Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple's DUI Checkpoint App Ban Is Stupid
hookskat writes "Reason.tv Editor in Chief Nick Gillespie reacts to Apple's decision to ban DUI Checkpoint Apps from the App Store, writing: 'Let me add something even more damning of this latest development in corporate cave-ins to legally protected free speech and I'm gonna bold it for emphasis: Some police departments actually supply the data used in such apps because they reduce the number of drunk drivers on the roads! Somehow, I'm thinking that Steve Jobs circa 1984...would have told U.S. senators sending threatening letters about computer-based info sharing to take a hike. Or at least to spend time on, I don't know, creating a freaking budget for the country rather than worrying about regulating something that helps reduce impaired driving.' Last month, after RIM caved on the same question, Reason.tv released this video on the subject of banning DUI checkpoint apps."
Watch the video.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
And the app will still be on the store. Apple has not banned DUI checkpoint apps, even hypothetical ones.
If it is something I can SEE WHILE WALKING DOWN THE STREET than it is public data, by definition.
Interesting definition.
You walk down the street, see someone's credit card laying on the sidewalk where they dropped it. Obviously, it is now public information. There can be nothing wrong with selling that information to the Russian mob, right?
You go to the ATM machine and the person ahead of you forgot to pull the receipt. You take it and get their account number. You wait a few minutes before looking so you can look at it while you "walk down the street". It is obviously public information now. Oh, you were also able to shoulder-surf their PIN, so that's public information, too.
You pull the PDA out of your pocket while walking down the street to check your appointments and see that you have an appointment with Mistress Dominica tonight at 7 and you better not be late you slimy worm kiss my feet bastard! This information is now, by definition, public data.
No, I think your definition is a little incorrect. Ok, a lot incorrect. People using this kind of definition for "public data" are why the ECPA was written and why scanners have large gaps in coverage of the cell phone bands. They could hear cell phone conversations on their radio, so they thought it became "public data" they could pass around freely.