The discussion around whether or not jailbreaking iPhones should be exempt from the DMCA has just reached a level of ridiculousness that words can’t really describe any longer. As some of you might know, Apple and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are in a tussle with one another over whether or not the US Copyright Office should put an exemption in the DMCA allowing the jailbreaking of iPhones. Apple’s reasoning for why no exemption should be made is rather… Over-the-top.
Every three years, the US Copyright Office holds hearings about possible exemptions to the DMCA. The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a request to have jailbreaking of iPhones added as an exemption, and Apple has been fighting that request ever since, stating it constitutes a breach of copyright. Apple’s most recent filing says that jailbreaking of iPhones could lead to crashing transmission towers – among other things.
According to Apple’s filing, people can access the iPhone’s baseband processor (BBP) on jailbroken iPhones. This chip controls the phone’s connection to the operator’s network. By hacking the BBP, you can change the phone’s exclusive chip identification (ECID), which in turn can be used for malicious purposes. “With access to the BBP via jailbreaking, hackers may be able to change the ECID, which in turn can enable phone calls to be made anonymously (this would be desirable to drug dealers, for example) or charges for the calls to be avoided,” Apple said. It is interesting to note that operators generally rely on SIM cards for identification purposes.
In addition, Apple adds that by giving several jailbroken iPhones the same ECID, you can cause a transmission tower to malfunction, circumvent data limits, or even crash the tower through denial-of-service attacks. “In short, taking control of the BPP software would be much the equivalent of getting inside the firewall of a corporate computer — to potentially catastrophic result,” Apple said.
In the filing, Apple neatly summarises its objections to the request by the EFF to allow jailbreaking:
- Crashes & instability
- Malfunctioning & safety
- Invasion of privacy
- Exposing children to age-inappropriate content
- Viruses & malware
- Inability to update software
- Cellular network impact
- Piracy of developers’ applications
- Instability of developers’ applications
- Increased support burden
- Developer relationships
- The Apple/iPhone brand
- Limitation on ability to innovate
I have to hand it to Apple – they know how to push all the right buttons. Of course, the entire list is a prime example of ‘fear, uncertainty, and doubt’. There are countless mobile platforms out there that are not restricted in the way the iPhone platform is – S60, Android, webOS, Windows Mobile, Blackberry – and none of them seem to be really posing any problems to mobile operators.
It’s quite clear that all Apple’s interested in is making sure the platform stays as closed and controlled as possible, as to ensure a steady flow of income to the company – jailbreaking is done because people want control over the phone they bought, and what applications they’ll run on it. There’s nothing wrong with Apple wanting to protect its interests, but it’s sad that it has to resort to such FUD to get there.
Even if I liked OS X and didn’t think it was a usability nightmare, and even if I thought Apple hardware was really sooo sexy and not more prone to issues, and even if I had a wallet deep enough to ignore the ridiculous price tags, I would still not buy Apple because I just CAN’T stand Apple culture. From the ridiculous marketing hype around the release of every new product, to the ridiculous “Apple knows best” mentality we see in examples like this, the App Store, or the Psytar case, to the ridiculous fanboys they seem to attract who accept and even DEFEND every ridiculous decision made by Cupertino, its just miserable! No. Thank. You. I’d go back to using Windows before I lived in that world.
Anti-Apple culture is just as bad…
That’s why you just ignore it. Windows marketing isn’t any better.
As always with anything you buy:
1) determine your needs
2) evaluate capabilities of all solutions
3) choose solution that offers the best value while still meeting your needs.
Effective advertising *can* help step 2, but not usually its just buried in the website somewhere.
Oh, and never seek help in a forum. The signal to noise ratio is just too high.
Yeah, but you forget that when people go shopping they:
4) buy the coolest looking product in the store
Didn’t think it was a usability nightmare? Let me guess, you think Linux is the crown of Usability?
Let’s me guess, you think OS X usability is the best available, fit everyone, everything and everywhere?
One nightmare doesn’t void other one(s).
Man I wish I was allowed to mod you down off topic! What the heck does Linux have to do with anything in this story or my post??
Edit: typo
Edited 2009-07-29 19:00 UTC
We should all be able to spot the pro-Apple loonies by now who steadfastly defend Apple’s behaviour to the hilt come what may and believe that such behaviour will keep things locked up.
I dunno… I’ve been using Linux since 1995… and right now I use it exclusively to get things done.
I’ve not got problems with Mice, Laptops, Wireless, Video, Encryption, Disk Utilization, Audio, DVDs, CDs, keyboards, work-flow, e-mail, “office applications”, collaboration, groupware connectivity, using networked resources, Using multiple displays from a laptop (without using multiple video cards or outputs) Blue-tooth *just works*, my packaging system is great, I’m using the laptop to its fullest. Virtualization is very pleasant and works… I’ve got the ability to run a COMPLETE development environment on my machine, easily. I can remotely connect to dang near anything?
What is this “usability” issue you have? I think its centered on … something you won’t address.
Remember, Linux is VERY friendly. Its just picky about its friends.
Ah! Apple! What do I think of Apple?
MacOS is OK. The Unix core is nice, if a bit dated in places compared to other POSIX OSes. The slick desktop is nice, but really not my cup of tea. And its proprietary nature is somewhat of a downer. All in all, I would give their OS an unenthusiastic thumbs up.
The company itself is becoming more annoying with every passing day. Big thumbs down there.
The community surrounding Apple is varied, as is any community. There are a lot of Apple users, mostly developers, for whom I have a lot of respect. But the general run of Apple fans seem to be more annoying than the company itself. So I’d have to give the Apple community in general a big thumbs down.
But then, as a Linux guy, I come to the philosophy of “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”. And based upon that, I guess I almost have to give the Apple world as a whole a rather uncertain thumbs up.
Why does life have to be so complicated? Perhaps I should become a Sandwich Maker.
Edited 2009-07-29 19:20 UTC
Technical considerations aside, the EFF has argued that Apple’s lock on the iPhone is unmerited from a copyright protection perspective and aims to “suppress competition from independent iPhone application vendors.”
For a product possessing less than 5%, do they have to relate every argue with monopoly? I don’t see any reason, for which people have to be locked on iPhone, similar to why people had to be locked on Office or IE. Actually if Apple want to make its phone product close AND attractive, they do need to make it much better than other vendors’ by their own. Don’t see any hurt to competition.
EFF would stop making that broad stroke if Linux were the prevailing market leader.
Why do you keep bringing Linux into this discussion? I’ve not seen one mention of Linux outside of your comments. I do have to hand it to you though, there’s no faster way to send a discussion spiraling off topic around here than to pull Linux into it somehow.
He’s just trolling .. don’t feed him.
Yer, but it’s always amusing to watch the resulting road accident.
Since Linux and the software that surrounds it is open source and de facto open anyway then creating a closed platform with it like Apple is going would be that much more difficult. I fail to see how you can compare apples to kiwi fruits, so to speak, in the EFF’s reasoning.
I recommend a cold shower otherwise your head is going to explode.
Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft all go out of their way to lock down their gaming consoles. Why? Because they make their money from selling games. This isn’t all that different from Apple making money from selling apps for their devices (No, Apple’s devices are not sold at a loss like the game consoles usually are for a while, and no there haven’t always been an App Store).
But Apple, like the console makers, has a vested interest in selling “Official Add-ons” for their device. Is it any wonder they want to protect this?
Having said that, my opinion is: secure your device, but don’t go too far out of your way to do so. Jailbreakers will *always* find a way in, but you’ve at least got to put up a fight (I’m looking at you, Dreamcast…).
Apple limiting the distribution channel for iPhone apps would be fine if they didn’t limit what apps get to be included so much and so arbitrarily. Third party software repositories also wouldn’t be in such high demand. Publish clear minimum software qualifications and get on with it rather stomping on the consumer’s choice of what to install on there possessions.
It’s much easier to get an app into the App Store than it is to get a Game onto a console.
The App Store feeds a much more functional device than a game console also. Even the Playstation doesn’t gain the amount of functions the iPhone is designed to provide unless you dualboot the PS with Yellowdog or similar.
In this case, Apple is saying “the Jesus Phone for all your possible needs.. er.. unless we arbitrarily decide that you kids can’t have that function.”
I eagerly wait the day you all be buying computers with preinstalled and locked-down software, not allowed to install other OSes, apps only available from one vendor, and you’ll be paying a monthly fee for the whole pack of sh*t. And the best of all: you all will be happy with it and crowds of people will come up with hearty points about how all of it is so marvellous.
In the end, we all get what we deserve, either by actively seeking, or by not doing anything against.
Oh, I still fail to see how jailbraking is in any relation to copyright. This is stupid.
Its only a copyright issue because big business decided to side step fair use by locking down the hardware in the name of copyright. The DMCA restricts jail breaking, research into jail breaking, hell even discussing it(so much for freedom of speech). The exemption would remove DMCA restrictions into this activity, which is something Apple will absolutely fight. And lie about to get their way.
Look publicly Apple says that Jailbreking is bad and are against it, but other than upgrading their OS have they ever activiley persued jailbreakers? Have they actively persued hackintosh makers other than those trying to make a business out of it? The only reason why I don’t like jailbreaking is because there are some idiots out there who are actully pirating 99 cents apps. Why? Are you that damn cheap? And no don’t give me the try before you buy bullishit because I know they are not going to buy it. If they are not going to buy they shouldn’t be allowed to use it and should absolutely be counted as a lost customer because without the pirate version they would have no alternative but to buy. But luckily that is not the whole community, there are plenty of developers that just want unrestricted access and a jailbroken iphone is a perfect platform for that. Anyway my originsl point is regardless of what Apple says they rarely go after users who choose to jailbreak their phones. So is it relly an issue? I’m not defending their very silly claims but we have to look at past history here.
Something make you avoid to be locked on a closed platform. First, help improve an alternative open platform. Second, insist on use product possessing good interoperability. Third, only do entertainment once the second is broken.
Only when a platform start developing its own proprietary file format, or protocol, or other things prevent future interoperability, you are going to be really locked on and at that point you need to consider throw away that platform. As long as the interoperability remains, refusing to use a platform only because it is close is unreasonable and far less efficient. Not mention Apple’s product is not that closed.
By that criteria, I don’t see Apple really locks on anyone like how MS once locked on people by .doc (with the inferior implementation of Office on Mac (and today’s 2008 is far less inferior, almost equal) and lack at all on other OSes) and IE (with the help of IE-specific HTML web site) for now.
So you are free to choose Apple or not. For me, I will not because I am willing to be locked on, but because Apple’s product is currently the best and I am able to turn to other platform far before I would be unable.
If there are no such products (that you could choose to use instead of said locked-down ones), or the ones that are available are far inferior, than the choice in reality is not a choice. Unless you can manufacture your own hardware, that is (since open software is more easier to come by). A collegue of mine wants to by a touchscreen phone, went in to a local vodafone shop to try out what they have, and came out totally disappointed. Until a locked-down device provides higher usability and usefulness even in its locked-down state than the others, there’ll be no incentive for the locker to release the lock, since it has tangible control over the crowd.
With a new, open, non-locked, whetever else platform, your first move needs to be to convince the average joe crowd (there is strength in numbers, we all should know that by now, you need momentum to achieve anything) to use your device, and the iPhone being where it is, this would be hard.
In my opinion, Apple does not prevent any vendor to provide better alternative. It is just a fact that no one else has already provide a better one. So we can claim a vendor is locking people if it make any other vendor can’t provide a better alternative by marketing or sales strategy in the future. But we can NOT claim so by just the fact that there is still not a second vendor appears.
There are two kinds of lock, “lock-down” as how Office locks user and “lock-down” as how Apple seal iPhone. I think they are different. Office locks users by the “network effect”, that is, as long as your friends use .doc, you will have to use Office regardless what quality and usefulness it provides. So if you say “a locked-down device provides higher usability and usefulness”, you must not mean this kind of lock. Can’t you call your friends having iPhones by another type of phone? So neither you and your friends locked by having or not having an iPhone.
Then for the “lock” as seal, why you think just the first vendor seal its product will hinder the second vendor provide better alternative? Actually a second vendor does not have to provide better alternative, it just need to provide close enough alternative then the first vendor will have incentive to improve its product. And that not kind of control over the crowd. People still have the choice.
Keep up the work Apple. At this rate I will *never* buy your products and encourage all my friends and family to avoid you.
Oh, I bet the marketing team are quaking in their boots right now !-)
The sad thing is, Microsoft is the only alternative to Apple that the vast majority of people even knows anything about and, therefore, will turn to. And they’re just about as bad; worse in some ways, but a little better in others. Linux has barely even gained a foothold, being limited to two or three of Dell’s absolute bottom-of-the-line machines or system76, which no one’s probably even heard of. You might see some random machines by other OEMs too, but I’m not aware of which ones off the top of my head.
In my experience, it’s been nearly impossible to successfully convince someone to buy a Mac anyway, with “I don’t like the way it looks/works” and “I want to just be able to walk in a store and pick one up.” Occasionally, I hear “they cost too much” and/or “the screen is too small.” If Macs are that hard to get someone to try (and like enough to use), then man… Linux is gonna have a hell of a time gaining traction.
I set a friend’s Vista Basic laptop to dual-boot with Ubuntu, and he kind of liked it… but for some reason, seemingly randomly, the system would lock up on a black screen when trying to start X.org, requiring a hard reset. He wasn’t too happy, and quite honestly, with the potential for data loss, that’s seriously not good–so I even had to recommend he just continues Windows for the time being.
That was one, going on two, versions ago. Still hasn’t asked to update… not sure if he will or not.
“Â Â …
   Piracy of developers’ applications
   …
   Developer relationships
   The Apple/iPhone brand
   Limitation on ability to innovate “
For a while there, I was actually starting to think that Apple was the subject of a smear campaign…but when they start releasing BS like this, I realize they are indeed as bad as it sounds
I’m sort of glad I’ve always been a “cheap bastard” and avoided modern Apple products. Kinda sad since I grew up on the Apple II and Macs in the late-80’s and mid-90’s.
On one hand I feel the need to support Apple, as they are one of the few mainstream companies that are actively working on accessibility to their products including the iPhone. Sure, they’re doing it for business reasons, but they are, after all, a business. As one who is a member of a minority which needs these accessibility features, I must support those who in turn support the accessibility I need… and right now, that’s Apple being the only company that is promoting accessibility out of the box and at no extra cost to me, the user. Consequently, I really do want an iPhone seeing as what they’ve done with that recently… but then I think about it and they’re pulling ridiculous stunts like this, and I’m not so sure I should support them at all. What they’re doing for accessibility is great and actually quite innovative in their approach, but the other things they’re doing–particularly with the iPhone–just make me want to turn away in disgust. I no more want Apple controlling my devices than I’d want Microsoft to gain that power.
Gotta hand it to Apple, that is just about the most painfully-stupid, intellectually lazy justification I’ve heard for anything in a long time.
Here are a few more equally-valid reasons that Apple could use:
– unlocked iPhones promote terrorism
– unlocked iPhones are a gateway drug that lead to crack and heroin use
– if Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini were were alive today, they would use an unlocked iPhone
– unlocked iPhones could be used to control a device that dumps adorable babies, puppies, AND kittens into a wood chipper
– unlocked iPhones could be used to force an entire kindergarten class to watch 2girls1cup
– unlocked iPhones will lead to little old ladies being pushed into empty elevator shafts
– unlocked iPhones are tools of Satan and lead to people becoming godless atheists and believing in the theory of evolution (that should get the fundie nutters onboard)
– unlocked iPhones could allow *gasp* proprietary software, or -even worse- help further Microsoft’s many vast, evil, shadowy conspiracies (and that one is guaranteed to get all the GNU/Freetards onboard)
Anything I left out?
You joke, but Apple were just one shade away from making the same terrorism comment (though not ironically like yourself) when they were waffling on about DoS attacks
Edited 2009-07-29 18:55 UTC
Yes. You left out the most compelling reason imaginable:
“When you unlock iPhones, you’re unlocking COMMUNISM”.
It is times like this that I am ashamed of having ever purchased Apple products… =(
Oh well, as long as you learn from your mistakes.
It’s probably just me, but 10 years ago I kind of admired Apple. They did their thing, they put hardware out there, they managed to shed the manacles of OS9 and produce OS X etc.. and their hardware was kind of.. good, along with their software.. it was well thought through. That, and the fact that it was a solid anternative to MS products..
However, then I rarely reacted to things like this. Perhaps I didnt’ care, or maybe the process wasn’t half-way as transparent as this, but looking back over the last 1-3 years..
Wow, Apple behaves like a real f–ktard, and I will never buy any of their products unless they change this so-called stance of theirs.
wow, it appears osnews has a word filter.
lucktard, tucktard, f–ktard, ducktard…
and the best part is that the edit, or preview parts of this site won’t even tell you it’ll do it..
Anyway, going on. Apple was the underdog. They fought the good fight. But now? They’re trying to shut people out of their services.. they’re trying to keep people from creating their own hardware, to run their OS on.. they’re trying to prevent people from running the applications that their OWN consumers wants to run on their phones.. the list is long, and.. it puts a huge dent in the so-called “crown” apple used to wear. Note that apple no longer wears a capital A.
Edited 2009-07-29 20:20 UTC
Am I the only one who is happy with their iPhone? It works great, I’ve got some good apps in use on it. I know there are limitations, but I purchased it anyway.
If people are buying the phone BEFORE researching what it can do and then complaining… their fault. If they are buying it and wanting to change it, then go for it. Just don’t expect the exact same support and features as if you were “playing the game” properly.
This happens ALL THE TIME. Microsoft did this with Xbox users who had “jailbroken” their Xbox with new chips or hacks. They are permanently banned from connecting to Xbox Live… and the backlash we got from that was…… um….. lemme see here…….
The company has every right to do this. The consumer has the choice to buy or not, and if they do to either live it the shortcomings or hack away knowing you’re going to miss out on somethings!!
Sorry, this isn’t about what the iphone can or can’t do. It’s about the business practice of Apple Inc.
Your entire post is about people not researching enough. What about those who’re tired of getting *screwed* over and over, about not being able to do as they want, with the hardware they bought? Like apple not approving their google voip application, for instance? Over the past 12-18 months there’s been TOO many of these instances to keep apple’s reputation over the water.
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).
…answer one simple question.
Could the things that they claim occur?
If the answer to this question is yes – regardless of the LIKELIHOOD of it occurring – then Apple have every right to use the points as arguments for their case. The likelihood of any or all of these things happening will be taken into consideration by the authority making the decision. If their claims are impossible then you can rightly call them fud. If, however, their claims could be substantiated it isn’t them using fud for their own agenda…
Not many are calling this FUD.. (seriously, FUD is the practice of discouraging customers from competitors products, for the most part by spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about it). Of course it *could* lead to the transmission tower going down. If you drive your car, or take a walk in the park, it *could* happen then too. Hell, it COULD happen by just using your phone, if you just happened to trigger some NASTY bugs in the firmware of that transmitter tower.
And no, just cause it *could* happen doesn’t give apple the right to use it as arguments in their case. Sorry, but it has to be a reasonable chance for it to happen, and then you have to weight it against the consumers *right* to use their product they bought, against the damage it could potentially do. Once you’ve done that, you PLUG the hole that the potential damage can do and then.. voila, no problem what-so-ever.
Edited 2009-07-29 21:48 UTC
I think you’re a child molester.
Edited 2009-07-29 22:06 UTC
Okay, lets take the ‘Inappropriate Content’ line just as an example. Yes a jailbroken iPhone could all installation of apps which contain inappropriate content – so what? The iPhone includes a pornpipe^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H web browser and Internet connection.
bravo! and Linux is just so Open that it will brake all wifi routers near me. i love Apple products but what happens around iPhone is just pure stupidity to me
jail broken phone or not, if someone wants to screw with cell phone towers and take the phone to another carier bad enough they will. is the network more vulnerable. OMG making anonymous calls, oh my. give me a a break. why not take it up a notch apple, here i will give you an idea for your next headline (i am sure i will be sued later if they use this claming i coppied it from them), “warning! running OSX on non apple hardware could result in someone using the system to creat a large enough electro magnetic pulse to end the technological world as we know it!!!?” (paid for by the Apple vs. Pystar compaign)
… that here in Serbia we are all already dead since the whole country has collapsed because 60% ( probably) of all mobile phones (not just every iphone bought here) are unlocked illegally.
Possibly that’s because you built a communications system. Here we are building a mashup of entertainment systems that must be protected because of all that super-geeky proprietary stuff (yawn). When the fog clears way, the capitalists have their money securely stashed away, and everyone realizes that the system was never designed to handle what’s being thrown at it the capitalist will swear they can’t afford the upgrade and the government will rebuild the thing at taxpayer expense.
Apple making fanciful claims that have nothing to do with reality… I’m so shocked…
Keep it up Apple, show us what you are REALLY made of.
You guys realize the greatest irony of all this is the company was founded by two guys who got their start in electronics by phreaking, right?
That’s who we need to FINALLY get to speak out against Apple and their asshat sleazeball proprietary practices – Where’s the Woz when we need him?
Edited 2009-07-30 00:40 UTC
Using his new-found abilities on Dancing with the Stars
If jailbraking the iPhone would allow people to crash the transmitters, get free phone calls, send spam, molest minors what does it matter? What does this have to do with copyright? It is the Digital Millenium *Copyright* Act isn’t it?
Or is it now the Digital Millenium Copyright, Telecomunications, Anti-Terrorism, Think of the Children and Anything Else we Choose to Think Up Act
…a bunch of engineers are furiously banging their heads against the closest cement wall, trying to dull the pain from the amazingly retarded stunt some PR folks and managers just pulled.