No I don't think apple does have the right to turn my phone off if I decide to jailbreak. If they had that right they would be doing it not begging for a patent to do so.
You have NO idea what a patent is then.
- Just because they have a patent on it doesn't mean they will do it.
- Not having the patent approved doesn't mean they can't
already do it.
A patent doesn't give anyone legal authority to do what's described in the patent. All it does is establish Apple as the inventor of that specific procedure. And if say, Google wanted to use the same procedure they'd have to pay a license fee to Apple to do it.
Current rulings only state that you can't be prosecuted for jailbreaking. But then, Apple never tried to have anyone prosecuted for that
anyway...
But nothing in current law says they can't brick phones and require a re-install of factory software, either. The law is currently silent on that.
If Apple wanted to do it, they already would have. They don't need a patent to do it today.
But they
aren't doing it, and haven't since jailbreaking began. So relax.
On the other hand, if it makes you feel better to paint yourself the rebel that's being victimized by Apple,
maaaaaaaaaaaan, then feel free.
Oh by the way, at the risk of further deflating your victim status:
the actual patent doesn't specify that a remote lock is to be used for jailbreak users only. Nor does it even say that the remote lock is to be used on iPhones that are in possession of the people who actually bought their iPhones, jailbroken or not. It specifies a method for detecting "unauthorized" users of the
hardware. You know, like people who may have stolen someone's iPhone? And if you read further, it talks about methods for analyzing the fact that behaviors of the user have changed, suggested a different person - someone who
may have physically stolen someone else's iPhone, for instance - is doing things to wipe out his or her trail. Like, swapping SIMs. Or repeatedly entering the wrong passcode and then wiping the phone.
Or jailbreaking and unlocking, when the previous owner never did either of those things before.
But there are some who have read into this and have decided to spread FUD by telling others that the patent
ONLY targets jailbreakers. It doesn't.
Anyone who's actually READ the patent application knows this... you
DID read the patent application, right?