now of course I have no problems, I'm almost 21.
But I've also used this whole 'under 18 no contract' thing to my advantage. It came in handy when dealing with a warranty contract on some equipment I purchased. I shouldn't have even been able to purchase a warranty, but they let me. Later when the product broke, I took it back and they told me that the contract stated that I had to send it in for repair, not bring it in for replacement. After pointing out to him that I was under 18 and he could get in trouble for even selling me a warranty, they promptly accepted the broken product and handed me a nice new box.
So I used it for a threat. So what, all the same
In the long run, I would hope that something would come along to patch up this hole in contract law.
I think in California that maybe this has been dealt with. I was able to open a bank account and even have a VISA before I was 18 because my father signed as a proxy on the contract. (He couldn't though access the money in the account, he was not a signor on account, just a contract proxy)
OLIVER
Better VDF than VD...check it out: Data Access
You are under 18, you can
Get married - May need parental consent in some places
Be a father/mother -Greatest responsibility ever... (pay child support for 18+ years...even if you are married)
Decide to end your child/fetus' life (don't get started on the pro/anti abortion thing ok)
Wield the greatest weapon ever created (cars have killed more ppl than guns and bombs ever did)
Serve life in prison for crimes
Pay taxes
Work at a burger shop (does this mean you may get fired because they cannot enforce the confidentiality agreement that keeps thousands of minors from giving up the ingredients to "secret sauce"
List goes on.
But you can't contribute in a meaningful way to anything meaningful that has to do with lawyers.
By the way, the next shrink wrap EULA is getting opened by my 9 year old son......
And I have to lie to do much of anything online.
Within the OS community, I'm completely open with my age. Nobody cares about age--just skills. It's absolutely wonderful. The only other place I get that is in college classes.
But on the rest of the Internet I have to lie. I have to lie to get an instant messaging account, a webmail address, access to a news site, some web space, or a chat room. I have to lie to get API data from Palm, Microsoft and many other companies. Some of these places make it exceedingly easy to lie--for example, one videochat site just has you hit the submit button again, implicitly promising that a parent is submitting th eform this time. In others, you have to jump through hoops to do it. But in most cases it's pretty easy to lie.
It gets on my conscience, though. Every time I lie I feel like a cheat. Every time I pretend I didn't see the "by clicking this button, you agree that you are over eighteen" line, I feel like a bad person. But I do it anyway, because I can't do what I want and need to do otherwise.
I understand that this is necessary because of contract law. However, I think that points to a deficiency in contract law, not in kids.
I haven't thought very long on this issue, but at least one solution comes to mind. It follows the model of child labor laws. Before fifteen (which, incidentally, I think is older than is really necessary) you simply can't work. Between fifteen and eighteen you can work, but with restrictions on what you can do and how long you can do it for. At eighteen, you're free to sell your labor in any way you please.
Perhaps similar provisions should be written into contract law. For example, between age X and eighteen, you can enter contracts unless they obligate you to pay money or do work.
In any case, I believe that the current system is Evil and Wrong. We should fix it instead fo forcing kids to be liars.
Hey, you try to find an open nick these days!
Apple isn't screwing anyone, nobody is better off in this situation
If anything Apple has lost a valuable contributor & I'm sure they're aware that by doing this it will hurt them
I've just turned 17, and I've been working full-time in the IT industry since I was 15. I started as a programmer for a major New Zealand ISP, and moved up to network administrator within 10 months, and I'm now a software engineer for a New Zealand startup company.
I, personally, haven't had _too_ much of a problem with my age, although there have been some minor issues.
This is New Zealand, and finding people with my skillset and experience is a non-trivial event.
I am extremely saddened that Apple have chosen to discard someone who would probably have been one of their best resources. What I'm also worried about however, is whether or not other companies will follow suit. (Including the one I work for, funnily enough.)
All it takes is one large multi-national to start a trend, and then all people in our age-group will have an even harder time of getting a job in our chosen field.
I think Apple need to go back, and rethink their actions.
Though I bet if he were to turn his talents to malicious hacking and if he were caught, he would be tried as an adult. Ain't this country great?
So, 3 hours after you posted the story, after ~600 /.-ers have sounded off against Apple, after a few other stories to grab attention have piled up, and at the end of the business day you finally realize that maybe you should occasionally do some research.
The reason? It turns out this kid's rant against Apple was missing one important detail... The one where we learn he was being provided developer access by someone who was violating a legally binding agreement. Maybe that's why Apple went all heavy-handed and cut off this developer's account? Oops.
I feel sorry for the kid if he wants to hack Darwin and Apple won't let him contribute his code back. I don't feel sorry for the kid (or his co-conspirators) for doing an end-run around Apple's contracts and getting burned. Welcome to the real world - you better get used to it.
In Canada, a 25 year-old can have sex with a 14 year old. 14 is the age of consent, for vaginal sex... anal is 18.
There's a political issue going on that isn't getting much press. Gay people are saying that it discriminates against gays. Interesting, eh?
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
The movie business already had to contend with this. There are child actors all the time, creating content (performances), who are working and legally contributing. There are different rules for child actors than regular actors though, including shorter maximum shooting days, trust fund witholding (so that parents can't take the money from the kid before their old enough to use it), and other rules specific to minors. Sometimes studios decide they don't want to go to all that trouble for a role (why do you think everyone on Dawsons Creek or Beverly Hills 90210 was not *actually* in high school?) and hire younger adults anyway. But many times they hire minors, and because they law is figured out already, they do what they need to. Child actors can do what they love, and the government can still keep children from being exploited (as much as they can anyone).
Perhaps this is a good model for software development as well? (As are other corellations between making movies and making software.)
-Trout
I agree. AFAIK this should be sufficient. I've just submitted this to Apple's feedback page for OS X:
It has come to my attention that you have disallowed Finlay Dobbie the rights normally associated with the status of Darwin Committer and have later disabled his ADC-account, where these decisions were both based on his age. I am dismayed that you disallow this talented young programmer to work on Darwin. We should applaud and encourage this form of community service that benefits hundreds of thousands of your customers. His work has helped to fix a nasty bug that could lock up MacOS X for minutes. He has also added new functionality to the official Darwin distribution. I believe that his contributions and ability to carry responsibility should be judged based on his performance.
I understand that you may be worried about the legal implications of working with minors. However, the laws that protect minors were never intended to keep minors from learning, contributing to society or taking responsibility. They do give parents the responsibility to monitor and (if necessary) steer their children. We cannot monitor and steer our children if they have insufficient freedom to make their own decisions. A proper education of our children depends on their ability to take responsibility. I urge you to contact the parents of Finlay Dobbie and ask them to sign the contracts that are necessary for someone to contribute to Darwin. This should be sufficient to guarantee that your contracts with Finlay Dobbie are legally binding and you can stop any violation of the contract under the authority of law.
As your customer, I have always known Apple to be a company that tries to act ethically. This includes your policy of Equal Employment Opportunity that disallows your employees to discriminate "on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, age, sexual orientation, gender identity characteristics or expression, disability, medical condition, U.S. Military or veteran status in recruiting, hiring, training and promoting." I hope and trust that you will not limit this policy to your employees, but will apply it to your contacts with volunteers that contribute to your products as well. I hope you will soon correct this error and make me a proud Mac-user once again.
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
is this even an issue of him committing to the repositories?
from reading that article i get the idea that nothing has changed on that, and his work as a darwin developer/committer can continue.
his issue was solely with the adc program, and the fact that apple requires even online members to agree to an nda; and the fact that you need to be an adc member to download the dev tools. this is where the age issue applies, this has nothing to do with darwin.
reading the article, he decided to give up on the darwin project because of his issues with adc.
that's what his article says.
what it doesn't say is who exactly made the decision to follow-through with the decision to revoke his adc privileges.
he mentions darwin a whole lot, but this is apparently an adc issue and not a darwin issue. for all we know the "darwin people" at ï£ might have gone to bat for him [and struck out] or simply not known, or had no say in the matter.
we don't know what happened in that regard.
imho his article portrays the darwin project unfairly.
and yes i agree with him that apple shouldn't require an nda to download the dev tools.
apple shouldn't require an nda for online members because online members and student devs (for the most part) don't get any pre-release software.
but finlay is well respected on the darwin lists, and it seems people are trashing the darwin projects unnecessarily here.
nibs
They don't have any choice about accepting code, because effectively, he can't assign copyrights for his changes.
this has nothing to do with accepting code. according to the article he _can_ continue working on darwin.
it's just a hassle for him to get updates to project builder, interface builder et. al. apple's gui tools.
the cli tools are a part of darwin ofcourse.
It was really low that they didn't refund his ADC account.
in the article he states he wasn't old enough to get a student account. this leads me to believe he had a free online account.
if he had a select or premier account, he wouldn't have mentioned/cared about the student account.
it's shady that apple wouldn't offer a refund, but apparently he hasn't lost any money at all.