Apple Cuts Off Under-18 Darwin Developer 815
Crispyking writes "Finlay Dobbie has been a leading contributor to the Darwin project, most notably
helping track down the infamous PPP-hang bug. He's been nominated to become a Darwin contributor (which comes with limited check-in privileges) but when going through the process, Apple found out he's under 18 years old, and not only refused to let him be a contributor to this 'open source' project, but canceled his
Apple Developer Connection membership (which gives him download access to the source code) on the grounds that because he's under 18, he can't be legally bound to the small-print agreement." Update: 03/26 00:26 GMT by P : Finlay wrote in email that he wasn't getting the Darwin source through his ADC account, but through a third party development project, which he resigned from as a result of all the red tape and the ADC account being disabled.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Young coders are best (Score:2, Interesting)
What about EULAs? (Score:4, Interesting)
Child labor too, perhaps? (Score:5, Interesting)
This sounds like such a boneheaded descision, though, that it must have come from their legal department.
Sorry folks, it's the law. (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't go ragging on Apple for this - if they weren't taking these steps, I'm sure a case could be made for child labour law violations.
Re:Age discrimination (Score:3, Interesting)
Now people are out to villify Apple because they aren't going to let someone who has no legal liability from having access to their code. Apple is being smart in their actions. I'm sure they would love to have him work on their code but they can't ignore the liability they take on if they let him work on their code.
What about licenses? (Score:2, Interesting)
Co-signer for NDA? (Score:4, Interesting)
-Karl
Does this mean the same for all EULA (Score:3, Interesting)
What a great time to be under 18... no restrictions on your software usage, it would be unenforceable!
Re:Age Discrimination? (Score:2, Interesting)
Because they can't legally be bound to a contract unless they are an emancipated minor. In short, if he wanted to take his code and do something else with it, Apple would have no recourse and could lose the whole operating system. I'll be the first to agree that this sucks, but contract law is the way it is for a good reason: it protects BOTH parties.
Play their game, sue (Score:2, Interesting)
Send a bill for your work. Sue for illegal distribution of your work.
You obviously weren't able to legally transfer any copyrights to them, nor work without renumeration.
This could be good leverage, either treat you like a person, or don't, not only the stuff that is to their advantage.
It just pisses me off to see "minors" treated like they have no rights, when "adults" don't take responsibility for their actions either.
Re:Gotta love contract law (Score:4, Interesting)
Kids worked at APPLE! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:So . . (Score:4, Interesting)
Kintanon
Unbeleivable (Score:2, Interesting)
Before lawyers ruled apple, they KNEW the 12 years old useless kid MIGHT become a professional developer and contribute to the apple world.
I know first hand, I WAS one of those. I received free copies of 'confidential' documentations, free access to some developer resources, a bunch of encouragment, LOTS of patience and ultimately a few friendship with some apple people that date back like.. 20 years now!
But then, I spent the last 20 years as a die-hard mac developer, writing many shelf software. so it DID pay to humor me when I was a useless and fuckingly curious kid.
And now, the morronic lawyers decide to stick by their fucking law books and ENFORCE that to everyone with the sense to realize that age has very little importance.
Burn them!
Re:Child labor too, perhaps? (Score:5, Interesting)
The building model planes part doesn't apply unless you plan on selling them for profit after they are built and don't conform to the laws on number of hours worked at certain times, etc.
Re:So . . (Score:2, Interesting)
Apple is within their rights here... (Score:1, Interesting)
Because he is not 18, he cannot be bound by the agreements that are required of anyone to join the Darwin Project or the Developer Connection. Given that, it isn't at all unreasonable that Apple cut him off.
The real problem is that somewhere along the way, he ignored a Terms of Service that demanded that he be over the age of 18. It is a shame that a talented developer can't contribute in all the ways he wants to because of his age, but that is just the way things are.
As usual, the Slashdot community is a little confused about just exactly what the words "Freedom" and "Fairness" actually mean. No surprise there. What exactly, rhetoric aside, is Apple supposed to have done wrong here, besides covering their IP? Regardless of your personal views on intellectual property, do you really think it is so ridiculous for a company to take steps to protect the results of its own R&D?
Re:Parents or something (Score:5, Interesting)
Specifically, it can even be used (in Florida) to only apply to a particular contract, a copy of which is included with the forms. It came up when we were fighting the curfew laws here (my little brother, who is a US citizen, was the first person in North Palm Beach to get hit with them - the judge threw out the case, calling the law "ridiculous". Gotta love the three branch system).
--
Evan
Corel had the same clause! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Young coders are best (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What about EULAs? (Score:5, Interesting)
The claim that you have no rights to use software if you don't agree to the EULA is still being debated and has not been well tested in court. I certainly don't need any sort of EULA for other copyright protected works I purchase (music on tape, record, or CD; books; magazines; movies on videotape or DVD; console video games; arcade games; sheet music; etc). Copyright only restricts the right to make and distribute copies. Personal use (including copies for personal use) has never required any sort license agreement. The claim that installation or copying into RAM to run software represents some sort of restricted copying is as silly as claiming that making a tape copy of a CD to listen to in the car is restricted. So why is computer software somehow different?
Don't buy into the software industries claim that you have no rights to a product you purchase. It's on shaky legal ground and they know it. There is no reason for citizens to let them extend copyright in this new way without a fight.
Re:What about EULAs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Show me some food that has a license agreement. For that matter, produce a music CD as well.
Re:GPL != EULA (Score:2, Interesting)
I should have been more clear...
Under US law, minors cannot agree to the GPL. Therefore they cannot modify or distribute code licensed under the GPL, because:
Now it's not entirely clear what modification of the software means (the same can be said of distribution). Obviously modifying the source code applies. An interesting question is if configuration files included with the distribution qualify. IANAL, but an argument could be made that such configuration files do apply (configuration files that are not included with the software are a different matter).
The end result is that, legally speaking, nobody under 18 can modify or distribute a GPL work. So if you're 17 and give your friend a Debian CD, the FSF could technically go after you for distribution without the right to distribute. If you're 14 and posting patches to the LKML, Linus could file suit against you for a GPL violation.
Granted, this is unlikely to occur. The press would be horrible. But is the law.
The way around this is simple, have your parents "sign" for you. I would imagine that an affidavit stating that they bind you to the terms of the GPL would be sufficient, but again, IANAL.
Re:What about EULAs? (Score:3, Interesting)
Absolute horsesh*t.
EULAs are a legal fiction and have no force or validity whatsoever.
The fictitious need for a "license" at all stems from an impossibly boneheaded court decision made in the 1970's which stated that the act of loading the software into memory for the purposes of execution constituted an infringing copy (the copy just made from disk to RAM), and was not covered under Fair Use. Ergo, a license was required.
The merest child could see how stupid this ruling was. Eventually, Congress got around to amending copyright law to expressly allow loading a program into RAM. So the highly specious need for a "license" from the vendor no longer exists. Like books, music, and videos, software is sold.
However, this idiot ruling from the court (which still serves as a crucial reference in the history of IP case law) serves as a jumping-off point to illustrate the unsustainability of the existing copyright regime in the light of modern digital media: Congress expressly gave you the right to make a copy in RAM. But what about that copy on your hard disk, which you copied from the CD-ROM you bought? If you've got enough system RAM, there's probably a complete copy of the work in the filesystem cache. Is that allowed? How about the copy in the read cache of your disk drive and/or disk controller itself? What about those fragments sitting in the L2 cache of the CPU, or those even tinier fragments in the L1 cache?
"Licensing" is not a reasonable or workable model. Copyright law needs to be fundamentally reengineered to live in the modern world.
Schwab
I've experienced both sides.... (Score:3, Interesting)
This corporation is run by the books, so basically they told me I could do what I wanted, but that they wouldn't be able to pay me for my work until I turned 14.
I've also been an active member of the development community for the product that I develop with (www.dataaccess.com). I have given many speeches, even submitted source that was incorporated into the language, all while under the age of 18. Now of course I have no problems, I'm almost 21.
But I've also used this whole 'under 18 no contract' thing to my advantage. It came in handy when dealing with a warranty contract on some equipment I purchased. I shouldn't have even been able to purchase a warranty, but they let me. Later when the product broke, I took it back and they told me that the contract stated that I had to send it in for repair, not bring it in for replacement. After pointing out to him that I was under 18 and he could get in trouble for even selling me a warranty, they promptly accepted the broken product and handed me a nice new box.
So I used it for a threat. So what, all the same
In the long run, I would hope that something would come along to patch up this hole in contract law.
I think in California that maybe this has been dealt with. I was able to open a bank account and even have a VISA before I was 18 because my father signed as a proxy on the contract. (He couldn't though access the money in the account, he was not a signor on account, just a contract proxy)
OLIVER
But he could be tried as an adult........ (Score:3, Interesting)
Get married - May need parental consent in some places
Be a father/mother -Greatest responsibility ever... (pay child support for 18+ years...even if you are married)
Decide to end your child/fetus' life (don't get started on the pro/anti abortion thing ok)
Wield the greatest weapon ever created (cars have killed more ppl than guns and bombs ever did)
Serve life in prison for crimes
Pay taxes
Work at a burger shop (does this mean you may get fired because they cannot enforce the confidentiality agreement that keeps thousands of minors from giving up the ingredients to "secret sauce"
List goes on.
But you can't contribute in a meaningful way to anything meaningful that has to do with lawyers.
By the way, the next shrink wrap EULA is getting opened by my 9 year old son......
Re:What about EULAs? (Score:1, Interesting)
"Licensing" is exactly the problem that copyright was supposed to solve.
The original U.S. copyright laws covered "maps, charts and books." Why specifically single out maps and charts? It was to solve the problem of map licenses. Ship captains needed maps and charts in order to safely navigate the waters. Mapmakers were in a precarious position -- preparing an accurate map was a difficult and expensive proposition, and the result was a single piece of paper -- that could be easily pirated.
The result was that mapmakers licensed maps and charts to ship captains. These licenses were the NDAs of the age. The result was that each captain was sworn to secrecy, and no one was able to compare and correct inaccurate maps and charts.
The primary purpose of copyright, with respect to charts and maps, was to rectify this situation by establishing a quid pro quo between the mapmakers and the public. In exchange for open publication of the maps, so that they could be compared, corrected, and eventually enter the public domain, the mapmaker would receive a government monopoly over the printing and distribution of their work.
Now we've come full circle -- Software automatically receives a 95 year monopoly, but that isn't enough for the software companies, who have unilaterally brought back the "bad old days" before copyright when you needed to sign a license just to read a book, or a map. In the case of software, you actually have to sign a license that says that you won't read the work, "Reverse engineer" being a fancy term for "read and understand."
Copyright doesn't need to be fixed. The only "fix" necessary is to outlaw software usage licenses entirely.
Ageism and Forced Lying (Score:4, Interesting)
And I have to lie to do much of anything online.
Within the OS community, I'm completely open with my age. Nobody cares about age--just skills. It's absolutely wonderful. The only other place I get that is in college classes.
But on the rest of the Internet I have to lie. I have to lie to get an instant messaging account, a webmail address, access to a news site, some web space, or a chat room. I have to lie to get API data from Palm, Microsoft and many other companies. Some of these places make it exceedingly easy to lie--for example, one videochat site just has you hit the submit button again, implicitly promising that a parent is submitting th eform this time. In others, you have to jump through hoops to do it. But in most cases it's pretty easy to lie.
It gets on my conscience, though. Every time I lie I feel like a cheat. Every time I pretend I didn't see the "by clicking this button, you agree that you are over eighteen" line, I feel like a bad person. But I do it anyway, because I can't do what I want and need to do otherwise.
I understand that this is necessary because of contract law. However, I think that points to a deficiency in contract law, not in kids.
I haven't thought very long on this issue, but at least one solution comes to mind. It follows the model of child labor laws. Before fifteen (which, incidentally, I think is older than is really necessary) you simply can't work. Between fifteen and eighteen you can work, but with restrictions on what you can do and how long you can do it for. At eighteen, you're free to sell your labor in any way you please.
Perhaps similar provisions should be written into contract law. For example, between age X and eighteen, you can enter contracts unless they obligate you to pay money or do work.
In any case, I believe that the current system is Evil and Wrong. We should fix it instead fo forcing kids to be liars.
Re:Gotta love contract law (Score:1, Interesting)
If anything Apple has lost a valuable contributor & I'm sure they're aware that by doing this it will hurt them
Speaking from experience.. (Score:2, Interesting)
I, personally, haven't had _too_ much of a problem with my age, although there have been some minor issues.
This is New Zealand, and finding people with my skillset and experience is a non-trivial event.
I am extremely saddened that Apple have chosen to discard someone who would probably have been one of their best resources. What I'm also worried about however, is whether or not other companies will follow suit. (Including the one I work for, funnily enough.)
All it takes is one large multi-national to start a trend, and then all people in our age-group will have an even harder time of getting a job in our chosen field.
I think Apple need to go back, and rethink their actions.
Re:Ageism and Forced Lying (Score:2, Interesting)
The system is screwed up (Score:2, Interesting)
Wow. Talk about your cutting-edge journalism. (Score:5, Interesting)
The reason? It turns out this kid's rant against Apple was missing one important detail... The one where we learn he was being provided developer access by someone who was violating a legally binding agreement. Maybe that's why Apple went all heavy-handed and cut off this developer's account? Oops.
I feel sorry for the kid if he wants to hack Darwin and Apple won't let him contribute his code back. I don't feel sorry for the kid (or his co-conspirators) for doing an end-run around Apple's contracts and getting burned. Welcome to the real world - you better get used to it.
Re:The 18 thing is strange.. (Score:2, Interesting)
There's a political issue going on that isn't getting much press. Gay people are saying that it discriminates against gays. Interesting, eh?
Hollywood with Child actors went here before (Score:2, Interesting)
Perhaps this is a good model for software development as well? (As are other corellations between making movies and making software.)
-Trout
Re:I encountered this as well (Score:3, Interesting)
It has come to my attention that you have disallowed Finlay Dobbie the rights normally associated with the status of Darwin Committer and have later disabled his ADC-account, where these decisions were both based on his age. I am dismayed that you disallow this talented young programmer to work on Darwin. We should applaud and encourage this form of community service that benefits hundreds of thousands of your customers. His work has helped to fix a nasty bug that could lock up MacOS X for minutes. He has also added new functionality to the official Darwin distribution. I believe that his contributions and ability to carry responsibility should be judged based on his performance.
I understand that you may be worried about the legal implications of working with minors. However, the laws that protect minors were never intended to keep minors from learning, contributing to society or taking responsibility. They do give parents the responsibility to monitor and (if necessary) steer their children. We cannot monitor and steer our children if they have insufficient freedom to make their own decisions. A proper education of our children depends on their ability to take responsibility. I urge you to contact the parents of Finlay Dobbie and ask them to sign the contracts that are necessary for someone to contribute to Darwin. This should be sufficient to guarantee that your contracts with Finlay Dobbie are legally binding and you can stop any violation of the contract under the authority of law.
As your customer, I have always known Apple to be a company that tries to act ethically. This includes your policy of Equal Employment Opportunity that disallows your employees to discriminate "on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, age, sexual orientation, gender identity characteristics or expression, disability, medical condition, U.S. Military or veteran status in recruiting, hiring, training and promoting." I hope and trust that you will not limit this policy to your employees, but will apply it to your contacts with volunteers that contribute to your products as well. I hope you will soon correct this error and make me a proud Mac-user once again.
what does this have to do with darwin? (Score:2, Interesting)
from reading that article i get the idea that nothing has changed on that, and his work as a darwin developer/committer can continue.
his issue was solely with the adc program, and the fact that apple requires even online members to agree to an nda; and the fact that you need to be an adc member to download the dev tools. this is where the age issue applies, this has nothing to do with darwin.
reading the article, he decided to give up on the darwin project because of his issues with adc.
that's what his article says.
what it doesn't say is who exactly made the decision to follow-through with the decision to revoke his adc privileges.
he mentions darwin a whole lot, but this is apparently an adc issue and not a darwin issue. for all we know the "darwin people" at ï£ might have gone to bat for him [and struck out] or simply not known, or had no say in the matter.
we don't know what happened in that regard.
imho his article portrays the darwin project unfairly.
and yes i agree with him that apple shouldn't require an nda to download the dev tools.
apple shouldn't require an nda for online members because online members and student devs (for the most part) don't get any pre-release software.
but finlay is well respected on the darwin lists, and it seems people are trashing the darwin projects unnecessarily here.
nibs
Re:No Refund for ADC Account (Score:2, Interesting)
this has nothing to do with accepting code. according to the article he _can_ continue working on darwin.
it's just a hassle for him to get updates to project builder, interface builder et. al. apple's gui tools.
the cli tools are a part of darwin ofcourse.
It was really low that they didn't refund his ADC account.
in the article he states he wasn't old enough to get a student account. this leads me to believe he had a free online account.
if he had a select or premier account, he wouldn't have mentioned/cared about the student account.
it's shady that apple wouldn't offer a refund, but apparently he hasn't lost any money at all.