Crackulous has stuffed it up imo.
Nope. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with it.
Sigh. I kinda wish people would actually read the story before posting. I mean, yes, I know that sensational headlines get more pageviews and more ad money... but come on.
Anyways, back to the matter at hand. Apple isn't claiming jailbreaking is illegal. Instead, they're opposing the EFF's request for an explicit DMCA exemption for jailbreaking. As it stands, it's not not really clearly covered either way. Non-software precedent indicates that it's completely safe, and the EFF wants to ensure that. Apple, for obvious reasons, doesn't want part of their EULA explicitly contravened by a DMCA exemption, so they're filing an opposition to the EFF's proposed exemption.
Apple isn't claiming that it should be ruled to be illegal. They aren't claiming that it has been ruled to be illegal. What they don't want is for it to be made explicitly legal via the EFF's proposed DMCA exemption.
This is a lot less of a story than folks are making it out to be. 'course since everyone's out to have Apple's head, it was pretty obvious that this story would be spun this way. To be expected I guess.
This is completely, 100% unrelated to Crackulous. The deadline for exemption request filings was quite some time before Crackulous got its recent surge of popularity, and you can bet that Apple figured out their legal strategy regarding jailbreaking not long after the first jailbreak exploits surfaced. Crackulous has only got a mention because "tech journalists" seem to operate on little more than keyword matching anymore -- they saw that something ostensibly bad happened (keywords: Apple, iPhone, applications, jailbreaking, modification) and that some legal stuff went on (keywords: Apple, iPhone, applications, jailbreaking, modification). They noticed the similarity of the topics, saw that both were popular topics for discussion, and bashed out a quick post or two. That's pretty much it.