No, Italy isn't banning the iPhone

Originally published at:

On June 23rd, 2017, a
lot of noise was made by an Italian newspaper that said that our new
Senate Act 2484 had the potential to “ban the iPhone in Italy” (here’s
an English article). That’s just wrong.
This is a “device neutrality” bill, protecting a principle every bit as
important as net neutrality, and it won’t ban the iPhone, but it
will protect and benefit Italians.

1 Like

This reads like a press release. Where did it come from?


Cleanup in aisle 6! The wordpress-to-Discourse plugin has borkedy bork bork borkedy!


But Italy will be banning Android, right?

Hmmm. I’m not sure that says what you mean it to. The fact that Apple’s rivals are all very pleased with this bill and Apple itself doesn’t want to comment, that doesn’t suggest that this bill is good news for them.


The topic is right for Boing Boing, but the writing… it might just be machine translated, or I wonder if it’s one of those Markov chains that are supposed to replace writers?

1 Like

You can still use your android phone. Just sideload “Jerwin’s android dungeon and app store” onto your device and disable signature verification. I’ll sell anything for a price, and I guarantee app approval. Check out my “smart fart” section.


Possibly just written by somebody for whom English is not the first language?

1 Like

And “closed app store and that store imposes unnecessary [i.e. non-technical] discrimination” sounds exactly like a description of Apple’s store. If iPhones aren’t jail-broken, they absolutely do run afoul of the law, in other words.


While I appreciate the intent of laws like this, Apple’s walled garden model has been absofuckinglutely brilliant for the average pleb.

I have to help people with computer stuff all the time, and I cannot fully articulate how liberating it is to have someone come in with an iPhone issue that is either a) a hardware fault, or b) just some workflow that needs to be set up and taught to the person.

With android and PCs, it’s almost always c) you fucked your shit up by downloading random-ass crap from the Internet or going to wierd predatory websites.

Side loading and jail breaking are great in principle, but most people aren’t ready for the responsibility (or don’t even want it).

1 Like

The unnecessary discrimination part is Apple’s get out clause, if they choose to take it.

Which is why I have argued for a jail break jumper/switch behind a “warranty void if broken” sticker, but that would make the device slightly thicker so it isn’t going to happen.

1 Like

Well, if “unnecessary discrimination” is being defined as discrimination based on content rather than technical issues (as the article is claiming), that’s an inherent part of the App store.

True, but it doesn’t have to be inherent. They can put anything they disapprove of behind a filter option and still be allowed to block malware or anything illegal.

That doesn’t mean that Apple want to do it, just that if they were to get banned then they have no-one to blame but themselves.

1 Like

Yeah, the content filtering is pretty vexing. I would much rather they whitelist any app that passes a technical rubric.

The universal argument against any kind of freedom.

I need my warranty for when my hardware breaks. The vast majority of software that I can install on my devices is incapable of breaking the hardware.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.