Apple Loses A Copyright Lawsuit

Techmeme Ride Home
|

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Federal judge has dismissed. Apple's claims that mobile device virtualization company corral corallium violated copyright law with its software that allowed folks to run ios on pc's quoting the washington post in a ruling that has wide reaching implications for iphone security research and copyright law a federal judge in florida throughout apple's claims that carelli had violated copyright law with its software which helps security researchers find bugs and security holes on apple's products. Corallium co founded in two thousand seventeen by husband and wife. Amanda gordon and chris wade was a breakthrough insecurity research because it gave its customers the ability to run virtual iphones on desktop computers. Corallium makes it to use physical avon's that contain specialized software to poke and prod. Ios apple's mobile operating system. The judge in the case ruled that carell liam's creation of virtual. Iphones was not a copyright violation in part because it was designed to help improve the security for all iphone users. Corallium wasn't creating a competing product for consumers rather it was a research tool for a comparatively small number of customers. Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment in the lawsuit. Apple argued that crawley products could be dangerous if they fall into the wrong hands because security flaws discovered by liam could be used to hack iphones. Apple also argued that chromium sells its product indiscriminately claim corallium denied dread. Rodney smith called apple's argument on those claims quote puzzling. If not disingenuous quote smith found that chromium used a vetting process before selling its products to customers. Apple initially attempted to acquire corallium in two thousand eighteen. According to court records when the acquisition talks stalled apple sued corallium last year claiming its virtual iphones which contain only the bare bones functions necessary for security research constitute violation of copyright law apple also alleged corallium circumvented. Apple's security measures to create the software thereby violating the digital millennium copyright act that claim has not been thrown out and quote. So i was already to say this was a dumb lawsuit but apparently companies have won a similar cases in the past around copyright but most in the digital security community praised this result. Let me quote at pony. All the things on twitter quote. This is a big deal for security research in particular but also other parts of tech apple case was an insanely broad assertion. That emulating iowa's firmware on something. That's not apple's own hardware violates copyright rather than covered by fair use. Imagine if. That argument had prevailed that emulation of a binary even for wildly different purposes such as security testing that binary is a digital copyright infringement. Might as well have back named afl to automatic federal lawsuit in that scenario was such a dangerously broad claim if the logical conclusion of your lawsuit is windows being a terms of service. Change away from overnight bankrupting vm. Ware to force everyone to use your and turning security testing of compiled binary into lawsuits. Then sorry you're lawsuit is bad and you should feel bad and quote

Coming up next