New Apple 'Camera' Patent Will Allow Remote Shutdown of Your Phone or its Features

[mountainbikermark]

this is crazy. leave it to Apple to come up with crap like this. pretty soon they are going to register to have their name changed to Skynet....

B

I'll start being concerned when a Jobs look alike with an Austrian accent shows up.
Until then I'll just continue to be annoyed at the attempted take over of the planet by Apple 1 patent at a time.

Support Our Troops! !!!
<><
From a Beano

 

[LoudRam]

The so-called disabling of the phone's camera for "copyright" protection is garbage. Anyone who wants to copy an event or movie for the purpose of redistribution isn't going to use an iPhone to do the capturing. There are far more covert and higher quality ways to accomplish the same thing and can be done without wireless communications as part of the process thereby eliminating this "remote shutdown" feature as a potential hindrance to those methods.

This is nothing short of an attempt to move our right to freedom of speech and freedom to record public occurrences of things such as police brutality toward a police state where we are only as free as those who administer the "law" in that immediate area will allow us to be. The potential repercussions are massive and potentially harmful. What if someone suffers a heart attack in a crowd at one of these public events where the remote deactivation has been implemented? Now instead of anyone nearby with a cellular phone being able to call 911 for assistance, there is nothing anyone can do but watch that individual suffer and die. How about being able to protect yourself from an attack or otherwise? So instead of being able to take a picture of a suspicious person or offender for possible future identification, they can instead attack under the cloak of the remote deactivation of your phone?

I really don't see this as being good in any situation or free country and only can foresee this being used by the government for political censorship in Communist China.

Big Brother is alive and well in the minds of Apple.

Since I can't like a post twice, I'll just like this once and give a BIG DITTO!!!

And this is one patent Apple can have all to itself. I hope Android NEVER copies this!!!

 

[MissionImprobable]

As I said when this was first mentioned a few months ago: I find it funny. If Apple implements this, then the coding for it is in the phone, meaning a motivated cracker/coder could find it and screw with any and every Apple device carrying the code. That would be quite interesting.

 

[androidlearner]

As I said when this was first mentioned a few months ago: I find it funny. If Apple implements this, then the coding for it is in the phone, meaning a motivated cracker/coder could find it and screw with any and every Apple device carrying the code. That would be quite interesting.

That and because Apple is patenting it, we won't have to worry about it getting into android as that would just give Apple something to sue for.


Sent from my Droid Razr Maxx Arctic HD

 

[Xplorer4x4]

Not really, if they ever implemented it they would go out of business... No one would want a phone that could have features remotely deactivated.

Sadly Apple will claim it is a feature. If the movie theater can mute your phone and disable your data, Apple sheeple will realize how rude it is and agree they shoudl not be using there phone at times like that.

The so-called disabling of the phone's camera for "copyright" protection is garbage. Anyone who wants to copy an event or movie for the purpose of redistribution isn't going to use an iPhone to do the capturing. There are far more covert and higher quality ways to accomplish the same thing and can be done without wireless communications as part of the process thereby eliminating this "remote shutdown" feature as a potential hindrance to those methods.

Tell that to people on youtube. For example, I am a professional wrestling fan(waits for wise cracks). Sometimes the small time companies simply do not tape the shows so people may use a phone to tape a dream match that otherwise would only be seen by people live at the event. Now this shouldn't fall under copyright law if the company stands to make no money off of it. Another example, my girlfriend went to a concert the other night. She took videos of a song or two I guess, but she doesn;t plan to upload it to youtube or redistribute it. While she is not posting them to yt or fb, I bet you anything other people there will have recorded video from there phone and will be uploading it on yt, fb, etc. Now of course it is stupid to issue DCMA take down for copyright infringement over such footage but who knows how many people the record labels or RIAA have already taken down videos through there own power or DMCAs.This used to be called fair use, but today it is copyright infringement, so in that regard, I disagree.

 

[Quick]

On the other hand, I'm kind of glad Apple patented this. It will limit the number of manufacturers implementing the technology and Apple will sue anyone else who tries to do anything remotely like this in the future.

Lol, you may be on to something there . Apple could be our best ally.

 

[cucucachu0000]

i wonder if mubarek would still be in power if he had this technology...... this is just begging to be abused by governments. theres really no other application for this other than to help dictators across the globe.

 

[MissionImprobable]

i wonder if mubarek would still be in power if he had this technology...... this is just begging to be abused by governments. theres really no other application for this other than to help dictators across the globe.

It also aids the police in giving beatdowns as well, as mentioned by others. There was a particularly violent attack earlier this year in Cali that included the police losing control of a dog that attacked a mother with her baby in her arms that would have just been hearsay had it not all been caught on video. I can't believe that Apple really even bothered to patent this mess. What other company would even consider using it?

 

[FoxKat]

As I said when this was first mentioned a few months ago: I find it funny. If Apple implements this, then the coding for it is in the phone, meaning a motivated cracker/coder could find it and screw with any and every Apple device carrying the code. That would be quite interesting.

An excellent point...give the bad guys a way to disable peoples' phones too, why don't-cha!!? Amazing...:blink: This could lead to an incredibly disruptive terrorist attack where nobody would receive the emergency alerts because the terrorists have disabled everyone's phones in the immediate area of the attack to increase the collateral damage factor. Again...brilliant! Way to go Apple. I now have another reason to hate them.

 

[FoxKat]

Originally Posted by FoxKat
The so-called disabling of the phone's camera for "copyright" protection is garbage. Anyone who wants to copy an event or movie for the purpose of redistribution isn't going to use an iPhone to do the capturing. There are far more covert and higher quality ways to accomplish the same thing and can be done without wireless communications as part of the process thereby eliminating this "remote shutdown" feature as a potential hindrance to those methods.
​

Tell that to people on youtube. For example, I am a professional wrestling fan(waits for wise cracks). Sometimes the small time companies simply do not tape the shows so people may use a phone to tape a dream match that otherwise would only be seen by people live at the event. Now this shouldn't fall under copyright law if the company stands to make no money off of it. Another example, my girlfriend went to a concert the other night. She took videos of a song or two I guess, but she doesn't plan to upload it to youtube or redistribute it. While she is not posting them to yt or fb, I bet you anything other people there will have recorded video from there phone and will be uploading it on yt, fb, etc. Now of course it is stupid to issue DCMA take down for copyright infringement over such footage but who knows how many people the record labels or RIAA have already taken down videos through there own power or DMCAs. This used to be called fair use, but today it is copyright infringement, so in that regard, I disagree.

OK, so I suppose I was thinking more along the lines of redistribution for profit, such as when someone goes into a movie theater with a high-end video camera and records the entire new-release movie, then creates DVD copies and sells the bootleg videos on the street corners. Or where someone goes to a concert and records the audio of the concert on high-end stereo gear such as a pair of mics sewn into their shirt and a portable digital recorder (Digital recorders), or simply takes the Tascam or Zoom recorder and uses the X/Y mics built-in to do the same, then just like above burns CDs that they sell for profit. I totally missed the Youtube/FB phenomenon aspect of recording of copyrighted material.

 

[swc2001]

View attachment 57029 Dosvidanya Apple!

 

[xeene]

If you can't innovate, deactivate!

 

[jayman350]

Sorry was meant to be a joke, sadly the days of common decency and privacy are long gone. Technology not only gives, but it takes away as well.

lol ok sorry about that, yet another example of how there really needs to be a sarcasm font

and you are 100% correct about the days of common decency being gone. the last time i was in a theater there was someone with a BT headset. they weren't using the phone or anything just had the headset on, and I was distracted the ENTIRE time by the blue flashing light on his headset...

 

[dgstorm]

lol ok sorry about that, yet another example of how there really needs to be a sarcasm font

and you are 100% correct about the days of common decency being gone. the last time i was in a theater there was someone with a BT headset. they weren't using the phone or anything just had the headset on, and I was distracted the ENTIRE time by the blue flashing light on his headset...

We are lucky here in Austin, TX. Most of the movie theaters (especially the "Alamo Drafthouse" chain) have very strong disclaimers at the beginning of a movie about not texting or talking on your cellphone during a movie. Even more importantly, they actually enforce it!

As far as your situation with the blue LED goes, I would have politely said something, but I can understand why that might not always be the best or even a possible solution. That kind of stuff and/or screaming kids makes me want to stay home and wait for the Blu-ray sometimes. lol

 

[Sydman]

We are lucky here in Austin, TX. Most of the movie theaters (especially the "Alamo Drafthouse" chain) have very strong disclaimers at the beginning of a movie about not texting or talking on your cellphone during a movie. Even more importantly, they actually enforce it!

As far as your situation with the blue LED goes, I would have politely said something, but I can understand why that might not always be the best or even a possible solution. That kind of stuff and/or screaming kids makes me want to stay home and wait for the Blu-ray sometimes. lol

I only go to Alamo now since they don't put up with that kind of thing. You get one warning and the second time you are gone with no refund, I have still had to complain about some people but after that first warning they straighten up.

I have thrown change at people before that refuse to stop checking their FB in other theaters that don't seem to care what people do. That is a huge pet peeve of mine and it is a great sign of disrespect and poor upbringing.