Tuesday, April 27, 2010

apple's security.

Just real briefly, I do think that this police raid on Gizmodo speaks to more than just the journalistic considerations that Mashable mentions - it's about the whole ecosystem of a company that values intellectual property above anything else in the world.

Intellectual property, while not the devil that it's sometimes made out to be, is one of the worst catchalls for bad behavior in recent memory. Suing senior citizens for downloading a few songs, the five-plus privacy warnings before a legit copy of a DVD, etc. all stand to punish consumers who are already on the side of the behemoths that come across like bullies. However, with Apple's pursuit of their new iPhone, this appears to have reached a new low. (Or maybe not. Maybe this is old-hat and I'm naive enough to think that this is some terrible event. Let me know.)

The simple fact is that the police would never have conducted this raid without being egged on by Apple, Inc. and perhaps even Jobs himself. The fact that Giz had already offered (some reports are even saying had already done so!) to return the phone speak toe the totalitarian nature of this company regime. As uncomfortable as I was with Google starting their censoring business in China, I'm even less of a fan of a company directing the police in my own country to a private residence.

I understand the desire, and even the need, to keep trade secrets. I'm not against capitalistic advantages, nor do I think copyright (or patents, in this case, more likely) should should obliterated. However, I do think there's a real danger in this case. The journalistic implications are important, and I believe that they'll be fleshed out, if not fully, in the near future. I'm still surprised, though, that so few people are talking about the broader aspects of this whole story.

Just another detail that pushes me away from Apple and their gates and into the open-source community. This is not a business, this is a master-slave didactic.

No comments: