Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Jul 2009 17:10 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 376040
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/15/13 23:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-05-05
I second that. I think there shouldn't be a law that makes it illegal to modify a device you paid for period. Would it be okay if GM or Honda said you couldn't modify your cars engine the way you see fit in order to save money on gas or for more performance?
The implications of using the (dmca) or other laws to prevent people from doing what they want with their devices is ridiculous as well as the implications of it.
If someone like Macguyver jailbreaks their iPhone and breaks into the pentagon with it to set off a bomb....
don't blame the cause on a jailbroken iPhone hence justification for enacting the dmca. I see far too much of this sort of attribution error (I use the term loosely for those who study psychology or sociology).