EFF: Apple's Dev Agreement Means No EFF Mobile App For iOS

schwit1 writes The EFF launched a new app that will make it easier for people to take action on digital rights issues using their phone. The app allows folks to connect to their action center quickly and easily, using a variety of mobile devices. Sadly, though, they had to leave out Apple devices and the folks who use them. Why? Because they could not agree to the terms in Apple's Developer Agreement and Apple's DRM requirements.

Comments

Principles vs Practicality

[danaris]

Well, I'm sorry for the EFF, then, but everyone knows what the terms are to get an app in the iOS App Store.

This sounds, to me, like the EFF allowing slavish adherence to their principles to prevent them from doing something that might actually help real people in the real world advance those principles in meaningful ways.

Either that, or they just realized they could use it as a publicity stunt.

Dan Aris

Re:Principles vs Practicality

[danaris]

You're post implies that, if EFF agreed to Apple IOS dev's T&A, that they could change the way Apple does things w/ regard to it. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I'd rather EFF not break it's principles, and show just where Apple stands with regard to its walled garden, than have them bow to a Corporate overlord.

No...you may have inferred that, but that's not what I was implying. What I was implying was that, since the app is designed to help people help the EFF achieve some of its goals, if the app were in the app store of one of the most breakout popular devices in the history of the entire world, it would thus make it possible for a significant number of additional people to help the EFF achieve the goals aimed at with this particular app.

But because they have decided that some of the principles behind what they want to achieve are utterly inviolable, and the Apple dev agreement conflicts with some of those inviolable principles, they clearly feel that they are therefore obligated to prevent anyone who owns an Apple device from using their app.

This is the kind of cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face behaviour that really hamstrings a lot of efforts to improve the world. I'm not saying the ends justify the means—far from it. Just that when you're living in a badly imperfect world, insisting that you, yourself be perfect at all times while trying to make the rest of the world better is very, very often going to prevent you from doing more good than it actually does in itself.

Dan Aris

Re:Principles vs Practicality

[tlhIngan]

Either that, or they just realized they could use it as a publicity stunt.

This.

There are TWO "app stores" that every iOS device has access to. The walled garden is the obvious one, but there's one where there is NO DRM, no approvals, nothing. And it was around since the original iPhone and since iPhoneOS 1.0

It was Apple's original SDK strategy, too.

It's called a web application and it uses HTML and JavaScript to do everything. You "install" it via Safari and it shows up as a icon in the home screen. No approvals from Apple are required (it's just a very specially formulated link), it can do a lot of things already (thanks to HTML5 integration) and is completely DRM-free. Do it right and it's practically native.

Oh yeah, you can program it in any OS, no Mac required :). As a bonus, it'll be usable on other OSes, too. (I think Android has the same ability too).

Re:Principles vs Practicality

[JohnFen]

Web apps don't count, have never counted, and never will count. That's why Apple deigned to allow people to write real apps -- something they adamantly did not want to allow when the iPhone was first released.

Re:Nothing of value was lost,

[geekmux]

Right now, the app is an alert system designed to tell you when we have new campaigns

Okay, let me get this straight - the EFF has their knickers in a twist because they don't like Apple's terms for their walled garden. I'm sure Apple users are really upset that they can't download an app whose purpose is to spam them.

Trying to complain about spam when it comes to free apps is kind of like complaining about the smell of tomatoes in a ketchup factory.

The entire point of free apps is to hammer you with spam until you actually spend money. There's no getting away from that shit, so don't assume consumers are somehow upset. They agree to be spammed every single day with the other 73 apps installed.

Re:Nothing of value was lost,

[meerling]

It's an app for getting the EFF news bits to you quickly and easily. If you didn't want that, you sure as hell wouldn't have installed it in the first place.
After all, do you jump in the pool when you don't want to get wet?

but thats sort of the problem, isnt it?

[nimbius]

This isnt just an EFF issue, although I can see them using this publicity to highlight the greater point. Apple TOS for the store is nothing short of a labor camp for developers. Apple owns content lock, stock, and barrel. Compared to Android they control far more of the application, its licenses, its content and how it interacts with users than many programmers are comfortable with. The cusp of their assertion is that you dont make money with your app, Apple makes money with your app. Youre just the fingers on the keys.
The app store highlights a controversial opinion but it must be said: Steve Jobs was no hacker, and he certainly wasnt the laureate inventor we all insist upon. he was just a very successful and very lucky businessman who was every bit as ruthless and myopic as Bill Gates. He just had a better PR team.

Re:Nothing of value was lost,

[Anonymous Coward]

I had to switch from Linux back to Windows because I couldn't bear the spam.

Calling bullshit

[mveloso]

It's a labor camp where people are making money.

Go back to the day to app stores like getjar. Did you even know they existed? Did you know how people bought and sold software before app stores? Did you know how developers did?

I do, and it was expensive to sell. The app store led the way to what is almost a zero-cost way to sell your software. You didn't have to provide a few thousand copies of your software as "payment." You didn't have to print a box, manual, and make physical media.

Saying the app store and its execution weren't a great revolution shows that you are totally ignorant of how software was made and sold only a few years ago. Small developers for software really didn't exist. Nobody pays for shareware, and making a living as a small dev was basically impossible. The app store basically recreated the hobby developer market, period, and brought it to a level of mainstream that was never attained by normal PCs.

Better PR? Apple does have better PR. But Apple also does things that nobody else things will work, and makes it work well. Making something work well is substantially harder than you can imagine.

Re:Nothing of value was lost,

[JohnFen]

he entire point of free apps is to hammer you with spam until you actually spend money. There's no getting away from that shit, so don't assume consumers are somehow upset.

Maybe in Apple's world, but in the rest of the world this isn't true. While most "free" apps are spammy or coercive, there are tons that are not. They're just excellent apps, provided at no cost, including no advertising, in-app purchases, or data mining. I've written many such applications myself over the decades, and continue to do so.

Re:No They Aren't Adhering At ALL

[steveg]

Did you look on the EFF page about this app?

Here ya go.