iBooks 1.2.1 Detects Some Jailbreaks, Disables iBookstore Purchases in Response

[Popeye206]

After an in depth reading of the iTunes Store Terms and Conditions and the iPhone software agreement, I have come to the conclusion that I have not: "tamper[ed] with any of the security technology related to such Usage Rules for any reason-or to attempt or assist another person to do so." by "jailbreaking" my iPhone.

As a result, I had no warning that, by modifying my iPhone I would lose access to books when I had purchased them.

Had I been given adequate notice that iBooks would only be accessible on a non-modified iPhone, I would have purchased said books from the Kobo or Kindle stores.

Apple has severely edited my ability to utilize my purchase without my consent or prior warning.

Ideas? .

You sound like "Steve the tractor guy".... "I know my rights!"

If I remember, Apple does say... "Jailbreak at your own risk". But, with that said, have you ever thought of that they didn't have a choice or this was an error on the new iBooks? Of course not... you just want to assume Apple wants to stick it to you every chance they get huh? They don't have licenses that they have to conform too. They don't have outside influences that bring them to these actions? They just sit in little dark room and think of new ways to screw their customer. That must be it!

 

[RevoDS]

Here is what the article says: "the new iBooks tries to run unsigned or improperly signed binaries". Every program that you get from the app store has a certificate that says "this program was legally downloaded onto this device". The certificates cannot be forged. But you can get around this by hacking the device so that apps will run even though they don't have correct certificates. Once you have done that, an application that was legally downloaded once will run on any device that has been hacked in this way. iBook tries to run apps that _should not run_ because they have incorrect certificates, and they run.

Any jailbroken device that runs such applications is indeed in violation of the DMCA. It is not in violation of the DMCA if it doesn't run any apps that originally came with certificates, where the certificates are wrong, tampered with, or removed.

You're misunderstanding what this is about. The check doesn't look to see if your device is enabled to run pirated apps, it's looking for whether or not it's jailbroken. Since the standard firmware prevents any unsigned application (every single app that runs only on jailbroken firmware) from running, the jailbreak process has to disable or bypass that signature check. It doesn't allow piracy outright, that's a different process that iBooks doesn't take into account. The Copyright Office has specifically said that Jailbreaking is legal, therefore the devices targeted by iBooks are not in violation of the DMCA (at least, not all of them).


This is scary, but not because of iBooks itself. Apple could simply be testing the method on iBooks, then spread it to other standard apps (Safari, music, phone, etc.) or even Springboard itself if it works well. It could very well become tougher or even impossible to jailbreak as a jailbroken phone would simply lock itself up. Fixing that would require modifying iOS much more in depth than what's done right now. (that is, IF Apple eventually decides to run this check elsewhere)

 

[firewood]

This doesn't make any sense. Why would Apple discourage and make it harder to legally purchase and view books in their store? Does jailbreakingreally cause that much of a headache for Apple that they think it's worth it to lose legal iBooks customers?

Yes. Developers complain about massive app thefts, and some give up after their servers melt. Resulting in less App store revenue for Apple, less developers, and thus eventually less apps available for all customers.

Devices with modified OSes get bricked during OS updates because the mod was done poorly. Customers complain to Apple, not the guy who screwed up the mod.

Devices running the stock OS cause none of these problems for Apple.

 

[Looper121]

Book publishers require Apple to have some sort of piracy prevention if Apple is going to sell books. That's all there is to it.

Exactly.

Publishers are just trying to cover their asses, it's pretty simple.

 

[Analog Kid]

Idle curiousity...

Is there any way a jailbroken phone can be used to remove the DRM from the iBooks?

If so, Apple will be able to defend this move in court. They can point to that and say "we had to do this to protect the DRM."

If not then they're just being stupid.

I dunno if that's possible, but I'm wondering now.

I'm sure this is the reason. With all the apps Apple provides, including IOS itself, they picked iBooks to get picky with? They're protecting their content providers, and have an obligation to do so.

 

[Millah]

I don't think that I'm entitled to anything I want. But I do think that if I paid for an iBook, I should be entitled to read it in iBooks.

Once again, you're missing the point. You bought it in iBooks, however you broke your agreement terms that you techically signed with Apple. You know how iTunes prompts you with an end user license? Yea, go check it, and I'm sure it's in there somewhere. Break that license that you "signed" and Apple doesn't have to uphold their end of the deal.

The example I quoted is a good example. Just because you paid for something, doesn't mean you're entitled to do with it whatever you want. Go buy a ticket to a theme park, and if you start cutting lines, they will kick you out without a refund even though you PAID to be there.

So yes, you are acting like you think you're entitled to do however you please.

Did it not occur to you that Apple is under the pressure of the CONTENT OWNERS to perhaps uphold certain standards in regards to DRM. Seeing as they are the owners of the content that Apple sells, Apple must comply and make those publishers happy.

 

[notjustjay]

That is pretty odd, but I think most vehicular analogies are weak when discussing how electronics operate.

I grant that it was a weak analogy, but I was trying to frame something that illustrated ownership yet "you have to play within the rules" licensing.

 

[henry72]

Great!!! I can't understand why would people wanted to JB their awesome phone. They want somebody hack into their phone one day? lol Watch out!!!

 

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

Best advert for Android are MR's iDevice news!

Awesome stuff and keep it up

 

[OllyW]

Not that I'm aware of.

So it's got nothing to do with piracy.

 

[rwilliams]

Great!!! I can't understand why would people wanted to JB their awesome phone. They want somebody hack into their phone one day? lol Watch out!!!

This is one of those questions where if someone has to answer it for you, you'll never really get it. You kinda have to do it for yourself to see what the fuss is all about.

 

[notabadname]

Read your License Agreement. As in: YOU agree.

People just don't want to be responsible for their own failure to comply with contracts and license agreements. If you hack/jailbreak your device, that is your right as it is your property. However, that does not mean Apple has to recognize it as being an "authorized device" any longer. Just because everyone clicks "ACCEPT" without reading the contract, does not mean you are not bound by it.

Apple reserves the right to enforce the Usage Rules without notice to you. You agree not to access the Service by any means other than through software that is provided by Apple for accessing the Service. You shall not access or attempt to access an Account that you are not authorized to access. You agree not to modify the software in any manner or form, or to use modified versions of the software, for any purposes

You agree not to access the Services by any means other than through software that is provided by Apple for accessing the Services.

(v) You shall be able to manually sync iBookstore Products from at least one iTunes-authorized device

 

[iansilv]

Here's the thing- I just jailbroke my iPhone for the first time to get some apps that Apple does not allow- lockscreen, enhanced folders, multiflow, Tlert, wifisync, autosilent and eWifi. Plus I got a bunch of little tweaks that make life nicer. But I don't want to install pirate apps. I think app piracy is ********- pay the authors for the work they do!

It would be nice if a jailbreak could be done where the cydia store could be installed but no app, ibook, itunes etc. piracy could be done.

 

[thegman1234]

I still don't understand what "jailbreakers did to apple" here. I don't think the act of jailbreaking necessarily harms Apple. What a lot of people might do as a result is pirate, but it's also an open question of whether those pirates would have paid anything for media if they had to. I think the answer is generally no, but I'm not sure if the jury is out on that research.

Like I said, it's a game of cat and mouse. "We'll get you!," sort of deal. The jailbreakers basically said, "We don't want to listen to you." So Apple said, "Okay fine, we'll try and make you listen to us."

People just don't want to be responsible for their own...

This is exactly the point I was trying to make a few weeks ago in the glass breakage thread.

 

[macsrcool1234]

Yep.

Only thing it's going to do is lose Apple money because people won't buy books from Apple anymore.

I'm not going to give up my jailbreak for this. Then again I haven't updated to 1.2.1 so there Apple

+ 1. I don't see what Apple hopes to gain from this. People can just buy books from the (superior) Kindle store anyways. This is nothing but a way to lose a revenue stream.

 

[rwilliams]

So it's got nothing to do with piracy.

Perhaps. I guess Apple figures that if you have a jailbroken phone, then you can access the files from a real computer, which can then use all kinds of software to break the protection, which could then lead to illegal distribution. What I'm curious about is how hard it would be to break the DRM and if the likelihood of such a thing happening warrants the action Apple has taken.

 

[Daveoc64]

I'm sure this is the reason. With all the apps Apple provides, including IOS itself, they picked iBooks to get picky with? They're protecting their content providers, and have an obligation to do so.

I have seen absolutely no evidence that the DRM on iBooks has been cracked (it's possibly the only DRM scheme for eBooks that hasn't been cracked as of yet).

If it had been cracked, it would have absolutely nothing to do with "Jailbroken" devices.

You wouldn't crack the DRM on an iPhone - there just isn't any need to do that.

It would be much more efficient to do that with a computer.

 

[Daveoc64]

Perhaps. I guess Apple figures that if you have a jailbroken phone, then you can access the files from a real computer, which can then use all kinds of software to break the protection, which could then lead to illegal distribution. What I'm curious about is how hard it would be to break the DRM and if the likelihood of such a thing happening warrants the action Apple has taken.

iTunes syncs the books to your computer automatically! Books from the iBookstore are merely EPUB files with Apple's FairPlay DRM.

This theory doesn't work!

 

[bobr1952]

This is one of those questions where if someone has to answer it for you, you'll never really get it. You kinda have to do it for yourself to see what the fuss is all about.

...or not do if you so choose. I just don't have any real reason to do so and don't really care to find out why I would want to--of course by that same token, I don't ever ask why I should jailbreak my phone or ATV.

 

[ks-man]

+ 1. I don't see what Apple hopes to gain from this. People can just buy books from the (superior) Kindle store anyways. This is nothing but a way to lose a revenue stream.

Seems like the next logical step would be for them to cut off access to stuff from the iTunes store (music and movies). I'm guessing people will yell much louder if/when that happens.

 

[rwilliams]

iTunes syncs the books to your computer automatically! Books from the iBookstore are merely EPUB files with Apple's FairPlay DRM.

This theory doesn't work!

You can access the entire filesystem on a jailbroken phone using SSH.

 

[Daveoc64]

People just don't want to be responsible for their own failure to comply with contracts and license agreements. If you hack/jailbreak your device, that is your right as it is your property. However, that does not mean Apple has to recognize it as being an "authorized device" any longer. Just because everyone clicks "ACCEPT" without reading the contract, does not mean you are not bound by it.

The term "authorized device" refers to a computer, not an iPhone/iPod touch/iPad.

You must authorize the computer (using your iTunes Store account) that your iOS device syncs with in order to sync content to that device.

 

[archipellago]

Denying service, fine. But this is taking your money, and *then* denying service. That's actually stealing, isn't it?

they aren't denying anything they are just informing you that the book won't run on your current config.

restore to default and it will work fine fine.

don't like it?

then why did you click 'I agree' way back when..?

 

[notjustjay]

Here's the thing- I just jailbroke my iPhone for the first time to get some apps that Apple does not allow- lockscreen, enhanced folders, multiflow, Tlert, wifisync, autosilent and eWifi. Plus I got a bunch of little tweaks that make life nicer. But I don't want to install pirate apps. I think app piracy is ********- pay the authors for the work they do!

It would be nice if a jailbreak could be done where the cydia store could be installed but no app, ibook, itunes etc. piracy could be done.

Sure that'd be nice. But do you understand how jailbreaks work? They find and exploit a vulnerability in the iOS code that allows for arbitrary code execution. Except in this case the arbitrary code isn't a virus or trojan but it's an application that has some legitimate use.

How is Apple to tell the difference? Maybe you jailbreak your phone and install useful apps and tools and promise to do no harm, but maybe someone else jailbreaks theirs and allows it access to all kinds of pirated materials and hacked DRM mechanisms. How do they know what the software is or isn't doing? All they can say is "hey, we built a lock mechanism into our code, that lock is not working, therefore something is wrong".

 

[macUser2007]

Only an idiot would buy a book from Apple: what you get is a totally locked, DRM-ed product, which you lose the moment you decide to switch platforms.