Slashdot Mirror
Apple Claims That Jail-Breaking Is Illegal
rmav writes "Apple has finally made a statement about jail-breaking. They try to sell the idea that it is a copyright infringement and DMCA violation. This, despite the fact (as the linked article states) that courts have ruled that copying software while reverse engineering is a fair use when done for purposes of fostering interoperability with independently created software. I cannot help but think that the recent flood of iPhone cracked applications is responsible for this. Before that, Apple was quietly ignoring the jailbreak scene. Now, I suppose that in the future we may only install extra applications on our iPhones as ad hoc installs using the SDK, and if we want turn-by-turn directions, tethering, and the like, we have to compile these apps by ourselves? Maybe we should go and download the cydia source code and see what we can do with it."
People never get up in arms about something till it effects them personally. What a load of crap apple.
The musings of just another geek and his junk.
Apple can claim whatever they want, and can sue whoever they want for DMCA violations. C&D's are freely distributable.
Whether or not that claim has the weight of law is up to a judge, not a marketing director.
..... Because they could potentially make no money off the apps that are installed via jailbreaking. The rest of their reasons are just a smokescreen. Plain and simple.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
When marketing and Reality Distortion (tm) fails, call in the jackbooted thugs and sue the dissidents into submission.
This, more than anything, is why Apple will never get one coin from my wallet.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
One need only transpose Apple's arguments to the world of automobiles to recognize their absurdity. Sure, GM might tell us that, for our own safety, all servicing should be done by an authorized GM dealer using only genuine GM parts. Toyota might say that swapping your engine could reduce the reliability of your car. And Mazda could say that those who throw a supercharger on their Miatas frequently exceed the legal speed limit.
Apple is the new Microsoft.
Just because something is legal doesn't make it right.
Just because something right doesn't mean it is legal.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Not the DMCA threat, of course, but the author of TFA who restrains himself from using a car analogy for a whole 5 paragraphs.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
That my Android is open source!
Of course breaking out of jail isn't legal.
What next, Apple claims that water is wet?
So, Jobs says the entertainment industry should forget about DMCA for their media; but iPhone jailbreaking is a violation of DMCA?
Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
How do you like me now? Bitches.
I'm Rich!!!
First off, this is coming now not because of some perceived "recent flood of iPhone cracked applications," but because the Copyright Office asked for exemption proposals to the DCMA on December 28, 2008, and the EFF filed one for jailbreaking. RTFA and RTFlegalbrief.
Second, while not effectively the same, what Apple is doing is trying to prevent jailbreaking from being ruled legal, not trying to have it ruled illegal. Being a non-lawyer, I'd at first say this is the same thing, but it is different. Just because something isn't ruled explicitly legal doesn't make it illegal, but would definitely help if some day someone wanted to sue over a jailbreak.
Engadget has a nice write-up on this from someone who has legal training if the three or four of you out there who don't just read the summary and post would like another perspective - http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca//
OP's editorializing is just stupid. Apple didn't make this statement because of "...the recent flood of iPhone cracked applications..." They're responding to the claims filed with the Copyright Office.
I really don't understand why anyone would expect Apple to behave differently in response to the EFF's proposal for DMCA exemption.
So Apple is doing this to protect its income for apps on the iPhone store. That also means it is protecting the income of application *developers* who sell through the iPhone store. Sure, they could try to sell apps only for jailbroken phones, but with all the gray areas around it legally (at least in the public's eye) and with the immense ease of use of the iPhone store (click and download right now!), they would much rather go Apple's route. Right? So Apple could be covering its ass, making sure they don't get attacked from iPhone developers who have trekked through the process to make "legit" apps but could be someday losing out to jailbroken competitors.
Or else it's just about the money.
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
On the topic of prison, when one initiates dogma centered around a prison, and utilizes terms like "jail breaking" then these terms are to help encourage judicial favor for Apple. The truth is that when someone sells an object, modfication of the object is the right of the owner.
Otherwise, let's have court cases about how judges cannot alter their robes in any way. They all must wear the robes the way they arrive on the first day of court.
If you car breaks, you must throw it out and buy another car.
I could go on, but rational people wouldn't require me to.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
I have a much better idea. A community-wide effort to make a free/open source phone. So it won't have multitouch, it'll have crazytouch. Then you can install whatever you want on it.
Yet another company taking the high road of suing their customers for profit!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Huh, I checked it out and believe it or not they're actually right, escaping from a federal penitentiary will get you an extra 5-7 years. Who knew?
No, it's like bitching that Toyota will sue you if you put one in. Sure, they can rule there warranty null and void, but that's all they can do.
How many things do you sue that don't have transparency? I would bet a lot.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Not to nitpick (actually, yes - this is complete nitpicking), but Jailbreaking relates to running unsigned code on the phone (and giving full access to the filesystem). Unlocking is what allows people to use other carriers and SIMs.
Don't take this as flamebait... I am looking for honest answers:
How is jailbreaking an iPhone different from removing DRM from a game?
Am I wrong that Jailbreaking an iPhone simply allows you to use more applications on it?
Is this not "Fair Use?"
Is it true that there are free, non-stolen programs that wouldn't normally run on an iPhone without it being Jailbroken?
Or is Jailbreaking simply a means to running pirated iPhone apps?
No, it's like Toyota suing you if you tried to make your own NOx kit for your own use.
If monkeying around voids the warranty, fine. If monkeying around is outlawed...then only outlaws will have monkeys...er. um. wait.
THL phish sticks
The normal demographic buys the iPhone, signs the AT&T contract, and shops at iTunes and the App Store, all as Steve Jobs intended when he created the world.* Only true geeks buy iPhones to crack them, and we know that Apple doesn't care that much about the true geek community. In other words, wrong answer on the motive, although the advice to not buy an iPhone if it isn't what you want is spot on (yeah, it's only common sense, but that's getting darn rare nowadays).
Disclaimer: I have an iPhone, an iPod, and a Macintosh (it sits near one of the Ubuntu computers and gets used now and then). I do, however, generate my own reality distortion field, and don't use Jobs'.
*Yeah, I know Steve didn't really do it, and God only thinks he's Steve Jobs.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Apple just needs to stop selling full copies and only provide upgrades. There can't be many people buying full copies for older Macs so 90%+ of their customers must be running some flavor of OSX. To avoid the tech support nightmare all they have to do is require a copy of the OS to be on the machine to do the upgrade. Pirating the original OS is clearly illegal so they retain control without having much impact on their customers. Release a story that customers with older machines have 90 days to upgrade to OSX which may cause a spike in sales then cut off all sales except upgrades. It'd be still easy to pirate given how Mac does the install but it'd be clearly illegal then to install the OS on new non Mac hardware.
"in the future we may only install extra applications"
I for one don't own an iphone nor plan on ever buying one.
Well, you are lesser sucker than many - myself included.
I'm a simple-minded person. So correct me if I am misunderstanding this situation:
Apple makes a little plastic box with an LCD screen, a battery, and a circuit board and sells it to people in retail stores. And they claim that there is some kind of law that prohibits anyone who buys this little plastic box from opening it, determining how it works, and telling other people how to make it work better. Unless, of course, they pay Apple more money beyond the money that was paid for the little plastic box at the retail store.
If this is a correct interpretation of the situation, then I have to agree that this company is delusional and that they will have a difficult time adjusting to 21st-century reality. These marketing major fantasies may have had some credibility in the 20th-century, but they are meaningless as the economy collapses.
Reality is reality. If you are exploring the circuitry and firmware of a little plastic box and someone comes up to you and tells you that you are engaged in illegal activity by doing so, politely simply to ask them to go away and something constructive with their short time on Earth. If they persist or attempt to physically prevent you from your examinations of your property (your little plastic box and circuit board), then just shoot them. Don't even give it a second thought. There are far too many people in the world, and the fewer delusional assholes running around making trouble for the rest of us, the better. They won't be missed. When even Republicans are talking about economic collapse, then you know that It's a new world out there. Anything that you can do to make the world a better place for reality-based people to live in (such as sharing iPhone knowledge and applications), to more welcome you are in the new world of the post-20th century fantasies.
Apple is about one thing: control.
courts have ruled that copying software while reverse engineering
Jail-breaking your iPhone so that you can install applications from sources other than the App Store is not reverse-engineering, regardless of whether you think Apple is right or wrong on this one.
I've always been a PC at heart.
Not like the rest, the others. Everyone around me. I was at odds with my society and knew it early since birth. Unlike them, I did not "Think Different!"--the mantra of the Macs around me, the phrase on all the billboards in the city that served as a reminder to its citizenry. Sameness pervaded the essence of my being and no amount of self-conditioning I did could change that. Eventually, I gave up and isolated myself emotionally from society.
I gaze at the faces going by, the white earphones contrasting their black turtlenecks, connecting their ears to their pockets, their blank faces engrossed in hip Indie rock music and various garage bands. I envied them for their perfection against my flaws and my compulsive nature to expand, to burden my life with troubles instead of remaining, like them, simple and easy to deal with. The grandest of virtues, simplicity... the philosophy by our loyal benefactor Steve Jobs, who descended from the heavens, creating the Earth, the iron, the wind and the rain. Steve Jobs, who defined the parameters of existence, the one who set about the patterns of reality, the constants, the variables. He who made gravity, electromagnetic energy, and shaped atomic structures and brought forth motion. From these things, he crafted the elements, processed them, refined them, and from these things engineered Apple products through the purity of his mind. Each Apple product was individually crafted by his own hands with the programming code used to run each device having being compiled in his brain and uploaded to each device telepathically, breathing life and perfection into each and every unit.
Except, it seems, for me, for I was not among the many. I was a PC. They were Macs. I've always been a cold, stiff person. I got by, disguising myself by keeping my non-Ipod music player safely out of sight, which I use because of my depraved nature demanding more functionality than the simple and easy-to-use Ipods have to offer... In the safety of my own home, behind locked doors, I ran a Forbidden, a contraband computer from more depraved, earlier days that was not given the love and blessing of being birthed by Steve Jobs. I dual booted, out of the great sin of curiosity-- curiosity, a shameful value of a PC, as curiosity has no place where simplicity matters most--using two of the great unutterable blasphemies-- something called "Windows Vista" and something else called "Linux." Although, as I mentioned before, although my tendency to be a PC and towards conformity has always been inherent to me, I was truly transformed when I found these old things in a hidden cache of computer parts predating The Purging. Perhaps the greatest sin of all, the single evil that, if discovered, would damn me forever, was the fact that my mouse had more than one button.
As I walked on among the Macs on the streets, passing the Starbuckses as I went along, I wondered how it all came to this. I glanced at The Holy Marks on the foreheads as the people wandered down the streets, the Bitten Apple tattooed on all our of us at birth, and wondered if, perhaps, there could be something more to life. But again, this was a PC's thought, and not, like everyone elses', a Mac's. We were to hold ourselves to the philosophy of Steve Jobs--so as his products were designed for idiots, so too were we to be idiots. But I was not a Mac--I was not an idiot. I was simply too complicated to be a worthwhile person.
Nature called. I found a nearby public iPoo--squeaky clean and sparkly white, things weren't all bad--and let myself go, expelling the waste that had accumulated inside me. After relieving myself and committing the overly-complicated and thus illegal act of wiping my ass (I did not flush as iPoos, designed to be idiot-proof, did not flush) I left and once again wandered the streets aimlessly, hoping to find some meaning in a world where I simply did not belong, a world where if my true nature was discovered, I would be endlessly persecuted by smug, self-righteous sons of bitches.
I am a bad boy criminal ... girls will like me now.
My guess is that they are making cash off of the App store, that they'd like to keep, but this isn't the point... If everybody uses their jailbroken device to install apps without paying for them, the incentive to develop for the iPhone kinda disappears.
No developers == no (or at least less) apps created without effort on the part of Apple. I think they must really enjoy the idea of sitting back, waiting to see what the unpaid minions will come up with... it's a nice position to be in, one which adds a lot value to their devices without any serious costs.
The incentive to defend the model is obvious. But I can tell you that when you develop an app that has a web-based component to it, and you find that the majority of your users haven't even bothered to pay $0.99 but really want to eat up your bandwidth and you can't even tell the difference between a legit and cracked app, it really makes you consider moving on to another platform. In cases like this, you're not just losing *potential* profits (which is debatable anyway), releasing the app is actually costing you real dollars... Double plus ungood.
For my part, I wish they'd throttle down the lawyers and focus on at least give devs a way to know which devices have actually bought the app. Wouldn't solve the cracked app install problem, but would at least avoid the case where you end up in the red because of server costs.
Microsoft has never been as litigious as Apple. Apple may make vastly overwhelmingly superior products to MS, but they have also always been more evil.
The only way Apple can become the new Microsoft, is if they stop suing people so much, and also make their stuff crash a lot more often. As things are right now, there's just no comparison. The two companies' suckiness are totally different.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
What am I missing here?
Oh, that kind of jailbreak. Nevermind. :P
It wasn't such a long time ago when Microsoft was claiming that basically you can't donate (or use!!!) a PC without the original OS.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/04/18/1623240
I guess everybody on /. knows how freakinglishly locked are the iPhones even compared to Windows Mobile devices so this doesn't come as a surprise at all.
> Maybe we should go and download the cydia source code and see what we can do with it. Alternatively, maybe we should buy a phone instead of a jail.
Apple has always been more proprietary than Mickeysoft! Before OSS gained a real showing outside of academia Mickeysoft was the open, free choice over Apple because at least you could choose the hardware.
And yet... so many Mickeysoft hating OSS fans (me) also love Apple (not me). Not even PocketPC locks it's users into the one Mickeysoft marketplace. Leave it to Apple to come up with that.
Honestly, if you bought an iPhone, turn in your geek card immediately and seek rehabilitation! Myself, I'll hold onto my PocketPC until a REAL Linux phone is released. Something with X, GTK and Qt where I can actually port my Desktop apps over with no more than a UI shuffle to handle the small screen. Not a new (read no existing software base)Java API with a Linux kernel hiding under 10 layers of cruft as though someone was embarrassed of it(that means you GPhone)
Since when did making some illegal ever stop someone who wanted to do it? Who cares what Apple thinks.
"How many things do you sue ..."
"How many thing do you use...", even
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I think you mean only outlaws will have monkey wrenches.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
you assume people only develop for money.
What are you, an ignoramus?..oh,, wait~
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
1) It is a decent phone (not super, but OK). Unlocked: so I can use with the carrier of my choice (t-mobile prepaid in US, others abroad).
2) It is a decent computer for some basic tasks
3) I use it as my calendar and as my phone book (no other cell phone is so nice for this)
4) A decent media player (watching movies in it on a plane is quite nice). I do not listen much to music, but I also have quite a few podcasts of "car talk" (you've gotta love these guys!).
5) Works as a decent USB drive with some additional software.
6) Can keep pictures and show them around in a decent screen
7) Every now and then I can take half-decent snapshots
8) There are some nice apps, most of the ones I have were free
So, what's the problem? I bought the device and use it as I want, I do not give a sh*t to what apple wants me to do with it...
No, it's not. It's like bitching and moaning that the new Prius isn't designed for nitrous injection kit, modifying it to support it and then being threatened by the manufacturer with a lawsuit...
Insane right ?
Why not just skip the Ipod altogether and instead use your bucks to vote for a company that isn't such a dick.
What you are engaging in, is called persuasion. I happen to agree with you: I advise against buying iPhones.
What Apple is engaging in, is far more hostile (and threatening) than your post. They are unsatisfied with saying, "If your desires are such-and-such, you might not like this product." They are saying, "If your desires are such-and-such and foolishly buy our product, we will go out of our way to harm you."
See the difference?
Attempt to put a nitrous injection kit into a Prius, and Honda isn't going to be on your ass. The issue isn't whether or not doing this to a Prius is smart; the issue is freedom. Who gets to decide what you're allowed to do with your Prius or iPhone? It's distasteful that we're even seriously talking about what is allowed.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Well, that's my point exactly. You're obviously not the type who cares what filesystem the phone is using, so the phone works for you. Is your phone even jail-broken?
You used "decent" five times in your post and "half-decent" once. If you like "decent" then the iPhone is for you. Most geeks I know prefer "un-fucking-believably awesome". The iPhone is not for them.
Support microSD: in a post 9/11 world, it is unwise to carry your data on media that you cannot comfortably swallow.
> courts have ruled that copying software while reverse engineering is a fair
> use when done for purposes of fostering interoperability with independently
> created software.
If we were talking about patents instead of copyrights, there would be no question. Is it OK for me to copy the iPhone hardware and make a few changes to make it work in a different environment? Why should Apple's IP in their boot loader be treated any different? They paid a bunch of money to a bunch of engineers to invent that software and for someone to simply take it for their own purposes is... well... stealing!
If you don't like Apple's rules - don't buy Apple. Anarchy is not the answer.
- Steve Jobs
So why can't we imagine a world where every computer can run software written by anyone? Is that not also clearly the best alternative for consumers? If not, why not?
That's just how big companies operate.
That's actually not true at all. Corporations are collections of people, and within them are coalitions and constituencies just like any other institution. Quite often, you'll have someone that wants a corporation to do something simply because they think it is cool and they really don't care about the profitability or business climate of it. They must justify some action in that regard, to cover their rears, but their mental game has already made the leap that they want to do something with the corporation just because they think it is cool.
So, when a company builds a school somewhere, sponsors a race, hires a speaker who climbed mt everest, invests in some wild technology, or any of the other things that corporations do, they do it because they think it is cool, and then they cover their rears to the shareholders and directors by inventing some elliptical story about profitability.
In fact, to many of the world's top business leaders, the whole point of the corporation is to exist to provide some social order and some revenue so that it can fund the private ambitions of its leaders. I mean, come on, do you really think if IBM funds something like a big art exhibit, they really sincerely think that doing so will yield a return? No, they do it because the board of IBM likes art, and that's that.
It's good to be a CEO.
This is my sig.
And we know where there are monkeys, there are probably pirates nearby too.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
also means it is protecting the income of application *developers* who sell through the iPhone store.
Forcefully creating and enforcing artificial scarcity for altruistic reasons remains forcefully creating and enforcing artificial scarcity, which is economically unsound and civilly corrupt.
thank you for your reference to this newsletter. It's not mine. I suspect that it's a parody.
I, however, am quite serious. Economic collapse means a completely different way of dealing with the technologies and the laws covering the technology of the pre-collapse era.
Economic collapse means that there is going to be a lot of disagreement over things like copyright and royalty payments that were accepted in the 20th-century pre-collapse era. People were willing to pay for copyright and royalties when they had money or the reasonable expectation of making money. Economic collapse means no more easy money. No more easy money means no more copyright or royalty payments. Attempts to collect scarce resources like money for pre-collapse concepts like copyright WILL be challenged in the post-collapse era. Most likely with violence.
In the post-collapse era, the resources of the police are going to be too stretched to put everyone in jail who uses violence to protect what little that they have remaining after the collapse. And they are unlikely to imprison anyone who is actually making life in the post-collapse era easier for everyone. Such as people who are willing to adapt complex pre-collapse technology to the new reality.
If all this sounds like a cheap distopian science-fiction book, so be it. As I said in the previous message, when even the Republicans are talking about a serious economic collapse unfolding, then you know the world is changing. The more adaptable you are to these massive changes, the better off that you will be in the coming years and decades.
Given their current mentality, I doubt that Apple will survive long in the economic collapse that the politicians assure us is currently unfolding. The copyright and DMCA laws won't survive long either. The lawyers and courts (and Slashdot writers) will be arguing fine points and legal technicalities long after these laws cease being enforced in the real world.
Just 'cuz it's a car analogy doesn't mean it's a good analogy. A more accurate analogy is that Toyota wants to reserve the right to sue you because you fitted a properly-engineered nitrous kit to your personally-owned Prius.
If you like software and hardware transparency, DON'T USE AN IPHONE! It was never designed for geeks.
More to the point, if you ever aspire to use your property in the manner you see fit, don't buy it from Apple, because they operate under the bizarre belief that they still have some proprietary interest in your possessions.
What Apple is afraid of is that their normal demographic will start using jail-broken apps
true
find a new world of problems, and start blaming Apple
Wrong. They're afraid they'll lose their master-slave relationship with their clientele. It's about control and market lock-in. Tech support is, at best, a trivial side-issue. More likely, it's a smokescreen.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
you can just not buy apple, and they can shove their locked-in product up their butt, until they get their lesson.
Read radical news here
Hardware != Software
Apple is not opposed to you F*ing with your hardware (it'll void your warantee), but saying they don't want the FCC to say that jailbreaking is legal. They have their justifications for it, but if you don't agree then you don't have to buy an iPhone.
It really is that simple. Companies that sell software are allowed (for now) to write EULA's that limit the uses to which you can put their software. While that ability is still in place you need to decide whether their limitations are worth the features. If not, they buy a different device where the trade off is acceptable.
You don't get to violate the EULA, just becuase you don't like it. That's like saying I should be able to walk into a Best Buy with my laptop and start ripping movies b/c I think they charge too much for new releases (Which they do, IMHO).
[sarcasm] It's my hardware, and I'm only copying bits. What's the problem?[/sarcasm]
Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
That was pretty funny :)
I'll await the letter from Apple suing me. Until then they can shove their EUA up their butts. I've bought the phone and I'll use it how I want.
Apple has improved it's products, but when it comes to lock-in they are still (and always have been) the kings.
Part of it is a desire for 100% control of the platform. This has allowed them to achieve things microsoft can not (I've yet to see a windows PC that suspends or hibernates as well as any mac--yes macs hibernate, it's just perfectly invisible--unplug or yank your battery while it's suspended sometime).
IBM wanted to lock down the PC the way Apple did the Mac--Apple just played more tricks. If IBM had been as successful as Apple, we would have a horrific, fragmented and expensive PC industry today, with no standard platform to count on. I'd guess even Linux would be out since Apple completely controls the BIOS and could (if they wanted) prevent other OSes from booting on it. IBM probably would have done that.
Mac products just got good enough where most of us can ignore their mis-behavior, but don't think for a second they aren't the worst company out there when it comes to locking down their products.
The Woz apparently has a jailbroken Iphone and has done it for others:
http://www.viddler.com/explore/engadget/videos/23/
they plan on going after him? Speaking of which, how much of apple does he own?
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
Bypassing the lameness filter is pretty easy
Since Ashton captured video on his iPhone and that means he jailbroke it and it's very public, Apple should be going after him, right?
I am always amazed at how the sheep bleat against the kinds of things that Apple and other companies do, only to see those companies policies remain unchanged and their sales go up.
Really, it is a complete joke to see groups like the EFF engage in this kind of action when it really only gives the companies they attack free publicity. As long as there is demand for the iPhone and growth in the marketplace, Apple has no reason to change their behavior, it is as simple as that. If they time their response to lawsuits and the aggressiveness of the their response, they will only gain more customers, perhaps many interested in thumbing their nose at Apple and jailbreaking the phone.
The only reason that Apple is making any argument against jailbreaking is to appear to the mobile carriers that they are doing something to prevent possible security violations. When there is incremental revenue available from jailbreaking, Apple will change its tune.
"Want to get sued? There's an app for that."
--
Toro }B^>
There are two things that people jailbreak their phones for: Running software that Apple doesn't want on the phones (backgrounder, some emulators, tethering) and running software that was downloaded/purchased illegally. Honestly, such a small minority of people jailbreak only to unlock their sim cards that I won't even consider them.
As to the former: Fine, have your slowed down devices, play your roms (also illegal, btw), violate your service agreements, that's on you.
As to the latter: You are stealing. You are stealing food from the tables of the developers, and they don't like it. If you keep cannibalizing the talent on the app store, it will cease to create stuff that's interesting.
I wrote a post-mortem on my blog discussing some of this stuff: http://www.kraln.com/?p=108. It really makes me sick.
The purpose of copyright is not "rewarding people who deserve to be rewarded", it's "promoting the advancement of the arts and sciences". Allowing interoperability is explicitly called out as an exception to the DMCA for this very reason.
Some people program for a living. Controversial I know.
I humbly and respectfully suggest that you consider the possiblity that 20th-century laws such as the DMCA will have little if any application in the post economic-collapse world. Whatever concepts of judicial balance that these laws attempted to provide in the era before the economic collapse will be rendered meaningless in the new post-collapse realities.
I suggest that you adapt your own point-of-view of technology law to the possibility that all laws regarding software/firmware and reverse-engineering will be ignored in the not-to-distant future. If your business or career depends upon the enforcement of these laws, please consider expanding your career path strategy or business model to include the likelihood that these can and will not be enforced by the authorities in the manner that they are currently.
Unlike most juvenile Slashdot comment posters, I am being serious and not sarcastic.
Apple makes some cool shiny stuff but they are full of shit. This is like getting arrested for putting a sledgehammer through YOUR OWN kitchen window because you don't have the keys, it's raining cats and dogs, and you need to get into your house. There is this thing called the First Sail Doctrine. It states that once you put one sail on a boat, you can put as many as you want. Oh, wait, sorry I got that wrong. It's the First Sale Doctrine. Once you buy something, you can fsck with it all you want. No, you don't go copying proprietary software without permission, but you may go ahead, say, install software that you DO have the right to install on the device you BOUGHT and PAID FOR. If it were a lease of a phone there could be something in the contract that says you can't install other stuff on it but it's a phone that you BUY. So if you want to drill a hole through the center of it, that's allowed. Because once you paid for it, it CEASES to be Apple's property.
Copying != stealing.
The people who make unauthorized copies wouldn't have bought the software if it was their only choice.
If I had some mod points left, +1 insightful. As I'm sure the OP of the thread is aware, anything on /. which is boo-Apple, get's modded down.
Damn you! I hope you get cancer and... Umm, too soon?
I doubt that Apple really cares about jailbreaking. For that matter, I don't either. Heck, I have mine broken. Not so that I can steal software, but so I can use T-Mobile.
It seems that that there are some, like me who only want the phone broken to we can use alternate carriers and install non-apple approved apps. Conversely, there is a huge number of people who only want to get apps for free. This is whole problem. Jailbreaking indirectly allows you to steal software.
The ones who say they just want to try before they buy of full of crap. Yes, I just wanted to try this torrent filled with 800 cracked apps before I buy them all. Give me a break. If people would stop stealing software there would not be a problem. For fucks sake, they are like 3 buck, just pay it!
So, the EFF and Apple are going head to head over these issues, but you post the EFF article detailing EFF's point of view. Nilay Patel at Engadget seems to understand this a lot better than most of the people here:
"... Apple isn't asking for jailbreaking to specifically be ruled illegal, it's just asking that it not be specifically ruled legal. If that sounds like a fuzzy distinction, well, it is, but that's the sort of gray area that keeps everyone else out of court for the time being. We'll find out more in the spring, when the Copyright Office holds hearings -- final rulings are due in October."
I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
Ya know, the only reality distortion I see is the people that seem to think that the worlds corporations and manufacturers owe them something because they make and sell a product that they have bought.
Apple owes you nothing except the responsibility to keep the product working to their specs for as long as the warranty lasts. Period end of contract.
If you take it apart their responsibility ends.
The reason that Apple claims that jail breaking the iPhone is illegal is to protect the investment of the developers and to keep them developing for people that want to buy them.
Now some people develop for reasons other than money and they are free to give away their work.
Personally I hope to be able to pay my bills by selling apps. It may not happen and the way things are going with crakulous it may be that the iPhone is a dead platform and I'll have to go elsewhere to make a buck.
That is what Apple hopes to prevent.
So I hope that they can win and prosecute as many people with this as they need to to reassure investors that they still have a viable platform. That way my favorite phone will continue to get neat apps and there will still continue to be money to be made.
Why bother
All of your examples are for business applications of a work purchased for personal use. And then you conclude derivative personal use is illegal. Besides being really bad logic, it ignores well-established concepts like "Fair Use". Also, it seems a bit early to declare how copyright works for digital media. Existing laws are far behind the technology, and there is very little legal precedent one way or the other.
"The ability to delude yourself may be an important survival tool" - Jane Wagner -
I buy an iphone. I own it. How can Apple tell me what to do with it after I hand over my cash and have receipt in hand?
Corporatism != Free Market
Look, it's very simple.
Saying that jail-breaking an iPhone is a violation of the DMCA, is the same thing as claiming that if I own a Blue Oyster Cult mp3, and edit the file to add even MORE COWBELL, I would be committing a DMCA violation.
Was he smoking Pot in South Carolina in the Pic?
Can probably get someone to go after him, depending on the jurisdiction.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
No, it's not.
I have a BMW. For many years companies like Dinan have been selling new engine control software that improves performance. Guess what, these packages are illegal in some areas - notably in California where I live because the California Air Resources Board has not approved the updated software.
Maybe the same argument applies to the iPhone. The FCC approved the Apple produced software, and changes to the software might or might not cause the phone to go out of spec with regards to RF emissions. In other words, should the FCC need to approve jail-break software? Like that's going to happen...
shitty comment system.
Did you read the legal brief? The key legal issue with the "Jailbreaking" applications is that they are used to distribute modified versions of Apple's bootloader and OS. If you wanted to write your own OS for the iPhone, you'd presumably be well within your rights to do so, but that's not what the jailbreakers are doing. They're taking Apple's software, modifying it, and posting it on the internet for others to download.
It did say in TFA that jailbreaking for interoperability has been determined as "fair use."
Sure. It's "fair use" if you do it in a lab, for educational or security purposes.
It is something else entirely if you then try to distribute the results, in whole or in part, as a derivative work. Those investigators can't rightfully "fork" Apple's code base.
The EFF is not a straight-shooter in this case, because they are engaged in a legal action.
Famously, on the "Colbert Report" the other night, Steven asked his brother about a legal matter, "So, who's right?"
His brother replied, "Who's paying me?"
That's what you're dealing with when you get "information" from EFF's site. They are as biased as you can get toward whatever they think best promotes their views.
I don't think it unethical, and often agree with them, but you should know where they stand. They are not a news organization.
--
Toro
"We unlock iPhones." Investigate? [Yes/No]
For years and years people whine and mewl about Apple and Macintosh before them." They won't let us do anything to this stuff we bought!" "I don't have a command line." "My software cost so much and now they have a new version" etc. fill in any thousand more complaints. ,by the way, never lives up to its advertised image, they would go away and we wouldn't be innundated with more future garage sale crap that can't be "messed" with.
If you didn't "think different" perhaps you at least had a chance to think. Think about this, if you keep buying stuff from Apple, they will continue this behaviour in justification of their sloppy old hippy philosophy. If you quit buying crap from Apple, which
Other manufacturers would see there is a demographic with specific needs and fill it.
Just let it die.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
...the consumer now has the means to do the copying. It was very costly to copy a book, and you certainly couldn't copy a film. But, thanks to the digitization of works, consumers can easily make duplicates.
The "producer" of the work is not obliged to release digital copies of anything. Notice that no one in the written book realm is screaming about online piracy or lobbying for anything like the DMCA.
If you decide to release a work that is easy for me to copy, you can *expect* me to copy it whenever I see fit. Why else did you release it in such an easy to copy form? There are hard-to-copy formats for all of the types of work that we are talking about here, yet almost all "producers" choose to distribute their works in easy-to-copy forms. Why? The answer is simple, it is easy to copy for them as well. They want to have their cake and eat it too. They want the benefits(profit) of low cost replication without the natural consumer response to a work released in an easily copyable form.
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
"In the jurisdictions I know, breaking from jail by itself is NOT illegal, because pursuing freedom is a human right. However it is hardly possible to break out without committing a crime in the process (damage to property etc.). Caught fugitives can only be punished for these, and they get detention for the time out."
SERE: Survive, Escape, Resist, Evade
If troops are expected to do this when fighting on foreign soil, i suppose now i don't see why the incarcerated should not also hold themselves to this standard. Of course, troops trying to regain freedom to fight again or to return home will likely destroy property, take lives, cause pain somehow/somewhere...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
I am sure I could rattle off stuff obscure to anyone but a select few for many big companies that many love or hate.
the point is, where people want it is where Apple isn't going to let them get it.
Apple isn't the new Microsoft, they have always been essentially the same thing but were excused for having a lower market share of Personal computers, though unlike MS you are not free to choose the hardware to run their OS on.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
If your using the tools from the 'iPhone Dev-Team', they're not actually distributing any modified software at all. They distribute an application which *patches* the firmware files downloaded to your computer via iTunes using the official firmware upgrade process, but they're very careful to make sure their binaries do not include any code written by Apple.
As such, they are not distributing a modified OS and Bootloader. They're allowing people to modify it themselves, albeit automatically.
Then I believe the dev-team have stepped into the realm guarded by the DMCA dragon.
Although they might be able to use the "circumvention for reasons of interoperability" defense.
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
This is an example of the new world order under the DMCA. First, they take away your ability to own the content you paid for. Now they're going to take away your ability to own hardware. I fail to understand why the Iphone is so popular, when other devices existed long ago. For example, look at the Palm Treo. I don't understand why so many people are obsessed with apple, and why they let Apple get away with such shenanigans.
Uh, I wasn't born knowing everything, and I don't claim to do so now. I'd hate for some person to end my existence because they discovered they understood something that I may not!
How about a little compassion, education, and tolerance? Is that what you'd do to your child in that circumstance, or does it just apply to strangers? Or attorneys? Or businessmen? Or foreigners? Or aliens?
Think for a moment. The iPhone doesn't readily allow for home grown apps and must be broken to allow any free apps to be used. Conversely, you want to develop for Windows Mobile instead and MS will not only let you for free but provide the tools and an emulator to do so all at no charge (Visual Studio Express). You don't even need the phone to pull it off. If Apple really wants to be the big name in town it has to open itself up to developers. Windows did not become the big name in town by shutting people out. Apple must realize this.
For those who seek perfection there can be no rest on this side of the grave.
I am so sick of hearing that after I bought something, it's not mine to do with as I please. I paid for it, why would I not be allowed to modify it, break it, or turn it into a personal floatation device if I see fit? What we need to do is STOP BUYING ANYTHING THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH DMCA AND THIS KIND OF CRAP ATTACHED! Somehow this turned into a sellers economy. Apparently they think we need to buy it more than they need to sell it thus giving them the authority to make the rules of what we can do with something. If everyone stopped buying the products unless they were truly ours then the only way to sell a competitive product would be to unrestrict it's use. I know I can hear the whiners now saying the price would go up do to subsidising, well.....read my statement about NOT BUYING. Does it really cost $700 to manufacture a cell phone? Screw them. Make them lower the price to street value. Nevermind, You can't fix stupid.
"Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
Some people program for a living. Controversial I know.
And some people live to program; also controversial.
You guys make it sound like all other phones are open source or something. Blackberry, Windows Mobile, Palm? Yeah, they're the Ubuntu of cell phones. I could not be more pissed with myself that I took the time to read this idiotic drivel.
Apple portrays a certain ease of use with all their products, especially to non-techie types. Just watch one of their PC vs Mac ads. Now if a non-techie person get a jailbroken iPhone, and something happens to it, they're gonna blame Apple. This is a problem for them, because then word might get out that their stuff doesn't "Just Work," even if they had nothing to do with it.
The Copyright Office has no business interfering with their business model. So let the jail-breaking continue without penalty.
please note that crmarvin42 is a known Mac Fanboy/Troll and Apple Apologist.
Actually, this makes me want to go any buy one expressly for the purpose of jailbreaking it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgFbqSYdNK4
Trusted Computing? Yes or No
So this means that I don't own the phone.
How come I am allowed to throw the phone away, beat the crap out of it etc. but I can't change the firmware.
WTF?
So Sue Me
Serious question: If I reverse engineer an application so that it installs without me clicking through the EULA, am I still legally bound to it?
why did you buy it if the manufacturer has terms you dont like?
Any manufacturer's terms hidden from the purchaser at the time of purchase do not deserve being observed.
Religion is the main cause of atheism.
What about some highly publicised antitrust countersuit.
Type of behaviour caught.. http://www.out-law.com/page-5811
"tying (i.e. stipulating that a buyer wishing to purchase one product must also purchase all or some of his requirements for a second product)."
I'd set up the iphone through jailbraking to flush my toilet so that if I rang it up it would activate a servo to flush the toilet after I took a dump.
Then I'd adertise this app for sale and see if Apple would go after me.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Now maybe they'll respond to their legitimate developer registration requests in under 8 months...
Did that distortion field help you catch any substance D dealers?
"Modifying the software - that is, creating a derivative work - is unauthorized and may well represent a breach of copyright law"
selling a derivative work is breach of copyright.
Doing it in your home for your own personal enjoyment?????
What... are you on dope, boy?
Apple is now deleting posts relating to jailbreaking from their discussion forum. My post didn't contain instructions or links to jailbreaking tools - I merely spelled out the advantages of jailbreaking, and criticised Apple for abandoning the hacker culture that brought them success in their early years.
"No developers == no (or at least less) apps created without effort on the part of Apple."
I don't follow. You're saying that no one will create apps for the iPhone/iPod unless they do it through a vendor lock in via iTunes? That doesn't make sense.
Isn't it more likely that many more developers would develop if they didn't have to get approval of their application from Apple? Sort of like the shareware scene now, where there are millions of developers, and you only have to go to their website and download it (and presumably pay for it).
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Fred von Lohmann of the EFF, author of the piece pointed to in this /. thread, also wrote a concise and thorough exposé of the FUD behind another recent Apple dud claim: Apple tried to use the DMCA to shut down the IpodHash project's bluwiki where posters discussed how to let people sync media to the latest versions of the iPhone and iPod Touch. /. talked about this case at the time, but links to von Lohmann's article and /. discussion aren't in the /. headline summary, so I thought I'd bring them to your attention here. von Lohmann's article is critical reading if you want a better understanding of how this proprietor and the DMCA actually work.
Digital Citizen
Keep it locked and keep on losing, idiots.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Android#Forthcoming
who cares anymore? the only reason i have an ipod shuffle is that it's the best product on the market of its kind. clearly this won't be the case for the iphone once android phones pick up, unless they make some BIG changes.
weinersmith
It's a good thing the founding fathers didn't agree with this line of thinking, or we'd all be having tea and cookies at 3pm, and paying a hell of a tax on it.
... social protest - they do mention inalienable rights though. Maybe you're referring to the Declaration of Acquiescence?
It takes guts to live outside a corrupt system. I did it for a while, now I am just Joe Taxpayer. I do respect the LW though for LIVING his principles, not just yakking about them.
Last time I read the Declaration of Independence, I didn't recall seeing anything called retarded
Ask Me About... The 80's!
I'll do whatever I want with my Ipod Touch. I paid 200 bucks for a piece of hardware and if I want to smash it, crack it open and dissect it or turn it into a device to rig lotto machines, ITS MY property.
Sorry MR AUTHORITY on everything!! It's a post... People have opinions.
In most court legal binding signatures, you have to get a signature and a second signature from another person to verify it was you who signed. Since nobody can actually PROVE you signed(clicked) on it and there is no witnesses, cant you argue without a witness, they cannot prove it was you who signed(clicked) on it.
..The next super cool new thing they have obviously been working on for some time, the "iDiot".
iDiot is Apple's new product, new marketing strategy, and, new lack of intellectual property.
As a matter of fact, Apple is looking into trademarking the total absence and void of intellectual property whatsoever, as part of its iDiot marketing.
/am a little late
//companies can do dumb things when they don't need to please the smart people anymore.
.. your creation of a maxi-cowbell version of a hit single constitutes the creation of a "derivative work" and the right to create such a work is granted exclusively to the copyright holder.
Circumventing a protection measure in order to exercise rights granted exclusively to the copyright holder is a violation of the DMCA.
In most courts, esp. in East Texas, it would take around 4 minutes to find you guilty.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
"Tonight there's gonna be a jailbreak. Somewhere in this town."
Errrrr, that'll be [b]at the jail[/b], then ?
Squirrel!
If a vendor does something to piss you off, don't buy from that vendor! Buy an android phone or Nokia Internet Tablet. It amazes me how many people buy Apple products to hack them when Apple is so hostile to hacking their devices.
The founding fathers had a complaint about taxation without representation, not taxation in general. If someone has the right to vote for their representatives, then they also can be fairly obliged to pay taxes, even if they disagree with how elections turn out.
and the situation today is different how? lobbyists represent their own interests to "our" elected officials, banks get billion (no, trillion) dollar taxpayer bailouts, but when one bank consumes another bank, nobody in congress bails out my credit card balances.many
major corporations pay no taxes and keep profits offshore. iraq gets rebuilt schools, roads and hospitals on the trillion dollar cost-plus-plus plan, while in the USA, inner cities are crumbling shells.
if ever there was taxation without representation, it is in the USA in the 21st century.
Ask Me About... The 80's!
The DMCA would only be applicable if it enabled unauthorized copies of the work to be made that would not be otherwise It does not copy, nor even grant any new ability to copy the copyrighted content. It simply modifies the software that you yourself have. While the modified software may technically be considered a derivative work of the original, which one might be quick to point out ordinarily falls under the jurisdiction of copyright, it actually still can't apply in this case because the modified content not actually being _copied_ anywhere. Heck, if it were copyright infringement, it would also be an infringement to simply _remember_ any copyrighted content you experience, as your memory of it will not typically be 100% identical to the original and therefore could technically qualify as a derivative work.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Their position in the markets they operate in is pretty much nothing like Microsoft's. Apple is not and never has been a monopoly.
It is *easy* -- not just possible, but *easy* -- and it's always been easy to buy any device apple offers (phone, a media player, a handheld, and, oh yeah, a personal computer) from another manufacturer. Even the *closest* thing Apple's ever had to a lock-in (online music) was easy to circumvent and inside of a few years had serious competition.
Apple generally doesn't use market power to force a consumer's hand. Legal power, marketing power, and even product-merit power... yeah. Market power, not so much.
Microsoft, on the other hand, is pretty much defined by their habit of using market power.
In the unlikely event that Apple somehow creates a piece of software or hardware that becomes a near essential part of almost every personal computer on the market, and then begins to abuse their status, then Apple will be the new Microsoft.
In the meanwhile, saying something like that is just another way of saying "Apple does stuff I don't like!"
Tweet, tweet.
Change the alert for incoming e-mail.. The standard one is too quiet and Its vital for work that I hear it.
This is the sole reason I jail-broke my iphone.. This is illegal!?!
How the flying f*** does apple think that DMCA is in any way even remotely applicable to this?
Sure jailbreaking unlocks the phone, but what actual copyrighted content is unlocked?
The unlocking, to the best of my understanding, does _not_ actually unlock any copyrighted content on the phone, it merely unlocks functionality of the hardware.
Functionality isn't something covered by copyright, so see my opening question above.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It appears that Apple just wants legal recourse to clear it's self from the liability of a cracked i phone. Apple does not want some party tinkering with the iphone and then suing them when it fails to work "correctly" it is the same thing with automobile example in the original article. ford will not honor a warranty on there care if you put a modified Honda fuel injector in the engine.
Who gives a fuck about what that **** of a company, Apple thinks? I for sure don't. I'd love to see the fuckers go bust. I hate Apple. I hate idiotic Apple loversâ as well. They're like little lemmings - they deserve to be chucked over a 200 parsec high cliff. Whilst nuking them on the way down.
Dave
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. --Martin Luther King Jr.
I don't like the law, but it's probably illegal to hack into an iPhone. Not that I care. Change the law. Go ahead and jailbreak, though I don't want to, and very few non-geeks ever will. Nobody's actully going to get in trouble. It's just that the law in fact does say you can't do that. If a judge or two is finding an exception, then there will surely be some contrary judgments, and the case should go to the Supremes then, and don't count on those idiotic zombies understanding. Change. The. Law.