Hacker News Reader

Comment by favaq | Hacker News Reader

Spotify and YouTube premium for free, in my case.

So copyright infringement. Really a poor argument against Apples policies.

People should upload an app that allows you to bypass the regional limitations on 5ghz WiFi and see what the EU thinks about banning app stores then. Because according to the typical regulator it’s bad when others impose limits, but not when they impose limits.

copyright infringement doesn't exist in the same form everywhere, I don't think a phone should have a single monopolized app store just to prevent US based copyright infringement.

In other news, the DMCA type rules do not apply to the whole internet and the Berne convention is just a fiction that stands in the way of the glorious EU forcing Apple to open their App Store.

The free transmission of information should usually triumph over the enforcement of intellectual property. It's a symbol of a healthy democracy, in my opinion.

If you want to argue the abolition of copyright that’s fine but it’s revolutionary and not the subject of this thread.

Copyright (and Copyleft) is a societal concept, not a technical one. In the technical world, there is only copying. If someone tries to limit your ability to copy data by using a societal concept as an excuse, they are directly censoring the content you interact with. That's not just democratically harmful, it's a bad omen for the market.

It's so anti-revolutionary that currently-sitting administrations in America and Europe agree that Apple is deserving of anticompetitive inquiry.

A not very interesting philosophical essay that is rehashing arguments everyone has seen a million times and is not about the subject of this thread.

A poor argument? To me, as a final user, it's the greatest one.

>Because according to the typical regulator it’s bad when others impose limits, but not when they impose limits.

I agree, regulators shouldn't exist.

> So copyright infringement. Really a poor argument against Apples policies.

>> A poor argument? To me, as a final user, it's the greatest one.

>> I agree, regulators shouldn't exist.

So you don't want regulators, even though regulators are the only possible way things like the copyright infringement tools you like might be made mainstream. Got it.

So you think that a private company with the sole purpose of increasing profits should have the same say as a more-or-less democratically elected body with the purpose of bettering the lives of its citizens?

That bootlicking for corporations never really did a thing for me personally — they are literally paper clip optimizers without a care for anyone.

So you think no corporation should be able to decide anything, everything should be left to pseudodemocratic EU agencies that are mostly concerned with clinging to power?

Which, by the way has nothing to do with any of the points I was making, and is just the typical hurr durr Apple bad response.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com