[vaxman]

It's 2023, there is probably a clause in the Developer Agreement that prevents streaming the materials provided under it to computers that aren't enrolled in the Developer Program.

What you are supposing is that they might choose not to enforce that until their own headset is shipping in volume. If anything, they are building a case against this person while at the same time analyzing their suitability to park their ass in a chair in Cupertino...then it will go to an exec who will decide the person's fate.

https://tenor.com/vKjA.gif

[smoldesu]

> And the Copyright Act doesn’t give creators, like Apple, a monopoly over transformative inventions that enable research into their product. Cf. Patton, 769 F.3d at 1276 (“The goal of copyright is to stimulate the creation of new works, not to furnish copyright holders with control over all markets.”).

- Corellium Inc vs Apple Inc, D.C. Docket No. 9:19-cv-81160-RS: https://aboutblaw.com/7PK

If Corellium can livestream a virtualized version of iOS on non-Apple hardware, I'd wager Joe Shmoe can livestream an official dev envrionment to their VR client.

[vaxman]

No, those are not affirmative defenses.

If you accept the Developer Agreement and receive protected materials under it, you cannot redistribute, publish or stream it because of case law, sorry.

I know it’s confusing because of all the little unethical assholes who hack apart every beta release and post about it on blogs run by morbidly obese grifter-enthusiasts, but it is actually quite simple —Apple can and does pick and choose who to enforce its agreements on, just as you may.