@mcjake: The comic thing is that if the products that come for the iPhone legally were not so good, Apple would all but ignore efforts to make their product better with jail-breaking. This is the irony of copyrights, that they are questionable from the start, and rarely enforced except when it suits the supposed holder to enforce it. We only get concerned about copyright violators when they might infringe on a perceived monopoly.
I am generally a customer of the walled garden that is the iTunes App Store, but if I were so inclined, I should be able to open up my own hardware to run whatever crap I please, and so long as I don't redistribute this modified product, what the blue-blazin', gecko-queefin' fuck do you care?
I'd like to see this shit be enforced. It's one thing to say it's illegal, it's another thing altogether to actually go out and try to do anything about it, short of simply releasing updates to newer phones so that jailbreaking is harder than before (which will, again, be broken).
Also I think jailbreaking clearly falls under reverse-engineering which is protected under the dmca. But apple has hojillions to spend on lawyers for sure.. so we'll see how it turns out..
Even if jailbreaking does fall under copyright infringement the fact of the matter is that you shouldn't need to jailbreak it to use it the way you want to. You own it.
I don't care who wins this argument -- the argument I want to see won is a class-action against Apple for locking down the iPhone/iWhatever to begin with.
My money's on the EFF. It is a legal use, and Apple's call of shenanigans is crap. They've also tried to argue that unlocking causes "irreparable damage":
@secretmanofagent: I thought there had been a decision by some agency (FCC?) that unlocking was a consumers' right. Considering that the only way to unlock the iPhone is to jailbreak it, I think the EFF has got a good chance of winning this.
I'm going off to donate a little cash to the EFF just because of this.
07/07/09
07/07/09
07/07/09
jailbreak, not unlock.
07/07/09
07/07/09
y3110w$n0w
02/13/09
Of course, I think my iphone is great as it is and don't really care about jailbreaking.
02/13/09
02/13/09
I am generally a customer of the walled garden that is the iTunes App Store, but if I were so inclined, I should be able to open up my own hardware to run whatever crap I please, and so long as I don't redistribute this modified product, what the blue-blazin', gecko-queefin' fuck do you care?
I'd like to see this shit be enforced. It's one thing to say it's illegal, it's another thing altogether to actually go out and try to do anything about it, short of simply releasing updates to newer phones so that jailbreaking is harder than before (which will, again, be broken).
02/13/09
Also I think jailbreaking clearly falls under reverse-engineering which is protected under the dmca. But apple has hojillions to spend on lawyers for sure.. so we'll see how it turns out..
Either way it won't stop the community.
02/13/09
Even if jailbreaking does fall under copyright infringement the fact of the matter is that you shouldn't need to jailbreak it to use it the way you want to. You own it.
I don't care who wins this argument -- the argument I want to see won is a class-action against Apple for locking down the iPhone/iWhatever to begin with.
02/13/09
i thought to my self, "now there's a scary ultimatum from apple."
02/13/09
[www.usatoday.com]
02/13/09
I'm going off to donate a little cash to the EFF just because of this.