Apple submits a lot of patent applications. Mountains of paper work go from Cupertino to the US Patent & Trademark Office every year and it seems like almost every idea Apple idly toys with gets picked up and analysed with the false assumption that it will end up in some future product.
Companies apply for patents for a variety of reasons including to store up a stash of them to use in lawsuits like the current Apple/Samsung brouhaha. Not every sketch or schematic will one day take physical form.
Still that hasn’t stopped the activists at The Save The Internet Coalition, which makes it sound as if the Internet is up there on the endangered species list next to the panda, from slapping up an anguished open letter to Steve Jobs.
The cause? A patent that while discussing ways to send information to your phone depending on the object you point it at also raised the spectre of institutions or government facilities hitting it with an infrared signal to block you taking photos. Cue the panic and paranoia…
The Save The Internet Coalition letter worries that were Apple to make the patent a reality it would be creating a tool for dictators:
“Thousands of people across the Middle East have used cellphone cameras to document violent government abuses. This technology would also give tyrants the power to stem the flow of protest videos and crack down on their citizens with impunity…if this tool fell into the hands of repressive regimes or malicious corporations, it would give tyrants and companies the power to silence one of the most critical forms of free expression.”
It would, if Apple was intending to do such a thing. But I suspect that its future strategy doesn’t rest on chasing the totalitarian bastard market, however lucrative. The language in the patent is indulging in the hypothetical, a common habit of engineers and lawyers.
I don’t think Apple has any intention of building features to censor photos into its devices. Not because I’m some rabid fanboy who believes it can do no wrong but because it would simply be bad business.
Beyond that, the actual technique described in the patent would be pretty much useless in bright, outdoor environments. It seems like nothing more than a exploration of what might be possible if you went down the road of trying to block cameras from playing a part in bootlegging films.
The movie studios would love it but Apple is much more interested in getting iPhones in the hands of consumers. Turning them into little electronic secret policemen would be a surefire way to lose their trust.
Analysing patent applications is a terrible way of working out a company’s intentions. And before we jump back into the old argument about Steve Jobs keeping porn out of iTunes, as inevitably happens when the words ‘censorship’ and ‘Apple’ come together, that’s a very different situation. In that case, Apple has made a decision about what it believes customers want from its platform. One they are free to disagree with and circumvent in all manner of ways.
Allowing others to decide when and how you use your phone camera would be a titanically stupid move on Apple’s part. Its rivals could instantly put themselves forward as the champions of freedom regardless of their own vices and the Apple brand would be incredibly damaged.
If Apple ever puts that patent into action and starts allowing others to censor your photos, I will eat any number of hats you wish to send to me.
