> In the digital world, any limitations on copying bits are akin to virtual restraints and locking information away.
Jennifer Lawrence might disagree with your laissez faire attitude.
back
1 comments
I'd argue that Jennifer Lawrence's sensitive bits shouldn't have been given to someone else (Apple) in the first place.
I assume you store all your money under the mattress? We all store "sensitive bits" (information) with others.
Well, to get his money from under his mattress would require you to break into his home. That's different from him storing his money under your mattress.
Well, yes, that was my point, since chances are (s)he doesn't actually keep money under the mattress, but on some bank.
Right, I see that now. I misread you earlier.
Sure. But there's not much to complaint about when those 3rd parties f* up, if you used them voluntarily...
I think you've just invalidated contract law wholesale.
Is that even valid when the contract is nothing more than a ToS that everybody agrees on without reading and most probably not enforceable in court?
I side with icebraining here.
The statement "there's not much to complaint about when those 3rd parties f* up, if you used them voluntarily." taken in general can refer to pretty much everything we encounter in everyday life. There are lot of implicit contracts made, and breaking some of them could be recognized in court (there's the concept of acting in bad faith).
In this particular case, JenLaw et al. have all the rights to be mad at Apple because of the broken ToS/implicit contract that said "this is my data, it's only backed up and will not be shown to third parties". Whether or not they have shown practical wisdom by using the service is a whole another matter.
That's basically the crux of disagreements around the "victim blaming" concept. People confuse two different things here - morality of whether something should be done, and the probability it will happen in practice. If I get mugged under the bridge in the middle of the night, I'm not morally at fault for being mugged (it's something that shouldn't be done), but I also haven't shown practical wisdom by going alone at night under the bridge in dangerous area (by doing so I increased the probability it will happen to me).
As far as I remember though, the "breach" was not on Apple's part but on the victims who chose weak passwords; can we blame Apple for this ? Except maybe for a lack of forceful education ?
The original sentence becomes "Jennifer Lawrence shouldn't have stored sensitive information externally without using a minimum of good security measures" in this vision.
Hah. You say that now. And then the bank messes up, and your savings account is empty. You're not going to complain? I think not. I think you're going to be screaming at the top of your lungs, calling lawyers, and so on.
I use Bitcoin. Don't have a bank account.
Your argument that bits should be copyable without restrictions is independent from the fact that these bits were not on her local hard drive.