You are making this too black and white. It's very grey. I really enjoy [k]'d apps because I like to evaluate them before I plunk down the cash. The app store has like 95% crappy apps. I pay for the ones that I use all the time. Yes many of them are $0.99, but it takes like $50 to find that one useful app.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
According to Apple, Jailbreaking is illegal
- Thread starter TheSpaz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are making this too black and white. It's very grey. I really enjoy [k]'d apps because I like to evaluate them before I plunk down the cash. The app store has like 95% crappy apps. I pay for the ones that I use all the time. Yes many of them are $0.99, but it takes like $50 to find that one useful app.
There are plenty of review sites available and popular opinion rules out the garbage.
No excuse for stealing.
It amazes me the way people will find ways to justify theft.
There's no justification for theft - period.
As long as they aren't making pirated copies available via installer.app, (isn't it called something different since 2.0?) they are in the clear.
The whole point of copyright is to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. As such, modifications to an existing work that is transformative enough to make a new, useful product are fine.
The whole point of copyright is to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. As such, modifications to an existing work that is transformative enough to make a new, useful product are fine.
Fortunately, nobody's talking about theft. They're talking about copyright infringement.
'course there's not really any justification for that either (at least not in this case)...
OK, first of all...i hate people that type in txt-speak on forums...but anyway...
People aren't necessarily blaming Crackulous, they are blaming cracked apps, which Crackulous makes available. And I don't buy the argument that people who use cracked apps would never have bought the real app. There are plenty of people who would buy the app if they couldn't find a cracked version. But there are also people who will not pay for anything and will only use cracked versions.
I can't be too much of a hypocrite. Not on the iPhone, but I have used cracked apps before. And after I decided that I liked them (many free trials are not useful to really decide if an app works for you), I shelled out several hundred dollars for each. I just decided that the buggy nature of the cracked app, and the inability to upgrade easily was not worth it.
Semantics.
Let's put it this way; there is no excuse to take the intellectual property from an independent developer while denying him or her the very reasonable $0.99 - $9.99 he or she is asking.
Very funny!
Two new things that I don't think were discussed.
EFF posted a new website called, freeyouriphone.org
They make a few good issues.
First amendment - Apple Blocking eBooks they do not like
Blocking competition
Other stuff...
They don't make the point that by modifying the original work, it is creating an original, transformative work. They should. That's the strongest case towards getting a DMCA exception.
Better.
Except you're not taking anything from the developer -- you're copying his intellectual property without permission.
And it's not just semantics. Despite what the RIAA would have you believe, copying a file/files without authorization is different than, say, stealing a CD. It's a different crime, the penalties are different, and it's handled differently by the legal system.
Still, that's going off on a tangent to this thread. Apple isn't reacting to Crackulous anyways -- they're responding to the EFF's request, nothing more, nothing less.
From Apple, via the consumerist.com
http://consumerist.com/5153597/apple-wants-to-make-jailbreaking-worthy-of-jail-time-2500-fine
http://consumerist.com/5153597/apple-wants-to-make-jailbreaking-worthy-of-jail-time-2500-fine
The consumerist is full of crap, the DMCA already gives apple the right to sue and claim the $2500 per infraction. Jailbreaking is already covered by the DMCA as the EFF admits by filing for a DMCA exception. Apple is not asking for any new rights or fines, they are responding to an exception request by the EFF.
I'm not defending The DMCA, it's a terrible law and should be overturned, but let's not exaggerate this into Apple going after people, they aren't.
Whether the EFF wins or not, the situation is unlikely to change, Apple wasn't suing JBers or the dev team before even though they had the right under the DMCA.
Apple isn't going after people... yet. You never know what can happen in the future. The JailBreak community simply wants to ensure that they will not get sued.
Jailbreaking is against the DMCA, but considered Fair Use under other laws.
DMCA makes the breaking of DRM illegal. I'm assuming that the jailbreak community needs to break sometype of digital copy protection to do what they do.
However, what they do is considered fair use under 17 USC 107.
I make that claim based on the following:
The work is of a non-commercial nature
It builds off of what Apple created to create a useful and transformative work.
Doesn't hurt the sale of iPhones/iPod Touches
The Librarian of Congress of grant exceptions to the DMCA and that is what EFF/JailBreak community is asking. I'm sure Apple will put up a fight, but I think the law is on the side of JailBreakers.
IF THE EXCEPTION IS NOT GRANTED:
Apple CAN go after whomever they find to have a jailbroken phone. If convicted, the poor SOB will need to pay up to $2500 + up to 5 years in jail. Seems stiff.
It's a trade.
The developer makes the app. A copy is distributed to you in exchange for money.
Just because the developer can make as many copies as he or she pleases doesn't mean it's guiltless to take one without paying.
Digital theft, physical theft... still deny the developer in the same way.
It seems like even the EFF doesn't agree that it's covered under fair use, since they are asking for a DMCA exception for it. The DMCA was written as an end run around the fair use provisions, that's why it is such a horrible law and should be overturned.
You're acting like this is something new, they've been able to sue since the iPhone came out. They're not as dumb as the RIAA, they know that suing your users is a bad idea.
The EFF may well win an exception, just like they did in the original cell phone unlocking case, they probably should. This really is just a minor procedural thing, the EFF submitted a brief, Apple submitted a brief, If the EFF wins, things go on as usual, if Apple wins, things pretty much do the same. There's no need for people to be screaming ZOMG Apple is teh evil, ZOMG Apple attacking hackers, ZOMG $2500.
fleshman03 said:
No. They can't. Well they could, but unless they can get a conviction for copyright infringement, there won't be any penalty. Apple's not stupid -- they know that there's not a chance in hell that they can claim copyright infringement when they freely distribute the software in question and the modifications are performed for personal use only (and are not distributed). That's why they're fighting this exemption -- they can't do much better than the status quo, so they damn sure want to maintain it.
You're getting your quotes mixed up, I was the one arguing against that, if you're keeping track.
Oops. Apparently the quote feature doesn't always work as intended when dealing with nested quotes. I've amended the post in question.
Jailbreaking an iphone might be a crime
According to an article on CNN. Apple is apparently asserting that jailbreaking violates the DMCA. Once again, Apple goes too far.
http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/18/could-jailbreaking-your-iphone-land-you-in-jail/
According to an article on CNN. Apple is apparently asserting that jailbreaking violates the DMCA. Once again, Apple goes too far.
http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/18/could-jailbreaking-your-iphone-land-you-in-jail/
Does anyone have a large, encompassing summary of the effects of the DMCA, because companies seem to be able to just say, "Oh, DMCA says..." for virtually anything these days.
What all does this thing do, anyway?
What all does this thing do, anyway?
Indeed. It seems Apple is looking at iphones the way the record industry views music downloads. You don't actually own the iphone, you just have a license to use it the way they tell you to.
Legally that is not the case, but nevertheless that would be the effect if Apple is successful at quashing jailbreaking this way.
Legally that is not the case, but nevertheless that would be the effect if Apple is successful at quashing jailbreaking this way.