DRM, Online Pass, Project Ten Dollar and the like

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I know they did it on purpose. My very first post on this topic was "oh this must be an anti-piracy measure", and their post on the matter all but confirmed it. (Which disregarding the jailbroken stuff there's certainly nothing obligating devs to cater to pirates and point out what anti-piracy measures they've implemented.)

 

 

 

so how are Apple to know how an app will act on jailbroken devices?

 

It acts exactly the fucking same.

 

It clearly doesn't

 

 

I don't get your point. It only doesn't because it's programmed to be different. It's not a matter of jailbreaking. It's a matter of how the game was programmed. They could do the same thing to a non-jailbroken device. If no one programs it to be different it acts the same.

[TheMightyEthan]

Except Apples testing system is highly unlikely to include jailbroken devices, so how are Apple to know how an app will act on jailbroken devices?

Again, I'm only talking about when it's specifically designed in, so the dev should know about it without Apple QA testing for it. And the app descriptions aren't written by Apple. All Apple needs to do is require devs to include in their app description a warning that it is not compatible with jailbroken devices if it has been specifically designed not to be compatible with jailbroken devices. Apple need not test jailbroken behavior.

 

And the caveat of jailbroken devices is already included in the TOS, which encompasses the whole store, meaning no need to individually post on app store listings that jailbroken devices aren't supported.

Okay, you keep saying this, but that's talking about "we don't provide support, so if it's glitched you're SOL", not "we specifically designed this so it will not work." This is why I feel like you're deliberately misunderstanding me in order to argue against a straw man.

 

How'd you think it feels over here when it seems like the "I am a lawyer" card you pulled earlier (and weakened stance on since too) seems to encompass a blind spot for the words "TOS" and "EULA", because you've not really once acknowledged that their TOS precludes the requirement of jailbroken device support.

I didn't think I needed to specifically acknowledge that, I figured it was implied every time I said their TOS are not the be all and end all of what they're allowed or not allowed to do. Yes, I acknowledge that their TOS says they don't support jailbroken devices.

 

It seems the only disagreement is if there should be catering by Apple to support jailbroken devices through their app store.

No one has said they need to support jailbroken devices, just that if the specific app is specifically designed to specifically break on jailbroken devices there needs to be a warning. I have repeated myself so many times, but you can't seem to comprehend what I'm saying. Again, this is why I feel like you're deliberately misunderstanding.

[deanb]

@FDS: My point being that it clearly acts differently on jailbroken devices, despite your little insistence there that it acts exactly the same. If it acted exactly the same on normal and jailbroken devices then it wouldn't have been an issue at all would it?

 

@TME: The compatibility listing is however managed by Apple, so if it's to be listed as compatible with certain devices and blocked from purchase and download by unsupported devices Apple would have to test it against those devices.

 

Basically Apples policy is zero fucks given for jailbroken folks, it's not going to list compatibility, or lack thereof, of jailbroken devices. Certainly not going to highlight that they exist right there in their store too. If an app doesn't work on your device, due to a bug on developer intervention, then they're not going to give a damn. I'm not misunderstanding you, you just seem to think there's some magical difference is made for jailbroken folks. There's nothing for them, at all.

 

See mixed message here, you accept what their TOS says, but you still do the hand waving dismissiveness of it. TOS can't take your rights away, and in this case it isn't, so those elements are be all and end all aspects.

 

There's 900,000 apps on the App Store, and the expectation is that Apple is not to cater towards jailbroken devices, but on this one specific app (which btw as noted earlier isn't the only app to ever restrict jailbroken users, it just happens to be a game app so enters our circles) should be catered for specifically by Apple towards listing compatibility towards jailbroken users?

 

I'm not deliberately misunderstanding you, it just seems contradictory to say Apple shouldn't be expected to support jailbroken devices, yet for this one app they should make an exception to that rule. That's the part I struggle to understand. It just seems, to use earlier words, stupid.

[TheMightyEthan]

Not this one specific app, any app where it's been specifically designed to not be compatible with jailbroken devices.  I didn't realize other such apps existed.  Apparently this was the first one where it was a big enough deal for them to put in a disclaimer.

 

Making a statement about what the program is or is not designed to be compatible with is not catering to, it's requiring their statements be truthful.  I dismiss TOS because it doesn't get them out of truth in advertising laws.

 

You keep talking about what Apple's policy is, but my entire point this entire time has simply been I AM NOT CONVINCED THAT POLICY IS LEGAL.  Just because it's in their TOS does not make it legal.  I am also not convinced their policy is illegal.  That's the entirety of my point, and has been since my first post.

[Eleven]

This argument is hard to follow. I completely agree with Dean though. Whatever I need to say, he already said so there.

 

I'm going to throw a wrench here. Jailbreaking an iPad is actually illegal.

[TheMightyEthan]

Not in the US it's not.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking#United_States

 

*Edit* - Wait, it's legal for phones, but tablets are in a grey area.  An exemption for them was denied, but because the definition of "tablet" was too vague.  So iPads are probably included, but not definitely.

Edited July 13, 2013 by TheMightyEthan

[deanb]

 I know your point is that you don't reckon it's legal. I just think it's a bit of an extreme viewpoint of advertising laws. As it has been 6 years since the iPhone came out and so far no legal action has been taken with regards to apps to show if they work with jailbroken phones or not I would lean in the direction of it not being something Apple are required to do.

 

I'll be honest, kinda assumed iPads were included in the "you're allowed to jailbreak it" camp. So you learn something new.

[TheMightyEthan]

Well and two things: 1) I'm not saying it's definitely illegal, just that I'm not convinced it's legal.  I'd like to think it would be illegal but it wouldn't surprise me if it went the other way, but it would be trivially easy for Apple to just put in a disclaimer and cover their ass so that seems to be the prudent approach (which is supported by the fact that after this broke the description was edited to add such a disclaimer) and 2) in the US stuff like that doesn't get enforced unless someone sues over it, and who's going to spend the money to sue over a $0.99 iOS app?  (I know this one was $7).  Stuff like that tends to get overlooked until there's a catalyzing event, like this one seems to be.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

@FDS: My point being that it clearly acts differently on jailbroken devices, despite your little insistence there that it acts exactly the same. If it acted exactly the same on normal and jailbroken devices then it wouldn't have been an issue at all would it?

 

 

How can you be this ignorant? They programmed it not to work on jailbroken devices. The game detects that it's jailbroken as a form of DRM. It's DRM that makes it not work. Not the fact that it's jailbroken. If they released the game as normal (which is EXACTLY what they're doing now that this was made public) it will work fine. Where is your evidence that a game that is programmed normally won't work the same on a jailbroken device? Like I said, they could do the same thing if you were running an older version of iOS or any other number of factors. They chose to lock out jailbroken devices from a feature of the game instead of letting it be. It's DRM. Nothing else.

[deanb]

I know they programmed it to not work on a jailbroken device as a form of DRM, as already covered the "oh it must be an anti-piracy thing" was my first post on this matter. And the fact the phones are jailbroken is exactly why the game doesn't work, it even says in the pop up "the gun don't work on jailbroken devices". So yes, it doesn't work because it's a jailbroken device, how can you be this ignorant?

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Do you even know what point you're making anymore? If they didn't program it to act differently on a jailbroken device it wouldn't act different.

[deanb]

Except they did program it to work differently on jailbroken devices, that's the point of this topic. Are you sure it's not you that's missed the point (given you've been so adamant to argue in this thread you've argued with Ethan at least twice when aiming for me)?

[TheFlyingGerbil]

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Except they did program it to work differently on jailbroken devices, that's the point of this topic. Are you sure it's not you that's missed the point (given you've been so adamant to argue in this thread you've argued with Ethan at least twice when aiming for me)?

 

You have stated multiple times that jailbroken apps work differently. They don't. This particular one only does because they programmed it to. Much like you could program it to work differently on different iOS device models.

[deanb]

Jailbroken apps don't work differently...except when they do.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Two examples of where they're programmed to work differently. If they don't program it then they work fine and you've provided no evidence otherwise.

Edited July 15, 2013 by Faiblesse Des Sens

[Thursday Next]

Might as well chuck in my 2 cents.

 

- The Android ecosystem officially accepts rooting. HTC provide bootloader unlocking on their website http://www.htcdev.com/bootloader With a lot of caveats about how stuff may not work.

- As rooting is an accepted practice it is common for apps on the Play store to say "Root Required" or "Will not work on rooted devices."

- The Apple ecosystem does not accept rooting as a legitimate practice. Apple's ToS discourages making such changes.

- As such, when you root an iOS device you acknowledge that you are going "off piste" so to speak.

- To my mind, once you do that all bets are off. Software *should* all work fine. But. If a developer decides that I should sit on the naughty step for breaking the house rules then I personally think it's a fair cop.

 

Not sure how many people bought Deus Ex and have a jailbroken device, but I bet it's a tiny amount. I think it's interesting that they are looking into ways to prevent piracy on mobiles. This experiment didn't pay off, but they've learned from it and we can all move on.

[deanb]

Two examples of where they're programmed to work differently. If they don't program it then they work fine and you've provided no evidence otherwise.

What evidence otherwise? as far as I'm to understand this only affects jailbroken devices and so far has had no false positives (which would make it super terrible, such as that game making tool on Steam writing over everyones images with a skull n crossbones logo despite legitimately owning it).

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

 

Two examples of where they're programmed to work differently. If they don't program it then they work fine and you've provided no evidence otherwise.

What evidence otherwise? as far as I'm to understand this only affects jailbroken devices and so far has had no false positives (which would make it super terrible, such as that game making tool on Steam writing over everyones images with a skull n crossbones logo despite legitimately owning it).

 

You keep saying stuff like this:

 

And the fact the phones are jailbroken is exactly why the game doesn't work

 

 

If it acted exactly the same on normal and jailbroken devices then it wouldn't have been an issue at all would it?

 

 

It clearly doesn't [Act the same]

 

 

Repeatedly you have stated that jailbreaking is the cause of this. It's not. It's the way the games are programmed.

[deanb]

So the reason the game doesn't work on a jailbroken phone, and even displays a "this doesn't work because you're on a jailbroken phone" because the game is running anti-piracy DRM that applies to all jailbroken phones is not because the phones are jailbroken? So why does this happen then?

[TheMightyEthan]

You guys are just arguing about the definition of "because".  FDS is saying that nothing inherent to the jailbreaking process makes the game not run, the only reason it doesn't is because the devs specifically programmed the game to act that way, therefore the not working is morally attributable to the devs, not the jailbreaking.  You are saying that given the way the game is programmed the immediate cause of that happening on any given device is that that device is jailbroken.  You both understand this.  Why are you still arguing?

[deanb]

Because FDS likes to be contrarian all the time. I know what he's saying, he doesn't seem to quite grasp what I'm saying, but given you have it's obviously not an issue with my description. Thursday also grasped the gist of my argument too, and managed to put it in nice bulleted list and likely in semi-lawyer mode of speak too (since I assume "off piste" isn't "away drunk").

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Dean is blaming the jailbreak and I'm blaming the developer. That's the difference here.

[deanb]

[TheMightyEthan]

On Tuesday Assassin's Creed 4 released, containing an online pass which restricted access to some arguably single-player content.  Today, two days later, they announce they are removing online pass from AC4 altogether and will not have it at all in any of their future games.

 

It's cool that they're removing it, but two days?  That's a flip so fast I think it gave me whiplash.

 

Now, because the game disc code still requires an online pass code to activate that functionality, what they have really done is simply made the cost of an online pass $0.  So you pop the game in, go to the console's store, and download the code free of charge.  Still requires an internet connection though, obviously, so they're not 100% getting rid of the problem, but it's still a pretty nice gesture.