It’s no longer illegal under the DMCA to jailbreak your iPhone or bypass a DVD’s CSS in order to obtain fair use footage for educational purposes or criticism. These are the new rules that were handed down moments ago by the U.S. Copyright Office. This is really big. Like, really big.
The office looks at copyright law every three years in order to make revisions or exemptions. The six “classes” now exempt from prosecution under the DMCA are:
1. Defeating a lawfully obtained DVD’s encryption for the sole purpose of short, fair use in an educational setting or for criticism
2. Computer programs that allow you to run lawfully obtained software on your phone that you otherwise would not be able to run aka Jailbreaking to use Google Voice on your iPhone
3. Computer programs that allow you to use your phone on a different network aka Jailbreaking to use your iPhone on T-Mobile
4. Circumventing video game encryption (DRM) for the purposes of legitimate security testing or investigation
5. Cracking computer programs protected by dongles when the dongles become obsolete or are no longer being manufactured
6. Having an ebook be read aloud (ie for the blind) even if that book has controls built into it to prevent that sort of thing.
This is easily the biggest tech news I have come across in quite some time—we’re talking years here. I’m actually going to need a few moments to digest all of this.
I am floored. Maybe this Obama fella ain’t so bad after all?
Not sure how much that Obama fella actually had to do with this one???
I can’t imagine this happening under Bush’s pro-corporate administration.
wowshutup
The democrats and republicans both have their favorite media cartels.
I can’t imagine this happening under Obama’s pro-copyright administration. ;)
You are ignorant. Let me help you with that.
#2, 4, 5, 6 all happened under Bush in either 2003 or 2006. They are old exceptions that have been kept.
You do realize that Obama packed the DOJ with RIAA lawyers and that joe Biden has been an area of concern for privacy/copyright/tech groups for years now, right?
This is one area where Bush wasn’t bad.
exactly. They were too busy making sure no nipples showed up on TV.
I can’t believe you idiots are still blaming bush. Obviously, this is a sign of mental illness and insanity.
clearly you do not understand the three branches of government.
clearly you are gay
No more rhymes now! I mean it!
Fezzic, are there rocks ahead?
Anybody want a peanut?
Library of Congress is essentially non-partisan and free of political influence. Its head has been around since Reagan.
Bravo to the LoC.
plus, the person who wrote this was sworn in under the REAGAN administration.
Maybe that Reagan fella wasn’t so bad after all?
Long live Reagan!!! (Oh sorry..my bad.)
Hillary Clinton not long ago actually stated that we need to “rethink” the freedom people have to say “just anything” on the internet. This administration is NOT at all pro freedom of speech unless you are simply repeating what THEY say.
You are right. If anyone ever suggests that we “rethink” something (such a scary word) they are obviously communists.
Storm Williams you maybe on to something.
no he’s bad.
NOICE!
Congratulations. This is really a great feat achieved.
Obama, Bush, Reagan and now crunchgear anyone else want to give credit to someone for this.
I’d like to congratulate my mum for this awesome achievement.
all these comments are, like, soooo funny. chuckle, chuckle chuckle.
I’d like to congratulate the t-rex for this one. Without him, none of this would have been possible.
Wow, this is really good news. About the only good thing that has come out of the Obama administration so far!
I’m not saying that Obama has achieved much so far, but I’ll quote a former teacher of mine:
“You don’t vote for the best, you vote for the least evil.”
you do understand the author of this document from LOC was appointed under the REAGAN administration?
As president, Obama will automatically get both the blame and the credit for anything that happens while he’s in office…
I just stubbed my toe! Damn you Obama…
Even appointees can’t do certain things if the current political climate and administration are heavily against it.
I don’t feel it’s a coincidence that this is happening now, probably with either overt, or behind the scenes support of the Obama administration
Lots of good stuff has been done by Obama, but he doesn’t get credit by journalists nowadays who are more driven by ratings than a desire to enlighten. Perhaps you should stop taking so seriously what the infotainment media is reporting to you. If you’re paying attention, you’d know that Obama has already fulfilled a remarkable number of his campaign promises and is busy working on the rest.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
The facts are out there. If you want to sit on your couch and be lied to nightly by agenda-driven opinion-mongers and peddlers of infotainment, fine, but don’t come here and try to lower every else’s IQs.
Bravo, Andre. Thanks.
While I believe you are partially right as to the fact that the “infotainment” most folks watch is just that… there are little nuggets of useful intel in the web of lies they spew… so it is occasionaly useful to venture into fairytale land. But I disagree on your premise as to weather or not The Prez has kept his promises. Nearly all of what he has promised is funtionally illegal anyway! As has been the case for longer than l have been on this rock. Few people realize anymore that the govt has gone so far beyond the sscope of the constitution & bill of rights that nearly all federal agencies and beurocracies are illegal! It all comes down to how much of your liberties are you willing to give up for the false sence of freedom and security that “THEY” proport to offer? This is just another stop along the incrimental road to tyranny. They destroy our sence of right & wrong bit by bit… we have been programmed to love the lawlessness… the imorality that now surrounds us. I am no bible thumper though l believe in a just and loving God who gave us a few seemingly simple rules to follow. Even if you dont believe in my God, any God of any religion lays out basic principles to live by, Id guess that there are no religions that would condone much of what we have become. We have been reverse engineered to love that which 100 years ago was bad… and snicker with disdain at the good and the just as “quaint” or Old fashioned”. It may seem awesome that all of these few laws have been overturned to many.But ask yourselves if it were you on the other side of these decisions… and the US Govt just legalized the public to steal from you? It is stealing of intelectual property my friends! Someone worked to make those things possible & should be comensated for it. We all want something for nothing even if its wrong. It is the incremental corruption of the moral fabric of our society. Our founders envisioned a society were we were free to create goods and services that others need or desire, and be justly compensated for it. Our govt. is supposed to defend that. Our govt. was intended to do few things on our behalf… defend the homeland (not wage unnescessary/manufactured foreign wars of aggression to preserve our resource interests etc), Protect & certify our money supply,(not hand it over to a private banking cartell as they did when they created the federal reserve back in 1913 on Jeckal Island… look it up!) And provide a legal framework that protects the citizens interests as to that which is stated in the constitution. As to the federal leviathan that is now creeping its corrupt tenticles into every aspect of our lives as we speak… NO I SAY! This is not what was envsioned all those years ago. Just because “They” have made stuff like this legal… it does not make these things right. Look in the mirror into your own eyes & tell me if you still think it is right or just? I ask those of you who find even a grain of truth to what l say to go to http://www.infowars.com or to http:// http://www.prisonplanet.com as starting places to educate yourself on the truth of what the Govt is not telling you. It does not matter what smiley faced puppet they install in the oval office… they are all controlled by the same puppetmasters… and at this point I assure you my friends… those puppetmasters are not any of us! Think lm a conspiracy theorist? Search your sole, and deep down you know so many things are not right in our country… our world. You just cant quite put your finger on it. These sites will help you to find the source of that little voice inside you that says somethings not right. Also go to you tube and search for any of the following full length documentary films … End Game: Blueprint for global enslavement… Fabled Enemies… Camp FEMA… Loose Change… Fall of the Republic. Any of these will open your eyes! Be free my Brothers & Sisters in Liberty!
Crazy people are so entertaining.
Wow. You have lots of time on your hands.
tl;dr
Sweet! Time to sue companies that brick phones when they are tampered with.
Uh, no.
These rules protect you from prosecution if you jailbreak your phone. That’s it. The carriers can continue to throw up all the roadblocks they like, they just can’t sue you for copyright infringement under the DMCA if you get around those roadblocks.
Just because you are allowed to circumvent those protection methods doesn’t mean companies aren’t allowed to use them anymore.
Collin, The article states that it is no longer illegal to jailbreak your phone. That does not mean it is illegal for Apple to brick your phone for doing it.
Nore does it mean that they can’t be sued for keeping you from following the law…
Just because something is legal doesn’t mean you have to do it.
So no, nobody’s keeping you from following the law.
And nobody can be sued, obviously.
Lets avoid the politics of who might have introduced this and just be glad that it even exists. +1 for Nerds everywhere! :-D
This is great news….probably should put more pressure on Apple to not randomly rejecting apps. This actually is much deeper than it appears, looks like Apple may have to relinquish some control on its App store and allow freedom to ring in.
This won’t put the slightest bit of pressure on Apple’s approval process.
I have a real issue when articles like the one you linked to claim that Apple is worried about losing their share of the pie in terms of App Store sales. Their true revenue comes from margins gained on hardware sales. Less than 1% of their bottom line is achieved through apps sold. I would guess that a lot of that goes back into supporting the infrastructure that makes the App Store possible. Revenues aside, I would rather they continue to maintain tight control. Consumers already have an “open” platform to choose from, and apparently it isn’t doing too bad.
I see your point, but there are some problems with the argument that you make here. While the direct revenues from the App store may be a minuscule portion of the total Apple revenues, it is the most important driver for the iPhone/iPad sales. You keep seeing this argument made in favor of iPhone that they have more (and better) apps as compared to Android or Windows Mobile. So, to me, the App store is the single biggest source of competitive advantage for Apple. Rest everything else (including the hardware or the OS) is either easily replicable.
This is one of the reasons, Apple wants to tightly control the store. The fixed costs have already been incurred, so all the money that Apple makes out of it is profits (I admit this is gross oversimplifications, but you get my point)…
I’ve seen several headlines and tweets indicating this is a big blow to Apple, but I fail to see it that way. Jailbreaking is widespread practice and is not highly enforced. Hopefully detailed analysis of the potential impact will be published so that folks like me can be educated.
The one issue I see, more jailbreaking to circumvent those items Jobs and Apple are adamantly against – like Flash (which in part goes along with the app store arguments above).
I look forward to more detailed information (without politics, please and thank you!).
How does this put pressure on Apple to relinquish some control of the App Store? I don’t think that Apple aggressively went after jailbreakers (correct me if I am wrong) and the article does not talk about voiding warranty by jailbreaking.
Apple quietly lets jailbreaking happen.
Because a) no software is fully secure(able) b) it keeps part of its user base happy – and one that isn’t likely to negatively impact its app-store users but gives a sense of greater freedom to all iPhone users c) wasting money and developer resources on this would probably aggravate Apple’s own developers more – requiring different internal hardware etc.
So this will have no impact on the App Store at all. If an individual or company is stupid and greedy enough to try to resell an iPhone that is jailbroken or has a a different OS (eg Android) in mass numbers, they will be legally dealt with like Pystar, and rightfully so.
@Alok Saboo – what’s wrong with Apple being like an everyday street retailer and deciding what goes in their store, based on whether it may compete with Apple and undermine their ability to operate, whether it may harm users (see spyware eg fake banking apps in Android’s market place – Apple’s code checking is just like an electronics shop only selling products certified as safe), or just scare some user away eg mums not wanting to give their kids an iPhone with porn apps in the store.
Users have freedom to get porn via Safari web browser – Apple doesn’t and can’t censor the web (the made WebKit which powers Google’s Chrome browser – Apple is pro-Web), they already have access to nearly 5000 HTML5 web apps for Safari on iOS ( http://www.apple.com/webapps/ ), and now they can legally jailbreak their iPhone if they want total device ‘freedom’.
Apple can run its business ie allocate costs and profits where it sees fit. It’s stupid to say that Apple making a profit on hardware gives it a competitive advantage. It covers its cost for the App Store, MobileMe, and most of its software with charges for apps etc. But even if it doesn’t – every company, if smart, occasionally subsidises new and growing parts of its business to get them fully competitive. With Apple, OS X is probably subsidised more than any other piece of software.
Don’t blame Apple for having a successful App Store because it may be or has been partially subsidised early in its lifespan! That’s plan BS. The App Store is successful because Apple code checks apps to ensure consumer safety from malware (unlike Android’s market place = 20% spyware), etc. And consumers have voted with their wallets, and Apple’s App Store is the winner.
What separates Apple from its main software based competition is that it actually charges for great software and services!
Now compare that Google on the other hand…
Very nicely articulated, however, the analogy with everyday street retailer is not very strong and here’s why.
In a regular scenario, there are more than one retailers. Further, you are not forced to buy from only one retailer, which chooses to not stock “some” product which the retailer perceives to be sub-standard.
If it was only one of these, i.e., there were more than one retailers or all products were available, then it would not be anti-competitive. However, the current arrangement is against consumer welfare.
Bollocks. Pyphone’s analogy wins.
Android’s Market = another retailer.
Nokia’s Ovi Store = another retailer.
RIM’s AppWorld = another retailer.
+ all other major phone makers soon to be launched app stores = other retailers.
But more accurately, each of these phone makers/sellers, including Apple, is like a ‘retailer’, whether there is only 1 app store per phone maker/seller (which is often so) or not.
And Apple certainly isn’t the only phone maker/seller – ‘retailer’. So your argument that you are ‘forced to buy from only one ‘retailer’ ie Apple, is totally spurious to the point of being absurd.
Walmart et al do not ‘force’ you to buy from them. You can go to Target, or whichever store you prefer.
Every store has some type of exclusivity – it’s called a Unique Point of Difference (UPD). Learn some Marketing 101. It’s how a chain store retailer differentiates itself from other retail chains.
Yet you falsely believe every retailer should sell the same products/brands, none should have exclusivity to sell some brands/products, or even control what quality they sell. That’s so crazy it doesn’t even dignify a response, but you got one.
Apple like Walmart etc stock what they want to sell, what they believe won’t harm their reputation (and customers), and justifiably so. It’s called Capitalism and it’s based on choice, consumption, and competition. If you don’t like Apple’s store go buy an Android phone and use their Market, or buy a Nokia and use their Ovi Store…
Just because Apple is a popular ‘retailer’ with many customers doesn’t mean it is the only ‘retailer’. It’s far from being a monopoly as phone maker/seller. But I’ll let you look up the stat’s.
And if you think the argument is about who can sell apps for a phone… please reread the point about ‘chain store retailers’ differentiating themselves with a UPD. And as it turns out most of the major phone makers/sellers have a single app store. Just as Walmart and other street retailers limit their brand’s selling points to one store type.
Pyphone’s argument needed a little refining, but it’s the best one I’ve read. Your logic is so full of fail, dreamy Communist/Crazy ideas, and ignorance of Capitalism and how – and why – retailers and phone makers/sellers market their products the way they do.
The only thing you’re missing is that app stores are a stupid fad soon to be forgotten in the annals of history.
This has nothing to do with the Obama administration.
That thanks goes to the EFF: EFF Wins New Legal Protections for Video Artists, Cell Phone Jailbreakers, and Unlockers – http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2010/07/26
SWEET! go USPTO and stepping into the 21st century! good to see.
Yeah, I can finally jailbreak my iphone and not feel like I’m going to be busted!
Not surprising on the iphone. Since you own the device you should be able to jailbreak it if you wish.
This is not the April 1st, right? What year is it, again?
“I’m actually going to need a few moments to digest all of this.”
Dont you mean grab a tissue to clean yourself up?
It is good to hear that it is now legal to bypass DRM for educational purposes. But is it legal to distribute the software required to bypass it?
Good question. Do you know where I can find the software online?
back when i found the need to do this (cause i didn’t know how to use other, ahem, “alternative” ways) i used DVD43
Nicholas you missed this companion ruling from a 5th Circuit judge
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2010/07/26/judge-rules-that-circumventing-drm-is-not-illegal/
why only iphone? why can’t they eliminate this phone locking system to one carrier?
same logic can be applicable to iphone regarding flash,i mean if user want to install flash plug in to apple can give some kind of mechanism to allow to install it?
The law and what Apple wants are two different things.
Apple doesn’t want you to have Flash on your device. Even though it is legal to have Flash on your device, Apple doesn’t have to make it possible.
Just because jailbreaking is legal now doesn’t mean that Apple isn’t going to try and stop it. It just means that Apple can’t legally pursue the jailbreakers.
EPIC!
does this mean devs like cyanogen wont have to worry about being messed with?
( http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/09/25/android-rom-modded-gets-googles-lawyers-in-a-tizzy/)
For some reason that link is trying to sell me a 52 inch TV.
Is it just me?
that last parentheses wasn’t supposed to be there
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/09/25/android-rom-modded-gets-googles-lawyers-in-a-tizzy/
Google was going after modders for messing with google-branded software. (Android OS is open-source, but Google’s apps, like Gmail, Maps or Voice, are proprietary and owned by the company). It’s not such a big deal anymore, because modders just release the modified OS, then release the untouched google apps to install over it.
“5. Cracking computer programs protected by dongles when the dongles become obsolete or are no longer being manufactured”
I don’t like the dongles that come with Steinberg wavelab 6, and they certainly don’t work with Wine on Linux. Neither do the VST dongles.
Though I own Wavelab 6 and the dongle, I would like to be able to use the software without it. As well as the VST plugins I own.
You could make the argument that no WIndows software that uses dongles work on WINE with Linux, and it would seem that it would satisfy the case?
Can you elaborate?
That is not an obsolete dongle, it is just one that does not support an edge case of using it on an unsupported platform under unsupported software.
“6. Having an ebook be read aloud (is for the blind) even if that book has controls built into it to prevent that sort of thing.”
Shall I expect a new firmware update for Kindle enabling this for every book??
#3 is actually “unlocking,” not “jailbraking.”
Potaytoes, Potahtoes… Same thing.
Not even remotely the same thing.
Common mistake for non technical people to make though!
@Narg It would be … only this is a tech blog … should be fixed.
Thank God common sense still rules. I’m not renting an iPhone, I bought it, why does Apple feel that it should be able control what I do with it? That’s madness. Great but, this ruling does not go far enough. If I’m willing to void my warranty, I can change out the seats in my car, switch engines, whatever and that’s before I finish paying for it. So, thank you to the judges.
I believe you are renting it unless you paid full price for it. And yes, willingly voiding your warranty is an option, and if you waive those rights, like anything, then you can do what you want with that equipment as long as it is used for its intended “legal” purposes.
No, your not renting it from Apple. You PURCHASE it from AT&T at a contract reduced price. Apple doesn’t own it anymore.
The “control” as you call it is actually built within the usage rights of having service through your cellular carrier, or by using it with iTunes etc etc. Not with owning it. Make sure you are upset at the right thing…
Is this real?
Does somebody have an in-depth to this ruling? I don’t see how “unlocking” could be legal due to that a company, ie AT&T in the US, has sole rights to providing cellular service to the iphone. I would think its the contract between the buyer, ATT, and the seller, Apple. Technically, while under contract, you don’t “own” the equipment, you are renting it from them, that’s why you bought it at a lower price.
Oscar, you do not understand the transaction that occurs when you buy an iPhone. You actually do purchase the phone at a subsidized price with the condition that you enter a contract with AT&T. That doesn’t mean you don’t own the phone.
This is why you are able to sell the phone before your contract ends. How would you legally sell someone else’s phone?
It is not rented, and that is not why you get it at a lower price.
True, my mistake at calling it “renting.” You do own the equipment and you have the rights to the built in software AS LONG AS you abide by the “Terms and Conditions” set forth by Apple AND AT&T. Once out of contract with AT&T you can switch it to any carrier you so desire.
What I get from this ruling is that you can jailbreak and unlock your phone, and apple can refuse service to the software if you did something that is technically legal to it.
Well I think this is good for people that want to use there phones on other carriers. The only thing this has the potential to make the phone unstable or have a security vulnerability. I think if you want to jailbreak the phone be prepared for the consequences. Not to mention Apple might not give you support because you jail broke the phone. You could always fall back on the forums. But at least now its legal to do this.
actually I don’t know what these guys are talking about…
I just checked out some new apps downloaded from
http://www.downhunter.com
the apps are really cool…
you should check them out too…
you can even download MOVIES, GAMES, SOFTWARE, GRAPHICS, TEMPLATES, TV SHOWS, SONGS… and much more
“Defeating a lawfully obtained DVD’s encryption for the sole purpose of short, fair use in an educational setting or for criticism”
The 2 things that pop out at me about this one are “lawfully obtained” and “for criticism.” When I rent a DVD, I’ve lawfully obtained it, and when I watch a movie, I do subject it to criticism, whether by commenting about it on Netflix, or by discussing it with others who’ve seen it. So, does that mean I can rent DVDs from Netflix, legally rip them to my PC, keep them there for a short period of time (however that’s legally defined), and criticize it in a Netflix review or in discussion with friends?
Well, that depends on if one can consider “renting” something “obtaining” (just because it’s in your possession does not mean you own it). Also I’m pretty sure that legally speaking “criticism” means some kind of publicised medium, the netflix review might stick, but I don’t think “I told my friends what I thought of the movie” would stick in court. Even so, that wording does give quite a lot of leeway. It’ll be interesting to see what the implications of that clause are.
You’re conflating two rulings.
The legally obtained line applies to phone software. In other words, you can’t jailbreak your phone solely yo install cracked or pirated software.
The educational or criticism ruling refers to short, fair use segments, not the entire film. And I doubt a judge would consider “discussing with some friends” fair use.
In fact, I could see this interpreted as that it’s okay to copy short pieces from a DVD, but NOT the entire DVD. Having the entire film on your drive would be a no-no.
anybody got a copy of that new Metallica album? :)
I wonder if it is now legal to use a jailbroken phone on ATT network?
Fair use = small sections. You can copy and post a few pages of a book for a review, but you can’t copy the entire book. I imagine the same applies to DVDs.
I’m a law student and know to keep in mind that you can’t be sued for violating copyright law if you do these things, but you can still be sued for breach of contract/EULA. If Apple or AT&T get you to sign a contract to use it only on AT&T or not to jailbreak it or it will void the warranty, they are within their rights to do so.
They make all kinds of requirements in the EULA. See http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/appstore/us/terms.html
This headline from Crunch Gear is totally wrong and not researched.
Sure it’s not a copyright violation, but that says nothing about whether it’s a contract violation.
From the agreement:
Security. You understand that the Service, and products transacted through the Service, include a security framework using technology that protects digital information and limits your usage of Products to certain usage rules established by Apple and its principals (“Usage Rules”). You agree to comply with such Usage Rules, as further outlined below, and you agree not to violate or attempt to violate any security components. You agree not to attempt to, or assist another person to, circumvent, reverse-engineer, decompile, disassemble, or otherwise tamper with any of the security components related to such Usage Rules for any reason whatsoever.
so if a company says you can’t do it, it’s illegal, is that the idea? What can they sue you for if it’s legal? The most they can do is withdraw support. I wrote at length on this: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/04/18/the-users-manifesto-in-defense-of-hacking-modding-and-jailbreaking/
Really glad to see this. Major win.
I wonder if this means you can create a software program or crack that would allow you to make iTunes accounts accessible on multiple computers and multiple iPod/phones without the long process of authorizing/de-authorizing and turning manual mode, etc.?
This is more of a success for people who write DRM-bypassing software such as Cydia (iPhone) or Handbrake (Mac DVD). Prior to this ruling, they were subject to the wrath of Apple, MPAA, etc because they were actively distributing software that violated the DMCA. Users were rarely bothered in comparison.
That said, there is nothing preventing Apple from declaring all warrantees void if the operating system is altered. My Subaru warrantee is similar: if I modify my engine, I void the warrantee on that part or whole of the engine.
Also, there is nothing preventing AT&T from modifying or enforcing a service contract terms prohibiting VOIP or tethering or another use of data services they wish to prevent.
As for who “owns” the iPhone: you own the hardware, but Apple owns the software and licenses it to you for a fee paid when you purchase your phone. As another poster mentioned, often the price of your phone was subsidized by the carrier who may enforce the term of the contract if you decide to leave.
my prediction is Apple will open up the iPhone for people to put their own personal apps on (to prevent people from actually jailbreaking), maybe even including a very simple development kit on the next iLife. (read: http://tinyurl.com/27yecug)
This is a step in the right direction for sure, but much more still needs to be done. DRM in any form should be illegal on any product that is for sale to the general public. This includes movies, music, ebooks, etc.
DRM should be done away with for good. If I purchase an ebook, I must be able to read it on any device I want. Furthermore, I must be able to resell the ebook if I no longer want it. I am currently forced to remove the DRM manually from each book I purchase. DRM MUST END!!!
Interesting timing on this as it coincides with a ruling out of New Orleans on Friday that implies breaking DRM does not violate the DMCA when the end result is a legal activity. (read: http://bit.ly/bkCCK4)
What some people think of DMCA http://picturelot.com/viewer.php?file=70449896352289812562.jpg
Excellent so to make this clear if say someone we’re to engage in non infringing uses of work.
In which this person does some security testing on his/her let say PS3 solely to promote the security of the owner which mean the security derived from testing and does not facilitate copyright infringement …etc law.
Meaning this person does this for educational as well promoting that certain security system.
Dude thats sweet its like you caught a fat bird and your like lets eat it dude , eat the bird …dude.
Sweet.
totally agree with the new regulations. Copyright laws are way too paranoid and alienate genuine users.
I see people arguing “all this means is Apple can’t legally pursue you for jailbreaking. They can still brick your phone if you do it and you can’t sue.”
people seem to ignore the fact that this sets a legal precedent for challenging that sort of thing.
Look what happened with the Sony CD rootkit fiasco. By naysayer logic, Sony was within their rights. They still got taken to task for it, which couldnt have happened as easily if playing CDs on your computer wasnt legal.
Apple can try to keep people from jailbreaking but designing a device with a secret fuse to stop Jailbreaking by bricking the device (is that iPhone 4 or Droid X? If its the latter, Apple would eventually likely try it) is indefensible when the change being made is legal.
Apple creating a “Silent Fuse” will subverted by hackers. for every security block there is an equal way to unlock the security update.
Heck , I seen a hacker running Windows 7 Ultimate . they were able to update as usual. Further more , I have witnessed people copying the key codes and putting it in to there lap tops. So its legal .
The sure way, is to create software that even those on low income can use. Get rid of the For profit scheme and make things available to all. this will sound crazy, what would happen if we abolished the need for currency altogether? hows that for insane?
All right! Now it’s time for a good DVD Ripper GUI to pop up.
NIce, to hear, that finally we can legally use our own iphones, to run software, amazing take that and up your nose steve jobs.
It mean I can root my HTC Legend and won’t loose waranty?
Too bad this entire story is false. Would have been nice.
Does this mean I can download movies “Illegally” if I write a review for each movie??
Your all stupid, who the f^&% actually has the time to post to a responce on the intern..oh wait.
I blame Obama
This ruling is GREAT!!! Do you want to jail break your phone?
RT @iphoneunlockr Just had our 100th client purchase #iphoneunlockr and let us know how happy they are <— great http://bit.ly/c6hzzw
MySQL Error. Epic fail!
But how does this affect the contract? Can your contract still be voided (or warranty) if you have jailbroken your phone, or unlocked it?
This makes it clear that you wouldn’t be able to prosecute, but couldn’t they still mess with you contractually?
instead of enjoy the news of this lets yell at eachother and be mean -.-. This is amazing :D
I’m even more happy that I still use a Motorola Razor…
and thats why your gay