Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th Apr 2011 22:17 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 469847
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.
If you're talking about the US, I don't think there's any question on where consumers stand legally. If you jailbreak something that's not a phone or an ereader, you take it up the ass.
It is in fact a grey area now that the DMCA exception for mobile phones was made. The question remains: would such an exception also be made for consoles, and what types of consoles? Especially with the case of the more powerful ones that are indeed capable of being used as a general-purpose computer too. And yet in addition Sony itself was telling both publicly and in legal documents that PS3 is a computer, and in other cases that it isn't, and if it is indeed deemed a computer one could for example try and use interoperability laws as a lever for more rights to it.
You see, there's lots of stuff that is now in the grey and a precedent in either direction would have cleared the matters.
It is in fact a grey area now that the DMCA exception for mobile phones was made.
That isn't how the DMCA exception mechanism works. The Librarian of Congress issues a list of exceptions. That is *the* list. If it's not explicitly on the list then it is not covered by an exception. If the Librarian of Congress wanted more than just cell phones on the list, they would be on the list. There is no grey area there unless there is a question as to whether or not the device is a phone. I don't think that question exists for game consoles however.





Member since:
2005-11-13
If you're talking about the US, I don't think there's any question on where consumers stand legally. If you jailbreak something that's not a phone or an ereader, you take it up the ass.
I'm not saying it's right, but really... where is the confusion here?