Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Claims That Jail-Breaking Is Illegal

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the never-underestimate-the-power-of-greed dept.

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."

15 of 610 comments (clear)

  1. Someone call the wambulance by mc1138 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Someone call the wambulance by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who do you buy your gasoline from?

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    2. Re:Someone call the wambulance by cyn1c77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who do you buy your gasoline from?

      I don't buy it. I bike, walk and use public transit.

      .I bet you think you're clever though, with your pithy "Who do you buy your gasoline from" crap.

      Like living with ideals is an impossible and ridiculous thing that nobody really does and no one is really expected to do. Personally, I disassociate myself permanently from people and organizations I don't like. Won't work for em, won't buy from em, won't be involved, won't help make them strong. Hell, I didn't like what my government has been doing last number of years, so I stopped paying my taxes. Almost went to jail for that, but my hands are clean. I did not help them.

      ...therefore I'm really just passing the hardship along to others. That makes me accountable to those others, and I may one day be called on to pay the piper, and if they come for me, it will be right and good and my own damned fault.

      It's called taking responsibility, maybe you ought to look into it.

      What are you 12 years old? It sounds like you think you're the clever one. The world isn't black and white, it's shades of grey and sometimes you have to compromise and work with people and organizations you don't like to make progress.

      Just because you don't agree with elected government officials doesn't give you the right to stop paying taxes and push the cost onto other citizens under some retarded form of social protest. By living in the country, you are accepting the whole package, including agreeing paying taxes, regardless of who is elected.

      If you don't like it, legally fight for change or GTFO. You can't bury your head in the sand and just ignore things you don't like.

  2. Apple has a problem with this...... by 8127972 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..... 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.
    1. Re:Apple has a problem with this...... by PotatoFarmer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Alternately, they've finally realized that they can't win on technological grounds. Apple undoubtedly has some incredibly smart people working on plugging these holes as fast as they can, but at the end of the day it's a handful of folks vs. the rest of the world.

      If you can no longer innovate, then it's time to litigate.

    2. Re:Apple has a problem with this...... by jlarocco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The true motive isn't profit,

      That's just silly. When a giant corporation like Apple makes a decision, the underlying motive is profit. Always. Hell, even when they do stuff like donate money to charity, they do it because they expect the good will they'll get from doing it to be worth more than they're donating. That's just how big companies operate.

      I don't know why they're doing this, but I'm 100% certain they're doing it because they think it'll help them make more money.

      --
      Maybe not
  3. Remember kids... by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Remember kids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong.

      Also, don't get caught.

  4. Re:And so it begins by mc1138 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's been going like this for a while, just look at their business practices, the only thing they have going for them is that they're cool.

    --
    The musings of just another geek and his junk.
  5. Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  6. Apple's reality-distortion field by Simonetta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Apple's reality-distortion field by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And see that's where it gets a bit hazy, and questionable legally.

      I purchased a device that had software on it - or I could have purchased a CD, or even a file. That is, and always has, been purchasing a copy of the object. And THAT is what copyright law allows. It doesn't allow producers to sell "rights to use" something - it allows them the legal right to copy it, and then distribute it as they want (which usually means selling it). Beyond that though they lose control of how you use it. YOU certainly can't copy it again except where copyright law allows via fair use, but you already own that copy and can do with it as you please, without any regard to the original copyright holder because again, that copy has been sold.

      Again, copyright law was created primarily when books were what was talked about, and hence they make a perfect analogy. IT DOESN'T MATTER that after the publisher sees that people are ignoring their first page directive not now doodle the book. If they now decide to claim that "You're not really purchasing the book anymore. You're purchasing a license to use it and the pages are just a delivery method.", then they still have just as little (ie, none) capability of saying that you can't doodle in your book. Because when applied sensibly, the "only a license, not a copy" argument is complete and utter bullshit.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  7. Are you kidding? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  8. Re:And so it begins by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple has long been far WORSE than MS. The difference, of course, is that your life is extremely unlikely to be impacted by avoiding Apple's products.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  9. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much of Apple's webkit enhancements are now proprietary and not submitted back. ⦠Further, the little they do submit back has given them leverage to control the package against public interest: I.e. Webkit rejected support for Ogg/Theora+Vorbis citing Apple. (Apple is a holder of MPEG LA licensed patents).

    Go check the gcc mailing list archives. No apple employee is permitted to come in contact with any GPLv3 licensed source code, they had to unsubscribe from GCC-patches mailing lists and have requests people not send patches to the main gcc mailing list.

    Apple is an exploiter of free software. Sometimes giving back is in their interest, but don't let that mislead you into thinking that they are a supporter.