Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes.

31 (86.1%)

No.

5 (13.9%)

Total Members Voted: 36

[Fanofgaming]

Yes, you pretty much are the only one who thinks they shouldn't be held liable. They make money off of this and are by that virtue liable no matter what. That'd be like me going around selling pirated DVDs because 'the guy who supplied me with him said he totally had the rights to them!'

Which is very well illustrated by Wolfire's posted picture:

Spoiler: Wolfire's Picture (click to show/hide)

[Sowelu]

Still not seeing it.  They didn't know they were selling counterfeit stuff.  The seller misrepresented it.  Of COURSE they are obligated to redirect the misgotten money to the proper place, but I really can't see it as "their fault".

Yeah, claiming ignorance is a pretty abusable defense, but one hell of a lot of apps come through that store.  If someone published an ebook that was ripped off wholesale from some other, copyrighted, little-known book, and nobody noticed because--surprise--reviewers haven't read every book in existence ever...is that the bookstore's fault?

[nenjin]

The point is that, if Amazon treats you like shit and doesn't really put their money where their ethics should be, you have alternatives.

Apple doesn't give you that choice. If they won't allow competition in this arena, and tout themselves as the benchmark of authenticity and legality for selling on the App store, they have a duty to do...their...job. And there should be consequences they fail to regulate the market they force people to use.

And that's before even getting into whether Apple actually gives a shit, or if this is actually part of their internal business model. Pennies are pennies after all, and the more people that buy, ethically or not, the more money Apple will make.

[USEC_OFFICER]

Yeah, claiming ignorance is a pretty abusable defense, but one hell of a lot of apps come through that store.  If someone published an ebook that was ripped off wholesale from some other, copyrighted, little-known book, and nobody noticed because--surprise--reviewers haven't read every book in existence ever...is that the bookstore's fault?

You know, there is this amazing thing called Google which will allow you to look up anything you want, right? [/sarcasm]

But really, if you are reviewing something, the least you can do is search it up on Google. Or, you know, check if it was in their app store already.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

It's Apple. Why the fuck would you expect any degree of quality whatsoever, especially from their walled garden store? Anyone claiming that they're responsible for what happened is really giving them too much credit. This should really just be a further example of why you don't deal with Apple, or make products for their shitty OS.

[Sowelu]

But really, if you are reviewing something, the least you can do is search it up on Google. Or, you know, check if it was in their app store already.

So the guy says "This is an open source game, and I have rights to use it".  The reviewer looks around online and, hey, it is indeed open source!  Doesn't mean the guy has rights to it, but I just plain don't see how you can POSSIBLY expect Apple to pay a guy to do serious, hours-long research into the rights behind an app when the guy submitting it has at least a somewhat-believable cover story.  Seriously, beyond a certain point, it is the responsibility of the submitters.

I don't know how much the guy was selling it for, but Apple's not making a buck a copy here.  Processing the app application is going to take a few good minutes of a guy's time, at least.  Making sure it doesn't crash the phone etc. takes a while.  Swapping some emails with the guy who submitted it, searching the web, doing a low level of research could take half an hour--and depending on the guy's cover story and snow-job, it could still turn up looking A-OK.  Eventually the guy who handles his application has to say "Okay, it's good enough for me.  If I spend any more time on this, Apple is going to lose more money paying me for my time than it is going to gain from selling your game."

[Shadowlord]

I don't know how much the guy was selling it for

Translation:

I CAN'T RTFA

The guys took a game that the original creators are selling on the app store for $10, and re-sold it for $1, claiming that it was perfectly legal because it was open source and the license allows it (no, the art assets are not covered by the license).

Apple didn't even remove it. The guys eventually went "Okay, half the internet is out for blood, I guess we'd better take this off the app store..."

[Pnx]

     6 Lugaru is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
     7 modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
     8 as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
     9 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

The GNU General Public License contains various references to how you cannot sell the game, or use it for commercial purposes... It is buried in legalese though... but...

We are releasing the source code under the General Public License(GPL), which means you can distribute modified versions of the Lugaru code, but they must also be open-source under the GPL. The game assets are included in the snapshot, and can be redistributed for free, but cannot be resold without our permission.

Please note that the game data is not under the GPL, and forbids commercial redistribution.

So it's pretty readily apparently the game was being sold illegally... Legally speaking, (and this is only my rather rudimentary understanding of the law speaking here) wolfire has a pretty strong case for a lawsuit, I'd probably only do it myself if they'd sold at least ~1000 copies... which is possible considering the game and the price, that said they probably wouldn't make much money off of some random dickhead... and if they sued the company they might actually wind up suing the person that processed the application... in either of those cases the individual sued would then sue the company because they failed to protect them from an illegal action... the US legal system can be pretty messed up.

Still making a few thousand more than you probably would have if you'd sold the game normally would be fun.

[Sowelu]

I don't know how much the guy was selling it for

Translation:

I CAN'T RTFA

Sorry.  I'd edited my original post and left some loose ends hanging.  What I meant was "I don't know how much Apple was getting from each sale".  Which leaves you with...if they weren't getting much, and he wasn't selling much, how much time can you expect them to spend on it?  How much fine print do you expect them to read?  Maybe you've never worked in a call center where you're expected to meet a quota, but sometimes you just have to put in some due diligence and if something goes wrong, you fix it later.  The alternative is that you go out of business.  Which I guess you guys wouldn't mind.

[Shadowlord]

Except that Apple didn't fix it later.

[DeKaFu]

"I don't know how much Apple was getting from each sale".

I'm pretty sure apple gets 30% of each sale. So no, not a dollar per sale, only 60 cents.

Also yeah, there's really absolutely no ambiguity about the illegality of this. The code was released under the GPL, but as far as I understand it, the artwork, characters, storyline and name "Lugaru" still belong solely to Wolfire.

BUT/AND

Even if they'd released the entirety of the game under the GPL, the terms of the Apple store license contradict it. Which means it's impossible to release it on the app store under GPL. Wolfire gets around this by releasing it under a different license, which they're allowed to do only because they're the original creator of the work.



Edit: http://blog.wolfire.com/2011/02/Counterfeit-Lugaru-has-been-removed-from-the-App-Store

We're not sure who took it down, or what will happen to the customers who were tricked into buying the fake copy, or the money they paid for it. We still haven't heard anything from Apple.

[Nistenf]

"If you accidentally purchased the fake Lugaru, you can forward your receipt to contact@wolfire.com and we will give you an authentic version of Lugaru HD, as well as a bonus Steam key for your trouble"

Amazing

[Trappin]

I have no idea what sort of numbers are involved with a #60 rank at the Mac store but it probably means a few thousand(?) copies sold. Apple not responding to the original authors complaint means its already in the legal dept.

Damages are equal to the retail price of the legitimate app.

[Flare]

Still not seeing it.  They didn't know they were selling counterfeit stuff.  The seller misrepresented it.  Of COURSE they are obligated to redirect the misgotten money to the proper place, but I really can't see it as "their fault".

When you claim to review the applications of the programs being held on the store, you gave an assurance that you would check the applicants before putting them on the store. There is some room in what "standards" Apple defines which must be met before something gets put on their store, but if they say that they're not checking for fraudulent or scamming programs, it's not much better than saying that they failed to check now isn't it?
In other words, they promised to uphold a standard of amongst the programs being displayed on their store, I think we can both agree that making sure the programs in question aren't fraudulent is the most basic of any public trading company.

Yeah, claiming ignorance is a pretty abusable defense, but one hell of a lot of apps come through that store.  If someone published an ebook that was ripped off wholesale from some other, copyrighted, little-known book, and nobody noticed because--surprise--reviewers haven't read every book in existence ever...is that the bookstore's fault?

Yes it is, they profited from it. It doesn't matter how much stuff goes through the store. Volume doesn't give them a free license to profit from fraudulent transactions. If a company can't make sure that the stuff going through their store is legitimate, it's their onus is on the company to make sure that they can. By law any retailer is not supposed to sell items or products which are obtained illegally.

Sorry.  I'd edited my original post and left some loose ends hanging.  What I meant was "I don't know how much Apple was getting from each sale".  Which leaves you with...if they weren't getting much, and he wasn't selling much, how much time can you expect them to spend on it?  How much fine print do you expect them to read?  Maybe you've never worked in a call center where you're expected to meet a quota, but sometimes you just have to put in some due diligence and if something goes wrong, you fix it later.  The alternative is that you go out of business.  Which I guess you guys wouldn't mind.

Most EULAs or web based contracts are quite similar to each other. All you nee to do is have enough knowledge to know how to use ctrl+f in a manner where you can find out the relevant bits. In any case, they are supposed to read GNU, they have people trained to do this more or less. In this case searching for the word "resale" would be a pretty good starting point. As for your call center analogy, if you can make sure your company isn't breaking the law with the resources at hand, it's not an option to keep expanding under such circumstances.

In conclusion, being ethical isn't supposed to be easy or convenient. The clue is in the name.