[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad But… but… Apple didn't put a banner on the site this week proclaiming opposition to SOPA! Absence of evidence is evidence of absence!

Clearly, they also support torture and government-sponsored genital groping at airports because they're an American company, and the current American government supports them.

P.S.: Do not eat iPod shuffle.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by chucker P.S.: Do not eat iPod shuffle.

I've been doing it wrong all along…

[chucker]

(That said, I'd love to see Tim Cook take a strong stand against PIPA/SOPA. I don't think Apple is actually among those strongly "fighting against piracy"; sure, their App Store needlessly enforces DRM even when developers would like to opt out, but for the most part, Apple has been fairly liberal about protection schemes — Mac OS X never even had so much as a serial number, and Mac OS Classic, at worst, had its Enablers, which doubled as driver packages.)

[Mugge]

In real life, I don't think there's anything keeping Apple from publicly disagreeing with the BSA. The BSA might have some sort of membership provision that discourages this, but Apple is their biggest member and should be able to disregard that. Now that I'm thinking about it, wasn't that exactly what Apple did over global warming with the US Chamber of Commerce?

Regardless, this should not just be about what kind of companies that benefit or not from the SOPA. What even the SOPA proponents fail to understand is that we owe our entire way of life and all our modern industry to the freedom rights that SOPA is infringing upon. Without freedom of speech most of the western would still be stuck with monarchs or despots and even the industries of the early 20th century would have had a hard time being as successful as they eventually were.

SOPA will do a good job of protecting old ideas, but it will do an even better one at curbing new ones.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Mugge In real life, I don't think there's anything keeping Apple from publicly disagreeing with the BSA. The BSA might have some sort of membership provision that discourages this, but Apple is their biggest member and should be able to disregard that.

In terms of market cap, Apple is clearly by far the biggest member now, but in terms of software revenues, software sales, software-related employees, software products, etc., others are far bigger.

And frankly, I don't really want to set up precedent for "Apple is large enough so they get to ignore the rules". It reeks of "too big to fail", even if it happens to serve our interests.

I'd much rather they leave the BSA, just as they've done with the Chamber of Commerce.

Originally Posted by Mugge Now that I'm thinking about it, wasn't that exactly what Apple did over global warming with the US Chamber of Commerce?

Indeed. Incidentally, the spokesperson (or responsible person?) on that appears to be still with Apple. As "Vice President, Worldwide Government Affairs", perhaps she'd be interested to comment on this?

Originally Posted by Mugge Regardless, this should not just be about what kind of companies that benefit or not from the SOPA. What even the SOPA proponents fail to understand is that we owe our entire way of life and all our modern industry to the freedom rights that SOPA is infringing upon. Without freedom of speech most of the western would still be stuck with monarchs or despots and even the industries of the early 20th century would have had a hard time being as successful as they eventually were. SOPA will do a good job of protecting old ideas, but it will do an even better one at curbing new ones.

Ah, but don't confuse "fail to understand" with "will benefit in the short term nonetheless". The content industry understands perfectly well that the current system is biased against both creators and consumers. Patent trolls understand perfectly well that the patent system was intended to accomplish quite the opposite of what they're doing. And the oil industry, too, understands perfectly well that its days are numbered. But for now and possibly in the coming decades, they still benefit from the status quo, and are busy setting up legislation to secure this for a little longer yet. Until they're retired and no longer have to care.

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by chucker In terms of market cap, Apple is clearly by far the biggest member now, but in terms of software revenues, software sales, software-related employees, software products, etc., others are far bigger. And frankly, I don't really want to set up precedent for "Apple is large enough so they get to ignore the rules". It reeks of "too big to fail", even if it happens to serve our interests. I'd much rather they leave the BSA, just as they've done with the Chamber of Commerce.

In the medical device industry, which I have some lobby work experience from, playing by the rules was officially what everybody agreed to. But in reality, even generally nice people such as those would not refrain from a little bit of running behind each others backs if there was a competitive advantage to be had. Seen in that perspective I don't think there's much fair play going in the BSA. Especially not if one is to judge them by their deeds. It's more likely to be an organised form of mutual bullying between the members. So asking Apple to play by that organisations official rules would probably be the same as asking them not to play by the de facto rules.

And yes, I too would like to see Apple ditch the BSA entirely.

Ah, but don't confuse "fail to understand" with "will benefit in the short term nonetheless". The content industry understands perfectly well that the current system is biased against both creators and consumers. Patent trolls understand perfectly well that the patent system was intended to accomplish quite the opposite of what they're doing. And the oil industry, too, understands perfectly well that its days are numbered. But for now and possibly in the coming decades, they still benefit from the status quo, and are busy setting up legislation to secure this for a little longer yet. Until they're retired and no longer have to care.

Oh, I wouldn't confuse that. What I meant, but failed to convey, was that they are failing by going for short term gain over long term value. Maybe the consequences won't come soon enough to bite their own asses, but their own offspring might feel it. And yet they push on with their agenda. That's a pretty big fail in my book.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Mugge It's more likely to be an organised form of mutual bullying between the members. So asking Apple to play by that organisations official rules would probably be the same as asking them not to play by the de facto rules. And yes, I too would like to see Apple ditch the BSA entirely.

I'm not sure where they even benefit much from the BSA. Anything sold through the iTunes Store architecture (which pretty much encompasses all their software by now — including OS X itself, even)? They control that already, and piracy, while not non-existant, is fairly low.

Originally Posted by Mugge Oh, I wouldn't confuse that. What I meant, but failed to convey, was that they are failing by going for short term gain over long term value. Maybe the consequences won't come soon enough to bite their own asses, but their own offspring might feel it. And yet they push on with their agenda. That's a pretty big fail in my book.

Right, but short-term-gain thinking happens on all levels.

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by chucker Right, but short-term-gain thinking happens on all levels.

True. But in this case the collateral damage is going to be huge.