Apple Drops Part of iPhone Developer NDA

ds writes "Apple, this morning, announced they are dropping the iPhone Developer NDA in respect to released software. Previously, iPhone developers were legally bound even after their software had been released." Another reader adds, "Early release software is still covered, but this should bring about increased developer interaction, as well as a slew of iPhone dev books." The complete message about the NDA change can be seen for now at Apple's iPhone Developer site, and is reproduced below. "We have decided to drop the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for released iPhone software. We put the NDA in place because the iPhone OS includes many Apple inventions and innovations that we would like to protect, so that others don't steal our work. It has happened before. While we have filed for hundreds of patents on iPhone technology, the NDA added yet another level of protection. We put it in place as one more way to help protect the iPhone from being ripped off by others. However, the NDA has created too much of a burden on developers, authors and others interested in helping further the iPhone's success, so we are dropping it for released software. Developers will receive a new agreement without an NDA covering released software within a week or so. Please note that unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released. Thanks to everyone who provided us constructive feedback on this matter."

Comments

So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Gewalt]

Developers will receive a new agreement without an NDA covering released software within a week or so. Please note that unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released.

If I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[ClassMyAss]

If I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

While the wording is a bit ambiguous, and I don't know what it means for bitching about rejections, I have a pretty good feeling that what they're talking about when they say "software" is really Apple software, i.e. the stuff that makes up the iPhone SDK, not the applications that you are developing. In other words, once this new agreement is in effect, we should be able to freely discuss the iPhone SDK in its current release form; we will not, however, be able to discuss the unreleased betas of the next iteration (which Apple usually gives registered devs access to). I think this is much better, because any person that wanted to can see Apple's tutorials and download the SDK anyways, so it was a little ridiculous to have it under NDA. Now if you're just not allowed to talk about the unreleased features, that seems a lot more reasonable.

...which should now make it totally legit to open source software that targets the iPhone - I know people have already done this (Oolong Engine comes to mind), but technically people that did this were in a gray area, where they were probably violating the NDA, but betting on the fact that Apple wouldn't come after them as long as they weren't doing anything too sneaky. It's good to have it cleared up, finally.

Back to your original point, though, IIRC the rejection letters that many received actually came with their own NDAs attached, so I'm not sure that this new agreement will have any bearing whatsoever on that.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Free the Cowards]

Yes.

You write code. You can talk about that code. But if that code is based on somebody else's code, and that somebody else has that code under NDA, and your code implies information about their code, then you have to keep it under wraps.

More concretely, Apple's NDA cannot prevent you from discussing your own code. But if your code contains information about the iPhone code, you can't discuss that.

Now that things are being lifted, you can discuss the iPhone code and therefore your own code which relies on it. The only remaining restriction is that you can't talk about iPhone code which isn't public yet, and by implication any of your own code which relies on the non-public changes.

So this change covers only their prerelease software, and by extension any of your software which contains information about their prerelease software. But it doesn't, and can't, cover your own prerelease software by itself.

Expect even more non-app store apps

[Seakip18]

With this gone, Saurik and other jailbreak devs can release their tools and compilers in binary format now. What this means is that Linux and Windows boxes developers enter the fray a lot quicker without having to navigate the pain that is the toolchain compiler assembling.

On top of that, they can openly discuss apps running on jailbroke phones without fear of reprisal. Hoorah!

Stupid iPhone devs

[clang_jangle]

Developing for the iPhone platform is exactly like slaves manufacturing shackles to be used on other slaves. When shiny is more important than freedom, it says something about one's lack of intelligence/integrity. IMHO. Heh, I laugh in the face of bad karma...

same ol, same ol

[Ukab the Great]

We mac developers were led to believe that by WWDC, we'd have an SDK with a lifted NDA. Nope. Didn't happen.

We mac developers were led to believe that by July 11 when the iPhone 3G was released, we'd have an SDK with a lifted NDA. Nope. Didn't happen.

Now they tell us that the NDA will be lifted at some point in the near future. What's changed?

Re:same ol, same ol

[Ilgaz]

Also Symbian fixing their only issue. The closed source kernel. It was taken way more seriously than some people in Cupertino expected. No industry fight happened too.

Funny is the Android release and Symbian going open source is also happening thanks to iPhone. Nobody can say Apple doesn't change things. I could never imagine Nokia and their biggest rivals agreeing to make Symbian open source. Even Flash 3 lite release which is rumoured to be free download for end user is Adobe's iPhone and Silverlight reaction. They asked millions of dollars from manufacturers before.

If Apple just allowed actual competition in iPhone itself without lame excuses like security and battery life?

Did uncle Steve have any alternative?

[linhares]

Let's just check the facts:

Número uno: The internet hated the NDA. Not only the goodwill and fanboyism that Apple gets for free was up for grabs; but also there was a real chance that Apple might become the new Microsoft in public opinion.

Número dos: Google does not fight the internet, and brought out Android. Android is gonna get some traction, not least for being open-source, for coming up with cool apps that google awarded prizes for, and for securing your developer's rights to distribute.

Número três: The market is down. It's going to get worse. In fact, we may have crossed the point of no return. The USA might have hyperinflation and all that comes with it.

So Steve had no alternative. The question is, for how long will the draconian measures at the app store still exist?

When will developers be sure of their investment?

Re:Android

[Ilgaz]

Spend months developing your application under strict NDA terms and get your application rejected because some idiot working at App Store thinks it has potential to be competitive?

I don't feel pity for iPhone developers. It is same as customers. They accept such abuse while buying the device or firing up XCode new iPhone app project.

Java is also object oriented and there is a very object oriented OS in hand which has more than 200 million users. Symbian that is. Symbian developers could release working iPhone apps in full functionality in months time. They also had to mess with stupid "hack" thing let alone fixing their own issues.

I keep saying that Developer should maintain a Windows Mobile or better, Symbian "mirror" of application. Symbian developers can ship their apps in whatever way they want, they can even mail the .sisx file to users. It is a lot different on iPhone official scene. If that idiot clicks "reject" template, you are doomed. You can't even TELL that the idiot clicked "reject" to your potential customers.