Hacker News Reader

Comment by kulahan | Hacker News Reader

Wouldn’t the guidelines apply to anyone using it who doesn’t have specific, legal, written exemptions? Not to say they don’t have it, but simply hand-waving “well they wrote it so it doesn’t have to apply to them” doesn’t seem quite as simple to me. I could be wrong!

View on HN

The whole point of an agreement is that it sets out what parties will do for each other, and what happens if there is a breach.

Apple could already do things with the App Store without needing to agree to something to get Apple to let Apple do App Store things.

Apple is not going to sue themselves for being in breach.

etc.

Just because there's e.g. a license agreement doesn't mean you need to agree to something, if you are somehow otherwise authorized to do the thing. E.g. fair use, or you have a pre-existing right or ownership, or whatever.

Thanks, this is why I asked - I know law can be weird and somewhat counterintuitive, so I try not to assume much!

No. Apple does not sign up for an Apple Developer account. Contracts with oneself aren't even meaningful.

This is a common tech enthusiast fallacy: thinking that law is code. So there must be some "if app published, there must be a developer account, and if the developer account violates the rule the app must be removed". It just doesn't work that way.

Apple has contracts with third parties to allow them to distribute apps in Apple's App Store. That's it.

While I am in agreement about the common tech enthusiast, or perhaps just dev, mental failings regarding law, I feel obligated to point out that App store guidelines written by the company running the app store are not law.

This is the reason why anti-trust agencies don’t like this. Apple (with its App Store) is a gatekeeper and in Europe at least it should not favor its own apps over the others(i.e maps, payments, AI integrations etc). It should play fair.

“Fair” meaning that an app that was designed from the ground up by the same people that created the device and operating system should get the same attention as a malware-ridden hack from six years ago?

What does fair even mean here? Ensuring the advantages of vertical integration can’t be enjoyed by users?

Fair means you follow your own rules and do not use your monopolistic position to promote your apps.

The law definitely is not code, but the law could require Apple to follow the same requirements they set for others. Then the government could sue Apple (or otherwise enforce this behavior.)

It's not the worst idea I've heard, tbh.

Sure, but that’s not how it works.

And it’s a pretty bad idea. It basically means that no apps that ship with an OS can be available in the store.

I don't think that follows.

Law is absolutely fuzzy code. Lawyers are people that try to grok the legal API in as many languages as possible. Code is a great analogy.

No, it’s really not. The law is not intended to be deterministic or efficient, and it is neither. Law explicitly leaves room for human judgment and context in ways code doesn’t and shouldn’t.

I think the premise is folks at Apple don’t have the occasion to be prompted to accept the terms.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com