Department of Justice and FTC Looking Into Beeper iMessage Controversy

[sdf]

Apple acts like a grade-school bully.

Every message sent through iMessage costs Apple money. This is a service they provide for their devices and customers, not for general use. There's no public API, and the private API must be kept secure. That it isn't is a major problem.

 

[MrSkoTA]

DOJ and FTC (really all the world’s politicians) are the dirty bureaucrat from GhostBusters that forced them to open the containment field and let out all the evil into the world!

 

[Naraxus]

Apple needs to tell the DOJ & FTC to pound sand and these asinine Senators (Klobuchar is leading the charge...shocker) to **** off. This is just silly.

 

[macfacts]

Apple advertises end to end encryption. A third party sticking their code in the middle of that breaks the promise to end users. This isn‘t anti-competitive, it’s closing security vulnerabilities.

Then there's something fishy about Apple's claim about end to end encryption. I can use PGP/gpg+email over _public_ networks and keep the encryption.

 

[Motorola68000]

These type of actions have little to do with safeguarding consumers. They are more about diminishing security and systems integrity to enable them and others to snoop. These situations just provide excuses and leverage to circumvent customer privacy.

 

[macfacts]

Which is their right as a vertically integrated company. I am fairly confident that the only way this can happen is if congress can come together to enact new laws because under existing ones, it has been established in court that Apple has no duty to deal.

Hate on Apple all you want. At least hate right.

Microsoft makes the PC OS and hardware (surface) and can define themselves as vertically integrated but they can't make it so chrome or Firefox can't run.

 

[Abazigal]

Microsoft makes the PC OS and hardware (surface) and can define themselves as vertically integrated but they can't make it so chrome or Firefox can't run.

Because windows (and macOS) didn’t start out that way, while iOS did. That’s the key difference. They are closer to android than iOS in this regard.

The ruling you are looking for in particular is called “no duty to deal”, which basically states that it is not unlawful to have monopoly power. It’s why apple won its lawsuit against epic, because the laws basically showed that Apple has no obligation to provide access to those APIs and development tools to companies that do not abide by its terms, and Apple has never once changed the rules.

If Microsoft were to create a new version of windows and make it closed with an App Store, then they might have a case. Otherwise, vertical integration has a very specific connotation and you and I don’t get to make up our own interpretations to run with.

It’s the same with iMessage here. Too many people seem too eager to shout “anticompetitive!!!” when they see something they don’t like. The law does not exist to force iMessage for android or pull Apple down a peg just because you wish for it to be so.

 

[haydn!]

For those who are on the side of Apple and wants to keep iMessage on their iPhones... need to understand that allowing iMessage on Android benefits you (shocker!).

You won't have to be concerned about "oh, they have an Android... I don't care to message them." Look at the data from teenagers and especially in the dating world. It removes that barrier. And I know you might be wondering... well, there's plenty of other messaging platforms to exchange messages with for Android users.

But the issue is that most iPhone users IN THE US... gravitate toward iMessage. If we (in the states) can agree to move to a cross-platform messaging app... this whole situation would be mute.

I have no objection to an iMessage App on Android, or better interoperability between messaging platforms. I don’t think any reasonably minded person would.

However, that’s not really what the issue is here, is it? It’s more an issue of legality and morality around the approach Beeper have taken.

No matter how you look at it, they have essentially Hacked Apple’s software and then attempted to profit from it. We have a huge problem if any legal or Government institution sides with Beeper when it comes to assessing Apples actions, no matter how this may influence things in the long term.

I’ve said all along, there is something suspicious about Beeper. They were too confident and bold considering their entire product relied on a security flaw. It really feels like they’re being backed by someone who stands to benefit from Apple being more open… and I don’t mean Joe Public.

 

[wbeasley]

Really now? If Beeper mini sought to license iMessage then that's a different story...

What they actually did was hack/reverse engineered a proprietary system and seemed to be proud having accomplished it...

I'm not from the US however I don't really see a need for government agencies to step in...

doesnt every EULA state you can't reverse engineer it?

 

[scorpio vega]

Android users are the most entitled peple I have seen In awhile lol

 

[5232152]

All this over blue bubbles.......If folks want interoperability, get one of the third party apps. Sounds like sour grapes from Android users.

What are you talking about? Why does this total lack of logic come from?
I as a Apple user want to be able to securely and safely communicate with anyone I want and Apple are blocking me from doing this. This has nothing to do with Android and everything to do with real Apple users that live in the eco system.

 

[5232152]

Android users are the most entitled peple I have seen In awhile lol

Every time you are writing you are being as anti-Apple and I will never understand why.
All us Apple users is security and if you are against that your Chinese society score just went up.

 

[hans1972]

For those who are on the side of Apple and wants to keep iMessage on their iPhones... need to understand that allowing iMessage on Android benefits you (shocker!).

It doesn't. It will cause some iPhone users to buy Android phones thus making Apple users less valuable to developers and companies.

It also makes it harder for me to find out which people are using iPhones and which aren't.

Tim Apple needs to have his Android team publish an official iMessages app for that platform. Restricting people who used Android phones from being able to communicate is a form of discrimination.

And it's a fine form of discrimination.

Companies should be allowed to make closed services.

I have no problem if Meta stopped WhatsApp being available on iPhones. In fact, I would think it would be fantastic.

´

It would be better for all of us. I love a lot of Apple things, but I hate the ecosystem that acts like a monopoly. And the vertical integration of the entire pipeline looks like a monopoly.

I dislike people and companies who want openness and interoperability.
I just want it to work for me and I don't care about people in other ecosystems.

If SMS was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me.

I agree with you that Apple should not be forced to make their services available on other devices. However, other texting apps don't exist on iOS. Other IP-messaging apps do exist (WhatsApp, Signal, etc), but Apple does not allow anyone other than itself to create a IP-based messaging app on iOS with regular text message (SMS) fallback. To me, this seems anticompetitive.

I only need one app to send SMS.

It's only text and there is a limit to what you can do with it. Apple's Messages handles SMS fine and supports feature even more than I need.

Not fantastic. Because in order to use iMessage I have no other option to buy an Apple device... that's not good look.

I don't understand why be against it. It helps everyone involved... including Apple users, answer me this... why do you not want iMessage on Android?

I don't want iMessages on Android because then

1) Some iPhone users will buy Android phones

and

2) Some Android users won't by iPhones.

"Because in order to use iMessage I have no other option to buy an Apple device"

That's exactly what I want to happen. I want Apple to force you to buy an iPhone against your will.

I don’t think anybody here is against having iMessage on Android. I actually think Apple should do it. But I don’t think we should contort antitrust law to force Apple to do something they obviously don’t want to do.

I'm against it.

I like it when Apple make services and products which works only on their platforms. That's when they do their best work.

Well, from my perspective... it prevents a user from switching.

If it prevents a user from switching away from iPhones, then it's a good thing.

In a 2013 internal email, Craig Federighi opposed putting iMessage on Android because it "would simply serve to remove [an] obstacle to iPhone families giving their kids Android phones."

Security and privacy are not Apple's reasons for not putting iMessage on Android. It's competition, exploiting teenage peer pressure, et cetera.

It's a case where the ends justify the means.

It benefits both Apple and users who are heavy into Apple products. We are a minority in the world and have no member to loose to Android and Windows.

 

[I7guy]

For all those people always complaining about the EU… here you have US authorities investigating whether a company should be allowed unauthorised access to private servers and services of another company.

Ridiculous. Feast on that.

Unlike those in the EU who defend the EU to the hilt who want apple to be a public utility, I am appalled at the audacity of these politicians and believe the voters need to vote appropriately.

 

[hans1972]

But that's where the anti-competitive comes into question.

iMessage is tied to SMS... no other app has access to this. So, being in the US... where majority of people use SMS and the only app that has access to it is Apple Messages app. Then, of course... most iPhone users will undoubtedly go with Apple Messages app.

It would be different if Apple created another Apple Messages app... not tied to SMS. So, hypothetically speaking on the iPhone... it would be an SMS app along with a Message app (specifically for iMessage).

The majority of the US doesn't use SMS. They use iMessage, RCS, SnapChat, FaceBook Messenger, WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram and plenty of other apps which does the same thing as SMS: communicating via text only.

 

[hans1972]

No, it's not supposed to be a bad thing, it manifestly is a bad thing. As a consumer, you should want more choices. It drives costs down and leads to better products in the long run. The stickier iOS gets, the fewer people can make a reasonable choice to leave it if they don't like decisions Apple is making. That's hell for consumers. If you don't share that perspective, 👍 good for you!

No, I don't want a lot of choices. I want ONE convenient choice which works fine and I have no problem paying extra for it.

It's great for me if other people can't move of iOS. I'm an iOS users and we need as many users as possible to become even more valuable to developers and companies.

The main reason Apple can treat developers as second class citizens is because of the number and value of us customers. Do you really want to give more power do developers?

 

[hans1972]

You realize that's a problem and bad for consumers, right? Forcing Apple to change that will also force those other companies to open up lest they want the same problems

I don't believe in governments forcing companies to be customer friendly or make interoperable systems or making it easier to switch.

It's something a customer should take into consideration before choosing to buy or use something.

 

[stars_fan]

Government intervention is always a what we need

 

[DakotaGuy]

Although I have an iMac and an iPad I also have a Galaxy S22 Ultra for a phone. I suppose for teens bubble color is really important, but all I want is a better stock messaging experience when I text iPhones. I use Google Messages for most of my texting because stock phone number texting is what most people do in the U.S. I also use Snapchat and Facebook Messenger, but I text a lot.

I personally prefer Apple to get RCS support so I can continue to use Google Messages to text anyone regardless of the type of phone they have. If Apple introduced an iMessage app for Android I would then have to use 2 apps to text. I would want to text Android phones with Google Messages so I have RCS support, however I’d want to text iPhones with iMessage for a better experience. If I didn’t have data I’d need to use Google Messages for everyone for fallback to SMS. It’s messy!

So really the only fully integrated solution that makes sense is RCS. It would be nice to see Apple get the GSMA to add E2E encryption to the universal profile, but even without it would still be safer than SMS which sends plain text. At least RCS is encrypted in transit. I know some young folks are obsessed with bubble color, but as an Android user I just want to open Messages and have a rich texting experience no matter the phone I’m texting. If I don’t have data I want an SMS fallback. Anything else would get messy flipping between two apps depending on the phone I’m texting.

 

[Shirasaki]

But…Apple is above the law of man 🥺

Apple fan: Apple designs the law to benefit themselves.

 

[CapitalIdea]

For all those people always complaining about the EU… here you have US authorities investigating whether a company should be allowed unauthorised access to private servers and services of another company.

Ridiculous. Feast on that.

And the EU wants Apple to be forced to authorize competing systems to spam you via the messaging app. Just what we need. More Nigerian princes.

 

[Biro]

For those who are on the side of Apple and wants to keep iMessage on their iPhones... need to understand that allowing iMessage on Android benefits you (shocker!).

You won't have to be concerned about "oh, they have an Android... I don't care to message them." Look at the data from teenagers and especially in the dating world. It removes that barrier. And I know you might be wondering... well, there's plenty of other messaging platforms to exchange messages with for Android users.

But the issue is that most iPhone users IN THE US... gravitate toward iMessage. If we (in the states) can agree to move to a cross-platform messaging app... this whole situation would be mute.

I don’t care about the technology pecking order among teenagers. And neither should anyone else. As far as a quality texting experience between Android and iPhones, Apple’s adoption of the RCS standard next year should solve that.

 

[CapitalIdea]

Let’s be clear here: The only reason the DOJ is getting involved is because they would love to open up the security of iMessages. They give zero crap about consumers.

I fail to see how this is any different than requiring Twitter to work with FaceBook.

Even if they do somehow force interoperability, they cannot keep Apple from charging for their service on their servers which they are required to maintain for zero profit from these users who did not purchase their hardware.

EXACTLY. This is just their latest foray into trying to get into messaging systems as they have tried multiple times before. Naturally, the dopes fall for it because they are the same ones who basically accused Apple of supporting terrorism by keeping privacy around after that San Bernadino situation.

 

[Shirasaki]

I’m all for government intervention in megacorp business practices. The more the merrier. They are all way too powerful, sometimes even more than government themselves.

Besides, if there were no blue bubble in the first place, then beeper would not need to exist today, even if iMessage is locked down as-is. Teenagers obsession with blue bubble and society being twisted by bubble colour is to blame. What if there were no colour difference?

 

[Shirasaki]

I don’t care about the technology pecking order among teenagers. And neither should anyone else.

Teenagers voice their disprove loud and they echo each other. Yes, any given adult can choose to not care, but society itself can’t.