Posted on 07/27/2010 10:58:07 AM PDT by Still Thinking
WASHINGTON (AP) — Owners of the iPhone will be able to legally unlock their devices so they can run software applications that haven't been approved by Apple Inc., according to new government rules announced Monday.
The decision to allow the practice commonly known as "jailbreaking" is one of a handful of new exemptions from a 1998 federal law that prohibits people from bypassing technical measures that companies put on their products to prevent unauthorized use of copyright-protected material.
For iPhone jailbreakers, the new rules effectively legitimize a practice that has been operating in a legal gray area by exempting it from liability. Apple claims that jailbreaking is an unauthorized modification of its software.
Unless users unlock their handsets, they can only download apps from Apple's iTunes store. Software developers must get such apps pre-approved by Apple, which sometimes demands changes or rejects programs for what developers say are vague reasons.
Apple spokesman Natalie Kerris said Monday that the company is concerned about jailbreaking because the practice can make an iPhone unstable and unreliable.
In addition to jailbreaking, other exemptions announced Monday would:
— allow owners of used cell phones to break access controls on their phones in order to switch wireless carriers.
— allow people to break technical protections on video games to investigate or correct security flaws.
— allow college professors, film students, documentary filmmakers and producers of noncommercial videos to break copy-protection measures on DVDs so they can embed clips for educational purposes, criticism or commentary.
— allow computer owners to bypass the need for external security devices called dongles if the dongle no longer works and cannot be replaced.
— allow blind people to break locks on electronic books so that they can use them with read-aloud software and similar aides.
(Excerpt) Read more at pddnet.com ...
I also love how they're so concerned jailbreaking might hurt your phone that they turn it off remotely! I'm glad I got them on my side protecting me!
Disclaimer: This is not to incite a flame war over products, but intended to be a DRM and DMCA themed thread, so please refrain from trashing each other's computing preferences!
Tech and DRM ping!
If so, that would be inconsistent with the, ahem, dongle ruling. Or at least once the servers have been down more than 48 hours, or something like that.
I still can’t figure out why this is a legal issue at all. Makes me wonder what the government’s payoff from Apple was to get this made a legal issue to start with.
Ok...I am a DRM (Dumb Republicam Male)...how does one unlock the iphone
Consistency? What’s that?
I think the reasoning was, “you haven’t shown that anybody’s been hurt from it enough yet—come back after it’s too late.”
The fact that this action was considered "illegal" in the first place is disturbing.
It wasn't Apple per se, but a lot of content related companies. They bribed a corrupt Congress to repeatedly extend copyright, till now it's almost infinite, and to criminalize any attempts to defeat their technological measures to lock down their products. They tried the tech measures without the criminalization initially, but they're so bad at it that they kept getting embarrassed by some nerdy kid in his mom's basement. These are implementation rules to create exemptions where the strict literal application of the law would be inappropriate.
Hmmm, in that case I recommend a liberal application of beer. To yourself or the phone, it doesn't matter!
Oh, don't get me started on that issue! The same people who are arguing that they don't sell the content, but a license to use the content, and that thus they're allowed to tell you what you can do with the thing you've bought and paid for? They've also argued in court that the sale shouldn't be treated as a license but as a sale, when that would leave them with less responsibilities to the customers!
“Ok...I am a DRM (Dumb Republicam Male)...how does one unlock the iphone”
Do you live in a city?
If so then you are a DRUM - Dumb Republican Urban Male
Ok...I am a DRM (Dumb Republicam Male)...how does one unlock the iphone
Hmmm, in that case I recommend a liberal application of beer. To yourself or the phone, it doesn’t matter!
OK...beer worked...dunked it and it stopped ringing..thanks for the help!
Excellent! Go with God, my son.
Today’s ruling is a very bad thing for Apple and great for customers.
As soon as they figure out unlocking 3GS with iOS4.0.1, I’m doing it and installing Flash on my phone.
Another rumor is Mozilla Firefox and Adobe Flash may team up to make a real browser for the iPhone.
Of course Apple has a for-profit strategy. But I can’t wait to see all your comments in a few months when you discover that the noncertified/unauthorized apps that you’ve loaded on the phones just stole your identity, shared all your contacts with nefarious players and your treasured little iPhones don’t work any more. Will you be demanding that Apple’s warranty still apply? Or will you be looking for the nanny state government to go after those big bad for-profit companies to bail you out for your naive understanding of what opening up a network connected device really means?
You mean, would I expect Apple to make me whole for damage caused by an app they didn't approve? No, of course not, who would?
Or will you be looking for the nanny state government to go after those big bad for-profit companies to bail you out for your naive understanding of what opening up a network connected device really means?
I would have no problem with Apple certifying apps as danger free and people could choose to use the Apple-certified ones or take their chances and use ones that weren't. Oh, wait....that's exactly what this ruling says, that Apple doesn't get to make that choice FOR you.
They go through this every few years. A few civic-minded organizations request exemptions, and the corporations bring their full lobbying power to make sure none are granted. I’m surprised the DVD one made it in this time. The MPAA has been fighting hard against it every time it’s been requested, and the Register of Copyrights (an industry lawyer hack) has consistently agreed until now, and then only partway. Format shifting, an otherwise well-established fair use of copyrighted works, is still not allowed overall.
The anti-circumvention part of this law is bad in many ways, so don’t expect much reasonable to come from it. So, yes, there is no exemption in case the DRM servers go down. They tell you to burn the music to CD and re-import. Thus they shift it upon us to either accept lower-quality sound (re-encoded lossy again) or more disk space (if you use a lossless codec) in order to keep our copy of the copyrighted work. Funny, right there they tell us to format-shift, but still say format shifting of DVDs is wrong.
For copyright questions, and going back to the Founders, I always look to books. Would this make sense if it were a book or song? If not, then it’s probably not within the original constitutional intent of copyright. I doubt Madison thought a publisher could arbitrarily come into his library and render his books unreadable. Madison would be shocked at the state of copyright today, and would have to swallow some of the words he wrote to Jefferson about the populace being able to keep the power of the publishers through copyright in check.
So, who will reimburse Apple for certifying the millions of apps that you think you have the right to put on an iPhone? And Apple doesn’t restrict your choice. You don’t have to buy the product/service that they offer. That’s your choice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.