Hacker News Reader

Comment by FDSGSG | Hacker News Reader

>So useful, in fact, that Apple tried to buy the company

It's not like Apple can't virtualize iOS.

Beyond that, I feel like this article could've done a much better job representing Apples claims. The author attempts to paint Corellium as the good guys while completely ignoring that they primarily sell to the likes of Azimuth.

Maybe DMCA is bad and Apple is evil, but that doesn't make Corellium the good guys.

View on HN

>> Maybe DMCA is bad and Apple is evil, but that doesn't make Corellium the good guys.

Not only is this my favourite point in all the comments I’ve read - but I feel like this one sentence says, in one sentence - what it took me like a page and a half to convey. :P

Author here. I don't see how providing a platform to speed up security research is a bad thing.

That said, I don't have a huge problem with Apple's 'they copied our bits' complaint. That's true.

The problem is that Apple is weaponizing 1201 in a way that would be very damaging if applied in other contexts.

But Corellium isn’t copying their bits; users provide their own iOS files.

I didn't really read it as them saying Corellium is the good guys. Certainly they want people to ignore any bad things Corellium does, but the point here is that this is just another bit of DMCA overreach, and regardless who the defendant is, we don't want further precedent set that legally locks up our devices and software from ourselves.

Why exactly is this overreach? Corellium cracks iOS licensing, it’s no different from pirating Windows.

Perhaps, but what's the harm? Apple doesn't sell iOS itself, while Microsoft does indeed sell Windows (even though most end-users don't see that cost directly).

Proving actual damages is a part of any copyright infringement case.

It's called aquihire: you buy the company to redirect the talent and bury the product.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com