Jailbreaking Could Soon Become Illegal Again

Who cares by mvar · 2012-01-26 09:31 · Score: 5, Insightful

Illegal or not i'll do whatever i want with my phone. I may as well take a hammer and test its screen, oh wait, is that illegal too? Patents, IP, copyright, SOPA, PIPA, lawsuits.. fuck them

Re:Who cares by Microlith · 2012-01-26 09:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

You should care. If you don't, you're just handing the reins over to someone who will fuck you over with force of law.
And if you don't care, you're half the problem.
Re:Who cares by jamstar7 · 2012-01-26 09:35 · Score: 2

Breaking your phone's screen is about the only thing that's legal. It forces you to buy another phone.

--
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Re:Who cares by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2012-01-26 09:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

You care. Because not only is it illegal for you to jailbreak, it is illegal for someone else to help you. As in to provide the tools to do the jailbreaking. So unless you are an uberhacker, you won't be doing much jailbreaking.

--
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Re:Who cares by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

[i]Illegal or not i'll do whatever i want with my phone[/i]
YOU do something that no one will know about is not the problem.
The problem are the people who are creating the tools. If creation, or possession of the tools becomes illegal, or advocation and instruction on how to use them becomes illegal... then all those websites you can easily "google" today to learn how to do it will VANISH.
You're welcome to reinvent the wheel in your basement, but more than likely you'll simply saying "fuckit" and move on... which is exactly what the proponents of laws like this want.
Re:Who cares by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-01-26 09:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

Inconveniently, you'll attempt to do what you want with your phone.

In the vast majority of cases, unless the owner of the device has considerable spare time and skills far outside the norm, their ability to do what they want with their device depends largely on the public availability of tools for doing so. Those tools are the ones that are most likely to get harder to find should their legal status shift(architecturally, prosecuting individuals who tamper with a GUID-bearing, cellular-modem-connected, user-account-data-correlated, device would actually be comparatively practical, make one mistake in your jailbreak, hit a tripwire or a tilt-bit somewhere, and run the risk that the hardware will phone home and report you; but unlikely to be a good PR move...)

Against a complex system, you are only as good as your tools, which becomes a much greater limitation if those become contraband.
Re:Who cares by Microlith · 2012-01-26 09:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

And you're under prior-restraint to keep silent about such methods!
Don't you love how the DMCA violates the First Amendment for the sake of corporate interests?
Re:Who cares by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

The crazier the intellectual property laws get the less respect people will have for intellectual property laws. I care quite a bit, but at this point it may be easier to just let "big content" hang themselves.
Re:Who cares by theillien · 2012-01-26 10:05 · Score: 2

Somehow, I don't think illegality will stop people from creating the tools or finding ways to disseminate them. Call me crazy since we already know how locked down things are on the Internet and nothing illegal ever happens.
Re:Who cares by Tr3vin · 2012-01-26 10:08 · Score: 5, Interesting

I do care, but I speak with my money. I buy phones that the manufacturer allows me to hack / modify. 'fastboot oem unlock' is a glorious thing. I'd rather give money to a company that allows me to do what I want than fight the more controlling companies.
Re:Who cares by PopeRatzo · 2012-01-26 10:10 · Score: 5, Interesting

The crazier the intellectual property laws get the less respect people will have for intellectual property laws.
I'm not sure how much less respect people can have for "intellectual property laws".
Any possibility for respect was wasted when "95 years from publication or 120 years from creation whichever is shorter" became the length of a copyright. Or when advocates for "intellectual property" sought penalties in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for downloading songs via bittorrent.
There just isn't a compelling reason why anyone should respect copyright laws. Especially considering how little of the financial benefit of those laws actually goes to the creator.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:Who cares by poetmatt · 2012-01-26 10:13 · Score: 2

They've just never had a chance to challenge the issue directly. The courts have sidestepped this as much as possible to narrowly rule on technicalities. The truth is, prior restraint isn't suddenly invalid as a defense because of the DMCA but courts are always very hesitant to fight against laws created by congress. Isn't it great? Even in the supreme court. This is how broken our system of branches of gov't is as it exists.
It becomes: Legislative branch -> judicial branch (Judicial rolls over 99% of the time)
Legislative branch = executive branch.
Nice balanced political system huh.
Re:Who cares by tepples · 2012-01-26 10:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'd rather give money to a company that allows me to do what I want than fight the more controlling companies.
So would I, but in some cases that I've seen, "the more controlling companies" control virtually all of a market.
Re:Who cares by Dahamma · 2012-01-26 10:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

Especially considering how little of the financial benefit of those laws actually goes to the creator.
The copyright length is definitely absurd (I'd argue in most cases 2-3 years would allow recovering the investment made into it and the majority of future profits), and removing casual copying of content probably would not result in much of an increase in sales, I agree. But it is still a huge benefit to content creators in one way - it keeps organized, commercial piracy (that is so common in Asian countries) to a minimum in many countries.
Imagine if there were *no* laws against copying someone else's work - say anyone could legally copy a studio's movie print and show it in their own theater, or copy DVDs, CDs, or books and sell them in a retail store along side the "official" copies, etc. Those copiers don't have to make back the time and money put into creating the work, only the trivial cost of duplicating it. I'd call preventing that a definite financial benefit to the creator...
Re:Who cares by Microlith · 2012-01-26 10:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

So do I, which is why I still use my N900.

I'd rather give money to a company that allows me to do what I want than fight the more controlling companies.
You have no choice. Look at the primary opponent of this: Apple. Look at their results. You cannot simply avoid them, their influence on the market is so stupidly huge that even if you don't buy their product, they can still directly impact your ability to choose other options in the future.
Re:Who cares by tepples · 2012-01-26 10:27 · Score: 4, Interesting

If I buy a carrier independent Android compatible phone

With the mess of protocols (CDMA2000 vs. GSM/UMTS), bands (AWS vs. standard), and plans (no discount for not taking a subsidized phone) that is the U.S. cell phone market, do you have a plan for making this practical in the United States?
Re:Who cares by fish_in_the_c · 2012-01-26 10:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

Are they immoral? If so disobey them.. if not obey them and work to change them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience
The question is are your action out of Love or Selfishness.
Out of concern for the common good , or just being a tool.
If you are actually looking to create a better world around you people will have more respect for your position ,even if they don't agree with it, they are still likely to jail, crucify or otherwise attack you, but your actions will have slow effect towards justice and you might have a chance at changing things because, often times people know when they are wrong even if they don't admit it.
If your motivations are selfish than it will show too and no-body will listen to you because you aren't just being a cry baby when you put in jail for doing what you knew was illegal.
That's the real problem with the occupy movement, they don't offer solutions , only complaints, they aren't making any useful demands on what would actually make things better, based on concern for the public good, they are simply saying they don't like the way things are.
News flash, nobody likes the way things are, the world will never be perfect this side of the grave.
The only question is , what are you going to do about it!

--
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
Re:Who cares by whoever57 · 2012-01-26 10:37 · Score: 2

If I buy a carrier independent Android compatible phone then I don't have to jailbreak it.
You are confused between sim-unlocking (allws the phone to be used with different carriers) and jailbreaking (allows different firmware to be loaded or features enabled).

--
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Re:Who cares by houghi · 2012-01-26 11:08 · Score: 2

The reason is control. As everybody now is a criminal, they can use it as leverage to let you do stuff you normally never would do.

--
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Re:Who cares by idontgno · 2012-01-26 11:23 · Score: 2

Interesting. The iPhone Reality Distortion Field is, in fact, the tidal gravitation zone of their humongous black hole's event horizon. The entire smartphone industry is stuck in the iPhone accretion disk, and there's almost no escape.
Well, I'll still keep jailbraking, and they won't catch me.

--
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Re:Who cares by PopeRatzo · 2012-01-26 12:09 · Score: 2, Informative

Imagine if there were *no* laws against copying someone else's work - say anyone could legally copy a studio's movie print and show it in their own theater, or copy DVDs, CDs, or books and sell them in a retail store along side the "official" copies, etc.

Is that what's happening? Do you see pirated DVDs and CDs on the shelves at Best Buy? Can you tell me which theaters are showing pirated films?
Why do the apologists for the ridiculous "intellectual property" laws always have to go to imaginary scenarios to try to make their case?
In the real world, can you provide proof that artists are making less money because of illegal copies than they would have if there had been no illegal copies? Because I can show you the opposite. Yes, I can show you instances of artists who would have made much less money if their work had not been passed around on torrent sites.
Hell, there are artists who got their start by distributing their work on bittorrent sites. Without that "illegal copying" those artists would never have gotten a record contract.
So, if you can lay out some evidence that the violation of copyright is actually lessening artists' incomes, then we can talk. Until then, I maintain that the current "intellectual property" laws do more harm than good - for customers and artists alike.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:Who cares by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 12:41 · Score: 3, Informative

The Galaxy Nexus is pentaband, supporting AWS and "standard" GSM. That just misses wimax and CDMA.
The Galaxy Nexus doesn't need SIM unlocking.
The Galaxy Nexus can be "jailbroken" simply by running fastboot oem unlock. No hacks needed, fastboot is a tool provided by Google.
Re:Who cares by kelemvor4 · 2012-01-26 12:43 · Score: 2

Imagine if there were *no* laws against copying someone else's work - say anyone could legally copy a studio's movie print and show it in their own theater, or copy DVDs, CDs, or books and sell them in a retail store along side the "official" copies, etc.
Is that what's happening? Do you see pirated DVDs and CDs on the shelves at Best Buy? Can you tell me which theaters are showing pirated films?
Why do the apologists for the ridiculous "intellectual property" laws always have to go to imaginary scenarios to try to make their case?
In the real world, can you provide proof that artists are making less money because of illegal copies than they would have if there had been no illegal copies? Because I can show you the opposite. Yes, I can show you instances of artists who would have made much less money if their work had not been passed around on torrent sites.
Hell, there are artists who got their start by distributing their work on bittorrent sites. Without that "illegal copying" those artists would never have gotten a record contract.
So, if you can lay out some evidence that the violation of copyright is actually lessening artists' incomes, then we can talk. Until then, I maintain that the current "intellectual property" laws do more harm than good - for customers and artists alike.
Talk about "whoosh". GP said that this is what would happen if there were no IP laws, not that it is what is happening today.
Re:Who cares by PopeRatzo · 2012-01-26 13:40 · Score: 2

Talk about "whoosh". GP said that this is what would happen if there were no IP laws, not that it is what is happening today.
And as I said, so little of the money involved actually goes to the artists that even if those pirated CDs were sold at Best Buy, they probably wouldn't cut into their incomes.
Let's just not pretend that the intellectual property laws are working to protect the incomes of creators, OK?

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:Who cares by CRC'99 · 2012-01-26 13:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

As someone who recently jailbroke his iPad2, its one of the best things to ever happen to my iPad!
I bought a WiFi only model - as for my purposes, the onboard GPS is *very* substandard. When then trying to use a normal bluetooth GPS, I find out that you need a GPS that speaks "Apple" at $99USD + shipping to your country. After the jailbreak, a $5 donation to the guy who wrote a part of a bluetooth driver and bingo, now it works with ANY bluetooth GPS.
Theres also this awesome extension called "Mail Extender" that adds all the features that mail clients have developed over the last 10 years when Apple decided that you shall not send anything but plain text emails.
Thankfully, I live in a country where console modchips and other methods for device compatibility are 100% legal - and tested in court.

--
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
Re:Who cares by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 14:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

Until it destroyed the entire entertainment industry because no one could afford to produce any content.
you act like that would be a bad thing..
it'd certainly weed out the people doing it only for money and leave the people doing it because it's what they love.
Re:Who cares by phantomfive · 2012-01-26 19:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

Is that what's happening? Do you see pirated DVDs and CDs on the shelves at Best Buy? Can you tell me which theaters are showing pirated films?
Uh, yes it is. In countries that don't respect copyright, those things happen. Have you never been out of the US?

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."

Specifying by shape??? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-01-26 09:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

There is something just heartbreakingly pathetic at the notion that the EFF is going to have to petition to get further devices included, distinguished largely by shape from those originally included, rather than it being a given that the device you buy, you own.

Perversely, I sometimes wonder if the situation would be improved if makers of 'traditional' categories of objects, like cars and appliances and firearms, were to start getting their DRM on and building systems that cryptographically verify every FRU's TPM on start and enter a lockout that can only be cleared by an authorized dealer if any tampering is suspected... Yeah, it'd make those product categories horribly worse; but it might finally give the computer-clueless some idea of just how insane the world of EULAs, DRM, and assorted device lockdown really is...

Re:Specifying by shape??? by viperidaenz · 2012-01-26 10:04 · Score: 2

distinguished solely by shape

That's better

Re:Hold up wait what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:35 · Score: 4, Informative

The DMCA makes circumventing digital security illegal - and this could include jailbreaking your phone / tablet / computer if it ever comes to that.
It has a provision for making exceptions, but unlike the DMCA the exceptions only last for three years. If they're not renewed they automatically lapse.

Re:Hold up wait what? by Microlith · 2012-01-26 09:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Because of this:

- Jailbreaking breaks the security on the iPhone, thus putting the tools in violation of the DMCA
- The LoC granted an exception to the DMCA for jailbreaking tools in the interest of enabling compatibility.

It's part of the DMCA, and its complete and total pro-corporate bias. All you jailbreaking Apple fans should watch as Apple fights the exemption renewal. They hate you and want you back in the box, and to never talk about it.

Re:Hold up wait what? by theexaptation · 2012-01-26 09:37 · Score: 2

The reason that it expires (just like a lot of tax loopholes) is so that another round of fund raising can begin for both sides of a divisive issue.
Setting it to expire is how they keep the campaign coffers full.
It is the government version of vendor lock in.

I cant wait thousands of 12 year olds in jail.. by Rivalz · 2012-01-26 09:39 · Score: 5, Funny

We need to create a new arm of the government now to fight this menace to society.
We need a badass name to instill fear in teenagers to curb their illicit jailbreaking habits.

An elite squad named...
A.J.A.C.K.A.S.S
Anti Jailbreaking And Computer Knowledge Agianst Stupid Senators

Re:I cant wait thousands of 12 year olds in jail.. by bratwiz · 2012-01-26 12:43 · Score: 3, Funny

How about:
"Computer-Oblivious, No-Good Repugnant Elitist Sophist Scumbags"
Or just "C.O.N.G.R.E.S.S." for short...

Re:Who cares / Exactly Badly Needed Semantics by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

Everyone, 'stop calling it jailbreaking', and start calling it a Free Country..

Re:Hold up wait what? by Microlith · 2012-01-26 09:40 · Score: 2

Except that this isn't going through Congress. It goes through the Library of Congress.

A weird place that USA by Teun · 2012-01-26 09:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

On the one hand you can in many jurisdictions legally shoot (take the life of) someone that trespasses your land/ house or car and on the other hand you can be locked up for modifying your own paid for appliance.

While the outside world has for many years thought the USofA was the most materialistic nation on earth...

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."

Re:A weird place that USA by Idbar · 2012-01-26 11:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

Amazing indeed. A place where a company is legally prosecuted for antitrust, for not allowing to uninstall their browser. Yet other companies attack their customers for trying to uninstall or modify any other part of their system.

Ah... how nice is being on the side that makes the rules.

Too bad ALL laws don't expire by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

It would be nice if all laws had a sunset scheme... something like:

Law originally passed unanimously: no sunset review needed

Law originally passed 75% to 25%: ok to "bundle" with other laws in a simple majority re-confirmation every 10 years.

Law originally passed with simple majority less than 75%? requires single-issue re-confirmation every 3 years.

Re:Too bad ALL laws don't expire by dnahelicase · 2012-01-26 10:16 · Score: 4, Insightful

It would be nice if all laws had a sunset scheme..
If only I had mod points.!
Why stop at laws? Let's make things like copyright expire too!
Re:Too bad ALL laws don't expire by KiloByte · 2012-01-26 11:22 · Score: 2

Cmon, considering how long it takes Congress to pass NEW laws, if we had a sunset clause like this nothing would ever get done.
That's the whole point!

--
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Re:Hold up wait what? by CaptainLard · 2012-01-26 09:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

Well you know what they say, "theres nothing more permanent than a temporary government program/law/tax/etc.". Maybe its due for one such law to work out in favor of the tinkerers...

Game Consoles by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:44 · Score: 2

Can we get game consoles added as an expemtion as well? Please?

Re:Hold up wait what? by Sarten-X · 2012-01-26 09:46 · Score: 5, Funny

Don't confuse the issue. We all know how evil, corrupt, and greedy* those librarians are! This is clearly an attempt to ensure they're not completely obsolete as books become irrelevant.

*Source: firsthand knowledge. My wife is a librarian, and she steals the bedsheets every night.

--
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.

Who's property by Grindalf · 2012-01-26 09:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

So if I buy such a device, who's property is it then? This seems to contradict the property laws ...

--
The purpose of existence is to make money.

Re:Who's property by Em+Adespoton · 2012-01-26 11:20 · Score: 4, Informative

If you buy such a device, it's your property. However, in order to do anything useful, you'll either need to flash the device yourself (this lets you *replace* the software, which is legal), or agree to the software license and then circumvent the software somehow -- and the software does NOT belong to you -- it belongs to the copyright holder, and they let you run it on your device.
If you can reflash (hardware reflash, not software reflash via the software already provided by the manufacturer) the device and install some other system on it, DMCA isn't broken.
Kind of like you can buy a car, but circumventing the on-board software is illegal. Same went for buying a printer and hacking the firmware to let you use any printer cartridge, until this got an exemption for compatibility reasons.
Re:Who's property by JustNiz · 2012-01-26 11:25 · Score: 2

Most often the way it works is:
The physical hardware is yours, The software isn't.
You just get a license to run the software. The license usually includes clauses specifically against reverse-engineering or circumnavigating any part of the software or its 'security measures'.
Then they simply find a way to make it that you have to agree to be bound by the licence terms in order to use the product.
or
b) By even turning on the product, you automatically have signified your acceptance of being bound by the licence terms.

Re:Sheer stupitdity by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-01-26 09:48 · Score: 2

Don't worry, consumer. Your ECU will be verifying the 'authenticity' of all peripherals on the local bus before authorizing ignition soon enough.

GPL should require vendors to ship with root by nightfire-unique · 2012-01-26 09:55 · Score: 5, Insightful

Even if someone intervenes and solves this legal issue, I don't think that's good enough. Having access to tinker and enhance is the reason these devices exist at all.

Imagine if 90s PCs were crippled this way. Would Linux, or its multibillion dollar server industry even exist? Apache? Tomcat? Free software can't survive in such a hostile environment. The anti-intellectualism must stop.

While we do have the ability to call the shots, I suggest that the next GPL revision include an additional clause:

Redistribution privileges granted by the GPLv4 are revoked from all manufacturers who ship devices that don't provide to the end user an easy, supported method of superuser privilege escalation.

The good news is, it would have two effects. Smart vendors would fix their devices to comply. The evil ones would fork the kernel and anything else using the new license, and eventually die off without community support.

Remember. We have the money, and we have the power. Not Hollywood. Hollywood is irrelevant.

--
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC

Re:GPL should require vendors to ship with root by Microlith · 2012-01-26 09:58 · Score: 3, Informative

The GPLv3 effectively does require that. It bars the use of GPLv3 software in things that require jailbreaking, or otherwise keep the user trapped and unable to rebuild and replace the GPLv3 binaries. Slightly different terminology, but same effect (the anti-TiVOization clause.)

Having access to tinker and enhance is the reason these devices exist at all.
Not quite. However, that should be something all users are able to do without interference from the manufacturer.

Smart vendors would fix their devices to comply. The evil ones would fork the kernel and anything else using the new license, and eventually die off without community support.
WRT GPLv3, they're already not using the GNU coreutils. And the Linux kernel will never be anything but GPLv2.

We have the money, and we have the power. Not Hollywood. Hollywood is irrelevant.
But you don't have someone like Chris Dodd, who can go on Fox News and threaten congressmen for not standing up to the American populace to force bad laws through.

Headline correction by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 09:56 · Score: 5, Informative

How about "EFF working to keep jailbreaking legal" as a headline? The OP (who has also linked to the article on his own retarded ad-filled site) is just sensationalising this shit to attract traffic / improve his pagerank. Better stories are available here and elsewhere.

Re:Headline correction by jedidiah · 2012-01-26 10:06 · Score: 2

Sounds like the shrill cry of a wounded fanboy.
The fact is that Apple would see all jailbreaking be illegal if it were up to them.
The original title is an accurate portrayal of the situation better capturing the fact that jailbreaking would otherwise be illegal. It took consumer lobbying to be declared legal and it will lapse into being illegal again without active consumer lobbying.
This has to be done repeatedly.
The RC could still declare jailbreaking illegal again despite of what the EFF does.
A watered down approach to the subject really doesn't capture the essence of the situation here.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.

Other things that should be illegal too... by stevenfuzz · 2012-01-26 10:01 · Score: 2

Upgrading a car stereo, getting suits tailored, Changing filters in air conditioners, Showering night club stamps off, Changing shoe laces, Singing along with a CD/mp3, Photoshop, Opening a computer... I mean, why would I have the right to root the cell phone/tablet I buy. Imagine if I enabled tethering, the world might end right then and there.

Re:Revolution! by PPH · 2012-01-26 10:10 · Score: 4, Funny

Shoot the head of all politicians!

There's nothing up there. Aim for the pocketbook.

--
Have gnu, will travel.

root and CarrierIQ by djscoumoune · 2012-01-26 10:12 · Score: 2

Do mobile providers need root access when they install CarrierIQ ? If so could they be sued if this law wasn't renewed ?

Unanimous consent by tepples · 2012-01-26 10:17 · Score: 2

Law originally passed unanimously: no sunset review needed

And guess how both the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Copyright Term Extension Act passed.

Re:Very relevant XKCD by newcastlejon · 2012-01-26 10:21 · Score: 3, Informative

Look, I've told you about this before. If you're not going to pick a relevant strip please pick a different one; there's even a search box provided.

--
If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.

Aspire X1 by tepples · 2012-01-26 10:22 · Score: 4, Informative

Acer makes an open game console. It's called the Aspire X1, it's about the size of an original Xbox 360 and can use its gamepads, and it runs all PC software. And unlike the major consoles, it has multiple app stores: Steam, Impulse, Desura, and GOG. There's even an adapter called the Retrode that lets it play classic games made for the Super NES and Sega Genesis.

Let's make PCs the fourth console.

Re:Sheer stupitdity by mlts · 2012-01-26 10:26 · Score: 2, Interesting

Believe it or not, on some makes of cars, the ECM/TCM will check if it is tampered with, and when taken to a service depot, the entire warranty will be voided.

It took about a year for people to "jailbreak" the latest EcoBoost engines so one can run a custom tune on them.

Direct link to the petition.. by __aasehi2499 · 2012-01-26 10:30 · Score: 2

https://www.jailbreakingisnotacrime.org/

Re:Who cares / Exactly Badly Needed Semantics by future+assassin · 2012-01-26 10:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

or call it what it is. Modifying my own property.

--
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*

Always the same. by forkfail · 2012-01-26 11:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

The white hats have to win every single battle.

The black hats need only win one.

--
Check your premises.

Re:Who cares / Exactly Badly Needed Semantics by Idbar · 2012-01-26 11:35 · Score: 2

What about calling it "Performance improvement by bloatware removal"? :)

Re:Maybe you should have bought a blackberry inste by an+unsound+mind · 2012-01-26 11:36 · Score: 2

Android on the phones without a locked bootloader (like all Google-released Android phones) also allows just as much freedom.

That's a large reason why Blackberry's dead - if you really want it your freedom, Android can do it. Android even gives you the freedom of releasing a locked-down device, which is why Android sometimes isn't as free.

Re:Who cares / Exactly Badly Needed Semantics by X10 · 2012-01-26 11:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

Everyone, 'stop calling it jailbreaking', and start calling it a Free Country..

Apparently, some legislators disagree with you, about your country being a Free Country.

--
no, I don't have a sig

Massive logical fallacies... by cbhacking · 2012-01-26 17:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

How the <REDACTED> did this get modded up??

Is that what's happening?

Yes, in countries that meet the criteria specified in the post you responded to, and even quoted: places where there are "*no* [effective] laws against copying somebody else's work" such as many of the Asian nations I've been to (Malaysia, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Indonesia, etc.), and a lot of Africa as well. Also certain parts of South America, though it's slightly less widespread there (in my experience).

Do you see pirated DVDs and CDs on the shelves at Best Buy?

Well, they don't have Best Buy in those countries, but everywhere that you can buy a CD or DVD, from a streetside vendor's cart to a chain of media retailers with a presense in most large malls, is selling mostly if not entirely pirated CDs and DVDs, yes.

Can you tell me which theaters are showing pirated films?

In those countries? (Almost?) all of them. The hard part would be finding one which *isn't* doing so. The better ones will use copies that were made with something better than a handheld video camera pointed at the screen, but it will still have stupid things like subtitles in a language nobody in the country speaks (not English).

You'll also find photocopied "books" printed on standard-size paper and bound with plastic rings, CDs/DVDs listing 5 different popular pieces of software plus cracks and/or keygens, and copies of well-known photos or other graphical art (either in printed form or in bulk on a CD).

The interesting thing about all this copyright-ignored media is that, aside from a few pieces from successful "locals" (literally, fewer than ten per nation), it's produced elsewhere in the world - in the US, Canada, the EU, NZ, or Australia, typically - because in such countries it's feasible for people to actually make a living creating such content.

Why do the apologists for the ridiculous "intellectual property" laws always have to go to imaginary scenarios to try to make their case?

What do you have to smoke that you can quote somebody's post, including the conditions under which it is stted to apply and still completely fail to understand that it is not being stated to apply universally? Are you one of those idiot Americans (I'm a US citizen myself, for the record) who thinks that the USA is the entire world, or are you simply completely deluded?

Hell, there are artists who got their start by distributing their work on bittorrent sites. Without that "illegal copying" those artists would never have gotten a record contract.

You can't even construct a logical argument out of your own words, never mind when using anybody else's. If the copyright owner is putting the content online for redistribution, it's hardly "illegal copying" anymore. Copyright law allows for the owner of the copyright to distribute their works however they like.

--
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...

Re:Massive logical fallacies... by Splab · 2012-01-26 23:20 · Score: 2

You are pointing at countries where peoples average monthly salary is less than a BR or a trip to the movies (Denmark) and saying "hey lookie lookie, no IP laws and pirates are rampant".
Personally I belive IP laws are killing competition and producing worse content. Most of those illegal copies you mention are crap and will be bought by those who can't afford the real thing anyways. Make big companies compete with the pirates and soon you will see products consumers want, e.g. DVDs that goes straight to the movie rather than force you to sit through 10 mins. of commercials for something that was hot 10 years ago.

Re:Hold up wait what? by tragedy · 2012-01-26 18:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

Yes, wouldn't it be nice if the DMCA had a sunset provision too? Personally, I think all new laws should have sunset provisions without some sort of actual constitutional amendment-like system to make them permanent. I also think they should need to be read in their entirety, on record in the house and senate before they get to vote on them every time.

Re:Hold up wait what? by fremsley471 · 2012-01-27 00:16 · Score: 2

And one of those two could be Newt Gingrich! Says everything about the process of picking candidates. Look at his record on marriage, lobbying/money, racist [food-stamp president, what sort of shit is that?], together with levels of hypocrisy beyond invention. Incredible. The idea of President Gingrich was laughable 10 years ago. What changed?

Slashdot Mirror

Jailbreaking Could Soon Become Illegal Again

69 of 239 comments (clear)