To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I too was going to give Thom a little good natured ribbing for this being his first post in a while but you beat me to the punch.
It's no surprise that Thom jumped at the opportunity to "blast" Apple for their desire to control the hardware that runs their software and celebrate the Library of Congress' ruling.
Like others here, I don't think the Library of Congress' decision will make much difference in the real world.
I don't know of a single case where Apple ever "broke down the doors" of a hacker who hacked their phone and its certainly within Apple's right to continue to make the process difficult, something the LOC didn't say Apple or another company couldn't continue to do.
But despite the impression others have regarding Apple's "evil intentions" I've always thought the license agreements, the efforts to make it difficult to hack their phones, hardware, operating system, etc. had more to do with product liability.
For example if they didn't have these EULAs and systems in place what's to stop a hacker from seeking compensation for "bricking" their netbook for example, or a company who installed OS X on non-Apple hardware and as a result lost millions of dollars in valuable data, or a techie claiming "lost productivity" because he'd hacked his iPhone and lost a big contract. Or imagine a hacker bringing AT&T's network to a halt due to a poorly written application or hack.
With all that said, I'm actually pleased with the LOC's ruling as it always feels a little "dirty" when bending the rules of an EULA and I've done so, self admittedly. At least hackers now can risk "bricking" their iPhone legally!
But be careful my fellow hackers...if you bring down the "network", brick your phone, lose data, or cause irreparable harm to your hardware, software, data or your body or that of someone else's, YOU will be held liable, criminally or civilly, not our friends at Apple or our other favorite technology companies.
I agree that although this is big news, cause for celebration, and a blow to Apple's hegemony, it's not going to have much real-world impact, because the geniuses who are out these figuring out the jailbreaks would do it whether it was illegal in the US or not. This doesn't compel Apple to make jaibreaking easy, nor does it particularly clarify the awkward instance where you take your jailbroken and broken iPhone into the Apple store to be fixed under warranty.
Really the main thing that this does is give people in the US with jailbroken iPhones a little more moral high ground because they're not actually taking part in a semi-legal activity anymore.
What about companies that do jail-breaking for profit, would this new law affect them. Would a company like Pystar be able to start again due the jail-breaking exemption?
Yeah, great he's got out to make another anti Apple story.
When I saw this news on the web, my first thought was: great, I will be able to crack DRM from video / music / DVD / video games now legally, it's so great.
When Thom read this one he's first thought was: aha, let's make a new that f**k Apple ...
A neutral news should be the whole story and a section about Apple. Not a whole thing against Apple then a sentence about DVD and music ...





Member since:
2007-09-22
Thank you Thom for getting out of your "OSNews hibernation". :-)
And obviously thanks go to the EFF, but maybe people shouldn't buy phones that need this (N900 anyone ?). :-)
Edited 2010-07-26 18:14 UTC