How exactly does runrev for ipad/iphone work?

Andre Garzia andre at
Thu May 6 14:25:13 CDT 2010

by the way, if you're in the mood for supreme courts, you can please sue
them here as well:

This is the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court, you can sue apple in here too
if you want. And here we have laws against prejudices and that protects
minorities, if you can convince them that apple is prejudiced against
interpreters and is oppressing xTalk minorities, your case will be a
wonderful success!!!

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Richard Gaskin
<ambassador at>wrote:

> Randall Reetz wrote:
> > This is an interesting Supreme Court subject.  I could write a
> > tight case that shows that code is content.  An executable program
> > is first amendment protected expressive content exactly the same
> > as is expected and enjoyed by a poet or a painter.
> >
> > So, build an ipad and iphone stack runner (using Apple's blessed IDE)
> > and be done with it.  Then the question is how to distribute runrev
> > generated stacks for the iphad?
> >
> > After that, the question is:  Does apple restrict the distribution of
> > ebooks, movies, sounds or other content as a function of origin,
> > protocol, or content?
> If you want to publish your source code as prose or poetry in an ebook
> there's nothing stopping you.  Some reasonably good poems have been written
> in xTalk.
> If you want to deploy that text as scripts along with an engine to
> interpret that text at runtime into executable statements, that's another
> thing.
> This seems to be the inverse of the font copyright precedent, where the
> distinction between code and data were clearly established:  font designs as
> bitmaps are not afforded copyright protection because they are considered
> primarily "utilitarian" and "obvious", but when vector fonts like PostScript
> and TrueType came along they were afforded copyright protection as
> executable code, even as the glyphs they rendered were not protectable
> (which explains the thousands of knock-offs, fully allowable if the designs
> contain none of the original code).
> With the distinction between data and executable code well established, I
> would not imagine it would be too hard for Apple's army of lawyers to draw
> on that to support a case where they've explicitly prohibited certain forms
> of executable code.
> But that said, I'm no lawyer.
> If you get this to the Supreme Court let us know how it works out for you.
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World
>  Rev training and consulting:
>  Webzine for Rev developers:
>  revJournal blog:
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:

-- All We Do Is Code.

More information about the use-livecode mailing list