Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Claims That Jail-Breaking Is Illegal

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the never-underestimate-the-power-of-greed dept.

Software 610

rmav writes "Apple has finally made a statement about jail-breaking. They try to sell the idea that it is a copyright infringement and DMCA violation. This, despite the fact (as the linked article states) that courts have ruled that copying software while reverse engineering is a fair use when done for purposes of fostering interoperability with independently created software. I cannot help but think that the recent flood of iPhone cracked applications is responsible for this. Before that, Apple was quietly ignoring the jailbreak scene. Now, I suppose that in the future we may only install extra applications on our iPhones as ad hoc installs using the SDK, and if we want turn-by-turn directions, tethering, and the like, we have to compile these apps by ourselves? Maybe we should go and download the cydia source code and see what we can do with it."

cancel ×

610 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Someone call the wambulance (5, Insightful)

mc1138 (718275) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847019)

People never get up in arms about something till it effects them personally. What a load of crap apple.

-1, Bad Summary (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847135)

OP's editorializing is just stupid. Apple didn't make this statement because of "...the recent flood of iPhone cracked applications..." They're responding to the claims filed with the Copyright Office.

I really don't understand why anyone would expect Apple to behave differently in response to the EFF's proposal for DMCA exemption.

have a mouse in your pocket? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847025)

"in the future we may only install extra applications" I for one don't own an iphone nor plan on ever buying one.

Re:have a mouse in your pocket? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847355)

"in the future we may only install extra applications"

I for one don't own an iphone nor plan on ever buying one.

Well, you are lesser sucker than many - myself included.

Means nothing (5, Interesting)

halivar (535827) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847027)

Apple can claim whatever they want, and can sue whoever they want for DMCA violations. C&D's are freely distributable.

Whether or not that claim has the weight of law is up to a judge, not a marketing director.

Re:Means nothing (4, Insightful)

morgauo (1303341) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847323)

And if Apple Corp. was suing you with some strange interpretation of the DMCA today and the legal dream team it must be able to afford...

What you be confident that the judge would sort it all out?

Apple's reality-distortion field (5, Insightful)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847379)

I'm a simple-minded person. So correct me if I am misunderstanding this situation:

  Apple makes a little plastic box with an LCD screen, a battery, and a circuit board and sells it to people in retail stores. And they claim that there is some kind of law that prohibits anyone who buys this little plastic box from opening it, determining how it works, and telling other people how to make it work better. Unless, of course, they pay Apple more money beyond the money that was paid for the little plastic box at the retail store.

    If this is a correct interpretation of the situation, then I have to agree that this company is delusional and that they will have a difficult time adjusting to 21st-century reality. These marketing major fantasies may have had some credibility in the 20th-century, but they are meaningless as the economy collapses.

    Reality is reality. If you are exploring the circuitry and firmware of a little plastic box and someone comes up to you and tells you that you are engaged in illegal activity by doing so, politely simply to ask them to go away and something constructive with their short time on Earth. If they persist or attempt to physically prevent you from your examinations of your property (your little plastic box and circuit board), then just shoot them. Don't even give it a second thought. There are far too many people in the world, and the fewer delusional assholes running around making trouble for the rest of us, the better. They won't be missed. When even Republicans are talking about economic collapse, then you know that It's a new world out there. Anything that you can do to make the world a better place for reality-based people to live in (such as sharing iPhone knowledge and applications), to more welcome you are in the new world of the post-20th century fantasies.

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (-1)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847449)

That's not a correct interpretation.

Phones run software. Software is copyrighted. Modifying the software - that is, creating a derivative work - is unauthorized and may well represent a breach of copyright law.

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (5, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847563)

Copyright (it least in it's original form) governed the reproduction and distribution only. If you purchase a legally produced copy of the work, then it is then yours to do with as you see fit. Saying that you can't modify software that you've legally purchased is akin to saying you can't doodle in the margins of a book you bought. And no, just because the publisher decided to print "THOU SHALT NOT DOODLE IN THYN BOOK." on the first page doesn't change anything.

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (1, Insightful)

qwertphobia (825473) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847673)

You're not purchasing the software. Almost nobody purchases software.

What you are purchasing is a license to use that software.

Since the software contains controls, Apple could argue those controls are being circumvented (which is illegal under DMCA) for gaining access to protected works for infringing purposes.

I'm not going to say I agree or disagree, but I can see Apple's point of view here.

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847601)

If you photocopy a picture of Pamela Anderson in the forest and no one is around to see it, is it a real copyright violation?

No company or corporation should be able to tell me how to dispose of my own property in my own home. This includes "copies" of things.

People need to stand up and "just say no" to artistic megalomania.

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (3, Insightful)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847629)

No, that's a very correct interpretation, because what it comes down to is the fact that that software itself, those 1s and 0s, are still physically represented.

Personally, I think anything that can be copied really shouldn't be copyrightable, not necessarily because I like to pirate because you should be able to physically manipulate anything you buy in any way you see fit unless you give up that right through contract.

I think we really need to start re-envisioning things for the modern world. A computer program isn't like a chair, an mp3 isn't like a television, and so on. I think part of the problem is that traditionally, people have built careers on what now can be represented in binary terms and easily transferred to other people, and hence people think they have a right to treating those 1s and 0s like they were chairs or televisions (scarce resources). Music won't end, and computer programs won't stop being written, people just need to adapt to the information age.

Failure to do so will probably result in some kludge of laws that limit our freedom in ridiculous ways.

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (5, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847463)

then just shoot them. Don't even give it a second thought.

Then continue your study of the internal workings of the iPhone from pound-me-in-the-ass prison ;)

Re:Apple's reality-distortion field (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847469)

If they persist or attempt to physically prevent you from your examinations of your property (your little plastic box and circuit board), then just shoot them. Don't even give it a second thought.

I find your ideas fascinating and wish to subscribe to your newsletter [motleycrow.com] .

Apple has a problem with this...... (5, Insightful)

8127972 (73495) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847035)

..... Because they could potentially make no money off the apps that are installed via jailbreaking. The rest of their reasons are just a smokescreen. Plain and simple.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (5, Insightful)

PotatoFarmer (1250696) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847161)

Alternately, they've finally realized that they can't win on technological grounds. Apple undoubtedly has some incredibly smart people working on plugging these holes as fast as they can, but at the end of the day it's a handful of folks vs. the rest of the world.

If you can no longer innovate, then it's time to litigate.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (1)

djupedal (584558) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847359)

> at the end of the day it's a handful of folks vs. the rest of the world.

Don't be silly - that 'handful' made the product that the 'rest of the world' uses. If the world had the absolute control you infer, it would have made the product up front.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (1)

PotatoFarmer (1250696) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847443)

It's not a question of absolute control, it's a question of more eyeballs. The proof is right in front of us - every single software rev for the thing has been broken, and not utilizing the same method every time.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (2, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847655)

Nonsense. At the height of it's power Rome built a civilization that the rest of the world (at least it applied to them) couldn't dream of building. Just look at how hard it was for them to keep the barbarians out. The simple fact there was that wealth, culture, and education were part of the resource pool needed to build their society. Brute strength, numbers, and cooperation was needed to tear it down. Rome was strong in the first set needed to build their society but weaker in the resources needed to keep it safe.

In much the same way, a very different resource pool was needed to create the iPhone versus keeping it locked down. Apple was quite well off regarding the first set but doesn't look so hot on the second.

Jail (0)

mfh (56) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847179)

On the topic of prison, when one initiates dogma centered around a prison, and utilizes terms like "jail breaking" then these terms are to help encourage judicial favor for Apple. The truth is that when someone sells an object, modfication of the object is the right of the owner.

Otherwise, let's have court cases about how judges cannot alter their robes in any way. They all must wear the robes the way they arrive on the first day of court.

If you car breaks, you must throw it out and buy another car.

I could go on, but rational people wouldn't require me to.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (1)

david_thornley (598059) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847221)

Are they making money off the Apps Store? They maintain it, provide a nice interface, and send 70% of the price to the developer. Considering the number of free and 99-cent apps, I'd think they're only breaking even, and provide the Apps Store along with iTunes to encourage people to buy iPhones and iPods.

The true motive isn't profit, since Apple makes their money off selling the hardware and not the apps, and more people will buy iPhones if they can be broken free. It could be a desire to keep control, or part of dealing with AT&T (since AT&T doesn't make money on a jailbroken phone that gets a contract with Verizon or Sprint). Or it could be something else entirely, perhaps a desire to make a legal stand in preparation for something else they're going to bring out. I can't see a clearly applicable motive.

Jailbreaking != Unlocking (5, Informative)

Jon.Laslow (809215) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847285)

Not to nitpick (actually, yes - this is complete nitpicking), but Jailbreaking relates to running unsigned code on the phone (and giving full access to the filesystem). Unlocking is what allows people to use other carriers and SIMs.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (3, Insightful)

cdrudge (68377) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847301)

Isn't the developer "license" something like $100? Plus, even with a $.99 app at 70%, Apple is still making ~$.30 for providing very little disk space and bandwidth to download it. It all adds up.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847461)

Exactly. Google earns pretty much all it's money from google ads and they certainly generate a lot less than that for Google per click. As I have managed niche GoogleAds campaigns with the buyer paying $0.05 per click... Sure, there are those ads with two digit sums per click but honestly, with massive volumes, really small sums add up a lot.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (1)

Zerth (26112) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847509)

$100? Jeez, a blackbery license is only $20 and you can hit up business users for a lot more for your software.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (1)

Maserati (8679) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847623)

That $99 also buys you a publishing and distribution deal, RIM has set up a software store but I'm not familiar with the terms. It's a safe bet that Apple's is seeing more traffic and dollars spent.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (5, Insightful)

jlarocco (851450) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847375)

The true motive isn't profit,

That's just silly. When a giant corporation like Apple makes a decision, the underlying motive is profit. Always. Hell, even when they do stuff like donate money to charity, they do it because they expect the good will they'll get from doing it to be worth more than they're donating. That's just how big companies operate.

I don't know why they're doing this, but I'm 100% certain they're doing it because they think it'll help them make more money.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (2, Informative)

bigfatdeal (1272820) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847609)

(since AT&T doesn't make money on a jailbroken phone that gets a contract with Verizon or Sprint)


Not to nitpick, but the iPhone is quad band GSM and will not work on CDMA networks like Verizon or Sprint.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847631)

Using that argument, you could argue that it is impossible for Google to EVER have profited.

They make up for everything in volume. The cost for Apple for allowing a user any given program after the overhead of running the servers ~= $0.00 to at least 5 significant figures, and I give that as a conservatively high estimate. The cost

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847253)

what about setting a prescient for policies toward future devices? smokescreen?

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847431)

what about setting a prescient

That'd be a neat trick.

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (4, Informative)

kalirion (728907) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847651)

Exactly. From the page about the Cycorder app [iphonehacks.com] linked to in TFA:
"The free native iPhone app appears to be much better video recording app than iPhone Video Recorder which costs $19.95. "

Re:Apple has a problem with this...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847677)

..... Because they could potentially make no money off the apps that are installed via jailbreaking.

You say this as if there's something wrong with making money from their product. Correct me if I'm not getting this right, but isn't the idea of a commercial company producing products (hardware and/or software) to make money?

By installing a jailbreak and then installing unauthorized applications, Apple is losing money. Of course they they want to prevent that in they can. Duh!

Apple Lock-in... (4, Insightful)

idontgno (624372) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847063)

When marketing and Reality Distortion (tm) fails, call in the jackbooted thugs and sue the dissidents into submission.

This, more than anything, is why Apple will never get one coin from my wallet.

Re:Apple Lock-in... (1, Insightful)

MrCoke (445461) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847241)

Your loss.

Be consistent too, and remove from your disks all open-source projects where Apple has done work.

Re:Apple Lock-in... (4, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847311)

He refuses to reward the company by purchasing their products because of their business tactics.

Why does that preclude him from using code that Apple has given away?

Re:Apple Lock-in... (1, Troll)

cabjf (710106) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847525)

Because it looks hypocritical to accept free stuff from the company while boycotting products. Also, while it does not mean it won't get to that point, I don't see how replying to an exemption from the DMCA constitutes calling in "jackbooted thugs" and suing.

Re:Apple Lock-in... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847613)

Because it looks hypocritical to accept free stuff from the company while boycotting products.

I guess he'll have to stop watching television too. He might see shows partially financed by Apple commercials.

Re:Apple Lock-in... (4, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847621)

Because it looks hypocritical to accept free stuff from the company while boycotting products.

Only if you frame it that way. You can accept their freedom-friendly offerings while rejecting the anti-freedom products without a logical disconnect.

Re:Apple Lock-in... (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847641)

So what is this apple code that you speak of?

Be sure to name something that wasn't first created by someone else and then taken over by Apple later.

Re:Apple Lock-in... (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847557)

One further point; is he/she suggesting that the person should refrain from using *any* open source software that Apple have contributed to, no matter how small that contribution relative to the overall project?

Re:Apple Lock-in... (1)

YerTalkingKrap (1477057) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847519)

Can you name me some commonly used open-source projects not for the Mac OS X which Apple has worked on? I may be wrong, but I personally can't think of any, but I'm open to correction on this point.

Hehehe (5, Funny)

Who Is The Drizzle (1470385) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847067)

The EFF analyst has apparently been browsing Slashdot for far too long cause even he is using car analogies!

One need only transpose Apple's arguments to the world of automobiles to recognize their absurdity. Sure, GM might tell us that, for our own safety, all servicing should be done by an authorized GM dealer using only genuine GM parts. Toyota might say that swapping your engine could reduce the reliability of your car. And Mazda could say that those who throw a supercharger on their Miatas frequently exceed the legal speed limit.

And so it begins (3, Insightful)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847069)

Apple is the new Microsoft.

Re:And so it begins (5, Insightful)

mc1138 (718275) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847087)

It's been going like this for a while, just look at their business practices, the only thing they have going for them is that they're cool.

Re:And so it begins (2, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847155)

The difference between Apple and Microsoft is that Microsoft is on top and we are not about to root for them. Oh, and they do actually try to make a quality product, but is that an inherent feature of Apple computer, or simply a result of being #2? (heh heh) Apple has style, which suckers a lot of people in. One could rant back and forth all day about their quality or lack thereof, but I will only say that Apple has a long history of burying information inconvenient to them, and of abusing and disregarding their customers. This does not differentiate them from Microsoft in any way, but I believe that is your point -- and it is certainly mine. Actually, I have personally found Microsoft to be more up front about security and other product flaws than Apple. Then again, there are so many of them...

Re:And so it begins (2, Insightful)

von_rick (944421) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847181)

I've noticed that Microsoft usually GTES sued by other, whereas Apple is out To SUE others.

Re:And so it begins (0, Troll)

neoform (551705) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847309)

Except apple makes products I actually want to use versus have to use.

Re:And so it begins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847605)

Yes, the only difference really is that Microsoft has so much more power than Apple, because of their dominance.

But you should start to question your preference. What would happen if everyone thinks like you? Apple in a dominant position could make a good background for some Orwellian dystopia.

Is your answer to that really "yes, but it is so shiny!"?

Re:And so it begins (5, Informative)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847381)

Begins!? Apple is the only major vendor to have been actively boycotted by the FSF for their efforts to obstruct freedom, force lock-in and undermine competition. Even Microsoft[*] hasn't managed to reach that high water mark. Of course, Apple has come a long way since then, and many of our younger readers may not even remember what they were like at their worst. ("Look-and-Feel" anyone?) Still, those of us who remember the bad old Apple keep a wary eye on the new-and-(mostly-)improved Apple.

[*] FSF members may not run MS OSes, but they do actively support building software to run under MS OSes, and will even accept patches to help their software run better on MS OSes.

Are you kidding? (5, Insightful)

Cajun Hell (725246) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847547)

Microsoft has never been as litigious as Apple. Apple may make vastly overwhelmingly superior products to MS, but they have also always been more evil.

The only way Apple can become the new Microsoft, is if they stop suing people so much, and also make their stuff crash a lot more often. As things are right now, there's just no comparison. The two companies' suckiness are totally different.

Re:And so it begins (1)

cpotoso (606303) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847569)

Indeed. The only reason I get apple computers is that: 1) The OS is relatively solid and quite unix-like. 2) And there are some useful commercial apps for it, vs. very little for linux 3) Lately linux installs start to look more like windoze than I want (I miss slackware 3...).

Re:And so it begins (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847587)

Apple has long been far WORSE than MS. The difference, of course, is that your life is extremely unlikely to be impacted by avoiding Apple's products.

Remember kids... (5, Insightful)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847081)

Just because something is legal doesn't make it right.

Just because something right doesn't mean it is legal.

Re:Remember kids... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847197)

Just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong.

Also, don't get caught.

Such restraint. (1)

rah1420 (234198) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847091)

Not the DMCA threat, of course, but the author of TFA who restrains himself from using a car analogy for a whole 5 paragraphs.

Thank god (1)

malkir (1031750) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847105)

That my Android is open source!

Re:Thank god (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847361)

i don't think your god deserves any credit.

Duh (3, Funny)

courseofhumanevents (1168415) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847107)

Of course breaking out of jail isn't legal.
What next, Apple claims that water is wet?

Jobs' new title - Hypocrite (1)

al0ha (1262684) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847113)

So, Jobs says the entertainment industry should forget about DMCA for their media; but iPhone jailbreaking is a violation of DMCA?

Re:Jobs' new title - Hypocrite (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847321)

He says they should forget about it because locking down a song that's still playable is not possible.
So they should forget about it, it just costs them money for nothing.

I would argue the same thing for the iPhone.

That doesn't mean that violating the DMCA isn't still a 'crime'

Of course, this has to do with the DMCA exemption the EFF filed last December.

Steve J. to Mac Users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847127)

How do you like me now? Bitches.

I'm Rich!!!

Bad summary (5, Informative)

richdun (672214) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847131)

First off, this is coming now not because of some perceived "recent flood of iPhone cracked applications," but because the Copyright Office asked for exemption proposals to the DCMA on December 28, 2008, and the EFF filed one for jailbreaking. RTFA and RTFlegalbrief.

Second, while not effectively the same, what Apple is doing is trying to prevent jailbreaking from being ruled legal, not trying to have it ruled illegal. Being a non-lawyer, I'd at first say this is the same thing, but it is different. Just because something isn't ruled explicitly legal doesn't make it illegal, but would definitely help if some day someone wanted to sue over a jailbreak.

Engadget has a nice write-up on this from someone who has legal training if the three or four of you out there who don't just read the summary and post would like another perspective - http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca// [engadget.com]

Re:Bad summary (1)

A. B3ttik (1344591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847249)

Just because something isn't ruled explicitly legal doesn't make it illegal, but would definitely help if some day someone wanted to sue over a jailbreak.

That is a subtle, but powerful distinction. Mod insightful.

This is like bitching and moaning that... (-1, Troll)

ZeroPly (881915) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847137)

... your new Prius isn't designed for a nitrous injection kit.

If you like software and hardware transparency, DON'T USE AN IPHONE! It was never designed for geeks. What Apple is afraid of is that their normal demographic will start using jail-broken apps, find a new world of problems, and start blaming Apple.

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847279)

No, it's like bitching that Toyota will sue you if you put one in. Sure, they can rule there warranty null and void, but that's all they can do.

How many things do you sue that don't have transparency? I would bet a lot.

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847595)

"How many things do you sue ..."

"How many thing do you use...", even

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (5, Insightful)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847343)

No, it's like Toyota suing you if you tried to make your own NOx kit for your own use.

If monkeying around voids the warranty, fine. If monkeying around is outlawed...then only outlaws will have monkeys...er. um. wait.

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847611)

I think you mean only outlaws will have monkey wrenches.

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (3, Insightful)

david_thornley (598059) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847345)

The normal demographic buys the iPhone, signs the AT&T contract, and shops at iTunes and the App Store, all as Steve Jobs intended when he created the world.* Only true geeks buy iPhones to crack them, and we know that Apple doesn't care that much about the true geek community. In other words, wrong answer on the motive, although the advice to not buy an iPhone if it isn't what you want is spot on (yeah, it's only common sense, but that's getting darn rare nowadays).

Disclaimer: I have an iPhone, an iPod, and a Macintosh (it sits near one of the Ubuntu computers and gets used now and then). I do, however, generate my own reality distortion field, and don't use Jobs'.

*Yeah, I know Steve didn't really do it, and God only thinks he's Steve Jobs.

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (2, Interesting)

cpotoso (606303) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847657)

I own an iphone because:

1) It is a decent phone (not super, but OK). Unlocked: so I can use with the carrier of my choice (t-mobile prepaid in US, others abroad).

2) It is a decent computer for some basic tasks

3) I use it as my calendar and as my phone book (no other cell phone is so nice for this)

4) A decent media player (watching movies in it on a plane is quite nice). I do not listen much to music, but I also have quite a few podcasts of "car talk" (you've gotta love these guys!).

5) Works as a decent USB drive with some additional software.

6) Can keep pictures and show them around in a decent screen

7) Every now and then I can take half-decent snapshots

8) There are some nice apps, most of the ones I have were free

So, what's the problem? I bought the device and use it as I want, I do not give a sh*t to what apple wants me to do with it...

Re:This is like bitching and moaning that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847669)

No, it's not. It's like bitching and moaning that the new Prius isn't designed for nitrous injection kit, modifying it to support it and then being threatened by the manufacturer with a lawsuit...

Insane right ?

Playing devil's advocate here... (4, Insightful)

Dekortage (697532) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847157)

So Apple is doing this to protect its income for apps on the iPhone store. That also means it is protecting the income of application *developers* who sell through the iPhone store. Sure, they could try to sell apps only for jailbroken phones, but with all the gray areas around it legally (at least in the public's eye) and with the immense ease of use of the iPhone store (click and download right now!), they would much rather go Apple's route. Right? So Apple could be covering its ass, making sure they don't get attacked from iPhone developers who have trekked through the process to make "legit" apps but could be someday losing out to jailbroken competitors.

Or else it's just about the money.

Re:Playing devil's advocate here... (2, Insightful)

Lostlander (1219708) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847295)

So what you're saying here is that it's about the money either the developers or apple's. which is really always apple's anyway because they get a cut.

Re:Playing devil's advocate here... (3, Insightful)

Asic Eng (193332) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847475)

That also means it is protecting the income of application *developers* who sell through the iPhone store.

However they are doing that at the expense of developers who don't sell or don't want to sell through the iPhone store, and at the expense of iPhone owners who are deprived of using the apps they want.

Re:Playing devil's advocate here... (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847531)

So Apple is doing this to protect its income for apps on the iPhone store. That also means it is protecting the income of application *developers* who sell through the iPhone store.

I, for one, don't give a rat's ass what specious justification they're using when attempting to deprive me of my property rights.

I have a better idea. (1)

john.picard (1440397) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847187)

I have a much better idea. A community-wide effort to make a free/open source phone. So it won't have multitouch, it'll have crazytouch. Then you can install whatever you want on it.

Great... (4, Insightful)

Anita Coney (648748) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847235)

Yet another company taking the high road of suing their customers for profit!

Jail-Breaking Is Illegal? (1)

ChinggisK (1133009) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847255)

Huh, I checked it out and believe it or not they're actually right, escaping from a federal penitentiary will get you an extra 5-7 years. Who knew?

An Honest Question (4, Insightful)

A. B3ttik (1344591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847329)

Don't take this as flamebait... I am looking for honest answers:

How is jailbreaking an iPhone different from removing DRM from a game?
Am I wrong that Jailbreaking an iPhone simply allows you to use more applications on it?
Is this not "Fair Use?"
Is it true that there are free, non-stolen programs that wouldn't normally run on an iPhone without it being Jailbroken?
Or is Jailbreaking simply a means to running pirated iPhone apps?

Re:An Honest Question (4, Interesting)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847643)

It's all nuances. Provided that modifying the software on your own device is considered fair use (and I would presume that unless you are violating something else like FCC regs it is), then you - personally - are not guilty of violating the DMCA. However, anyone who helps you is violating the DMCA. The DMCA is an odd law in that it specifically preserves the right to fair use, while making it illegal to assist anyone in exercising fair use.

In this way it is the same as DVD decryption software: legal to decrypt your disc for fair use (including standard playback in licensed players and copying for backup or format shifting), not legal to sell or traffic in the software or any instructions on how to do so.

I don't own an iPhone, primarily because the applications - especially the free (beer and speech) ones - are far more limited than for the wmobile market, and because I have an investment in wmobile software I would have to abandon if I switch. That and the iPhone can't do GPS if you're out of cell service (or couldn't as of 4 months ago when I upgraded my phone)...and that's where I need it the most.

Re:An Honest Question (2, Informative)

cowscows (103644) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847661)

Jailbreaking an iPhone isn't really much different than removing the DRM from a game that you own. But neither one is ethically problematic (although it might be illegal due to silly laws). With the game, it becomes wrong when you then start distributing the cracked version to people who haven't purchased it and who don't rightfully own it.

Jailbreaking on the iPhones historically (a long 15 month history) has been about running software without Apple's approval. The jailbreaking scene came into being well before Apple started selling applications on the iTMS. For about a year, there wasn't really any other way of putting new software onto your phone. Now that there is an online store for buying apps, it is possible to use a jailbroken phone to pirate them, but that wasn't the original reason for the development of the jailbreaking processes, and it's not the only reason that that development continues.

Re:An Honest Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847675)

Fair use doesn't come into it. Crapple's phone is under the DMCA which has very few exceptions to what you can do. Don't like Crapple's extreme vendor lock-in? Don't buy they're overpriced over hyped shit. Hey, and you won't look like a homosexual either.

One solution for Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847347)

Apple just needs to stop selling full copies and only provide upgrades. There can't be many people buying full copies for older Macs so 90%+ of their customers must be running some flavor of OSX. To avoid the tech support nightmare all they have to do is require a copy of the OS to be on the machine to do the upgrade. Pirating the original OS is clearly illegal so they retain control without having much impact on their customers. Release a story that customers with older machines have 90 days to upgrade to OSX which may cause a spike in sales then cut off all sales except upgrades. It'd be still easy to pirate given how Mac does the install but it'd be clearly illegal then to install the OS on new non Mac hardware.

Re:One solution for Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847517)

What does this have to do with the legality of jailbreaking an iPhone?

Is this a surprise? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847427)

Apple is about one thing: control.

Reverse-engineering? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847439)

courts have ruled that copying software while reverse engineering

Jail-breaking your iPhone so that you can install applications from sources other than the App Store is not reverse-engineering, regardless of whether you think Apple is right or wrong on this one.

Mac World (4, Funny)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847501)

I've always been a PC at heart.

Not like the rest, the others. Everyone around me. I was at odds with my society and knew it early since birth. Unlike them, I did not "Think Different!"--the mantra of the Macs around me, the phrase on all the billboards in the city that served as a reminder to its citizenry. Sameness pervaded the essence of my being and no amount of self-conditioning I did could change that. Eventually, I gave up and isolated myself emotionally from society.

I gaze at the faces going by, the white earphones contrasting their black turtlenecks, connecting their ears to their pockets, their blank faces engrossed in hip Indie rock music and various garage bands. I envied them for their perfection against my flaws and my compulsive nature to expand, to burden my life with troubles instead of remaining, like them, simple and easy to deal with. The grandest of virtues, simplicity... the philosophy by our loyal benefactor Steve Jobs, who descended from the heavens, creating the Earth, the iron, the wind and the rain. Steve Jobs, who defined the parameters of existence, the one who set about the patterns of reality, the constants, the variables. He who made gravity, electromagnetic energy, and shaped atomic structures and brought forth motion. From these things, he crafted the elements, processed them, refined them, and from these things engineered Apple products through the purity of his mind. Each Apple product was individually crafted by his own hands with the programming code used to run each device having being compiled in his brain and uploaded to each device telepathically, breathing life and perfection into each and every unit.

Except, it seems, for me, for I was not among the many. I was a PC. They were Macs. I've always been a cold, stiff person. I got by, disguising myself by keeping my non-Ipod music player safely out of sight, which I use because of my depraved nature demanding more functionality than the simple and easy-to-use Ipods have to offer... In the safety of my own home, behind locked doors, I ran a Forbidden, a contraband computer from more depraved, earlier days that was not given the love and blessing of being birthed by Steve Jobs. I dual booted, out of the great sin of curiosity-- curiosity, a shameful value of a PC, as curiosity has no place where simplicity matters most--using two of the great unutterable blasphemies-- something called "Windows Vista" and something else called "Linux." Although, as I mentioned before, although my tendency to be a PC and towards conformity has always been inherent to me, I was truly transformed when I found these old things in a hidden cache of computer parts predating The Purging. Perhaps the greatest sin of all, the single evil that, if discovered, would damn me forever, was the fact that my mouse had more than one button.

As I walked on among the Macs on the streets, passing the Starbuckses as I went along, I wondered how it all came to this. I glanced at The Holy Marks on the foreheads as the people wandered down the streets, the Bitten Apple tattooed on all our of us at birth, and wondered if, perhaps, there could be something more to life. But again, this was a PC's thought, and not, like everyone elses', a Mac's. We were to hold ourselves to the philosophy of Steve Jobs--so as his products were designed for idiots, so too were we to be idiots. But I was not a Mac--I was not an idiot. I was simply too complicated to be a worthwhile person.

Nature called. I found a nearby public iPoo--squeaky clean and sparkly white, things weren't all bad--and let myself go, expelling the waste that had accumulated inside me. After relieving myself and committing the overly-complicated and thus illegal act of wiping my ass (I did not flush as iPoos, designed to be idiot-proof, did not flush) I left and once again wandered the streets aimlessly, hoping to find some meaning in a world where I simply did not belong, a world where if my true nature was discovered, I would be endlessly persecuted by smug, self-righteous sons of bitches.

finally... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26847515)

I am a bad boy criminal ... girls will like me now.

As someone who's developed apps for the iPhone... (1)

ignoramus (544216) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847535)

My guess is that they are making cash off of the App store, that they'd like to keep, but this isn't the point... If everybody uses their jailbroken device to install apps without paying for them, the incentive to develop for the iPhone kinda disappears.

No developers == no (or at least less) apps created without effort on the part of Apple. I think they must really enjoy the idea of sitting back, waiting to see what the unpaid minions will come up with... it's a nice position to be in, one which adds a lot value to their devices without any serious costs.

The incentive to defend the model is obvious. But I can tell you that when you develop an app that has a web-based component to it, and you find that the majority of your users haven't even bothered to pay $0.99 but really want to eat up your bandwidth and you can't even tell the difference between a legit and cracked app, it really makes you consider moving on to another platform. In cases like this, you're not just losing *potential* profits (which is debatable anyway), releasing the app is actually costing you real dollars... Double plus ungood.

For my part, I wish they'd throttle down the lawyers and focus on at least give devs a way to know which devices have actually bought the app. Wouldn't solve the cracked app install problem, but would at least avoid the case where you end up in the red because of server costs.

Re:As someone who's developed apps for the iPhone. (1, Flamebait)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847645)

you assume people only develop for money.

What are you, an ignoramus?..oh,, wait~

Um... it isn't? (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847551)

What am I missing here?

Oh, that kind of jailbreak. Nevermind. :P

microsoft did it in the past... (0, Flamebait)

itsme1234 (199680) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847555)

It wasn't such a long time ago when Microsoft was claiming that basically you can't donate (or use!!!) a PC without the original OS.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/04/18/1623240 [slashdot.org]

I guess everybody on /. knows how freakinglishly locked are the iPhones even compared to Windows Mobile devices so this doesn't come as a surprise at all.

Monte Cristo reality (1)

NightFears (869799) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847567)

> Maybe we should go and download the cydia source code and see what we can do with it. Alternatively, maybe we should buy a phone instead of a jail.

Re:Monte Cristo reality (1)

NightFears (869799) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847593)

Errr... formatting.

> Maybe we should go and download the cydia source code and see what we can do with it.
Alternatively, maybe we should buy a phone instead of a jail.

Apple the new Mickeysoft? Hardly (1, Insightful)

morgauo (1303341) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847577)

Apple has always been more proprietary than Mickeysoft! Before OSS gained a real showing outside of academia Mickeysoft was the open, free choice over Apple because at least you could choose the hardware.

And yet... so many Mickeysoft hating OSS fans (me) also love Apple (not me). Not even PocketPC locks it's users into the one Mickeysoft marketplace. Leave it to Apple to come up with that.

Honestly, if you bought an iPhone, turn in your geek card immediately and seek rehabilitation! Myself, I'll hold onto my PocketPC until a REAL Linux phone is released. Something with X, GTK and Qt where I can actually port my Desktop apps over with no more than a UI shuffle to handle the small screen. Not a new (read no existing software base)Java API with a Linux kernel hiding under 10 layers of cruft as though someone was embarrassed of it(that means you GPhone)

Illegal? Who cares? (1)

Cyberfed (1294544) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847579)

Since when did making some illegal ever stop someone who wanted to do it? Who cares what Apple thinks.

Here's an idea (1, Insightful)

bratwiz (635601) | more than 5 years ago | (#26847687)

Why not just skip the Ipod altogether and instead use your bucks to vote for a company that isn't such a dick.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>