Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
General Jailbreaking iPad becomes illegal as well as unlocking your iPhone
- Thread starter rocknblogger
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The carriers care more about blocking jailbreaking than Apple themselves. You don't have to unlock your phone using a code, just use an app and a SIM card, you can use FaceTime over 3G where AT&T doesn't allow it, and can tether all you want when you don't have a plan that allows it.
Piracy is not a problem on iOS. There are very, very, very, very few people that do it, versus the amount that do on Android. If you look at the numbers, the amount of people doing it has actually gone down. Places like the US and the UK are at the very bottom of the list of countries that use "the site" in question.
Piracy is not a problem on iOS. There are very, very, very, very few people that do it, versus the amount that do on Android. If you look at the numbers, the amount of people doing it has actually gone down. Places like the US and the UK are at the very bottom of the list of countries that use "the site" in question.
I think that is a very good point and something that Apple obviously won't consider with this decision. Many of the people I know only use the iPhone because they can JB. Otherwise, they'd be sporting an Android device.
I don't really believe the article, and even if I did, I wouldn't give a @#$% 
I'm also using a box that removes HDCP, the DRM on HDMI/DVI, so I can watch Apple TV movies on my TV. If I don't use it, the Apple TV (and other boxes) thinks that I'm trying to record the video output, which I'm not.
I don't see why the act of jailbreaking itself would be illegal, only the act of installing things that circumvent copyright protection. That would be like making it illegal to buy a car and put a spoiler on the back.
----------
Hackers will find a way around that. Apple already tried to do that by blocking iBook access (the books, not the laptops) from jailbreakers, and they got around it in a few days.
----------
But many people use jailbroken iOS devices to pirate apps that they'd otherwise buy, so it might cancel out.
I'm also using a box that removes HDCP, the DRM on HDMI/DVI, so I can watch Apple TV movies on my TV. If I don't use it, the Apple TV (and other boxes) thinks that I'm trying to record the video output, which I'm not.
I don't see why the act of jailbreaking itself would be illegal, only the act of installing things that circumvent copyright protection. That would be like making it illegal to buy a car and put a spoiler on the back.
----------
Hackers will find a way around that. Apple already tried to do that by blocking iBook access (the books, not the laptops) from jailbreakers, and they got around it in a few days.
----------
But many people use jailbroken iOS devices to pirate apps that they'd otherwise buy, so it might cancel out.
Not gonna happen, Apple has no legal right to do so (except for possibly iPads)
Besides, doing so would cost them approximately 10% of their sales.
No company will do that.
Android is just as sustainable as iPads. Google/Samsung/HTC can sue you for rooting or hacking an Android tablet or other non-phone device, but not an Android phone. It's because of the iPhone that Android phones are legal to root or hack.
Hope you're right Intell.
I am still nervous
Hopefully they don't act like Apple and come and sue your ass.
Lol
Sony sued geohot but apple usually goes after other company's.
Hope they don't go after single joe smoe hackers
Actually they have every legal right to block access to a modified device.
I suspect more than 80% of all jail breakers would revert to stock, an its never been 10% of sales.
Not there style, they hired comex after the iPad2 jailbreak.
Sony is one of the dinosaurs, going after geohot is a typical old technology/entertainment business tactic.
That'll mean lost consumers for them - no jailbreak / no iTunes / no iCloud means no purchasing of iOS hardware any more. Fortunately, the Android tablets and phones are getting better and better all the time - iPad's are no longer that much superior.
True. Look how much everyone likes when the RIAA goes after individuals. Very bad press. Apple would more than likely block a JB'd device from some services. If that.
I think you are underestimating how passionate jailbreakers are. I don't take freedom lightly.
Block the devices, fine - the community will find a way around that. See iBooks.
Squelch jb'ing enitirely and I say goodbye to ios and move to android or windows on my next purchase.
Last edited:
The issue with Jailbreaking and the DMCA is entirely based on the protection circumvention.
Smartphones are a fairly well defined class of device - according to the quoted bit above, the main issue is the Librarian didn't want to go into created a legal definition of "tablet computer" as the current one is very vauge and broad, and does not want to risk extending the "Okay to Circumvent" to things like Windows/OSX/etc.
For me that never really worked. I gave up.
And there is a difference in how iCloud works from iBooks - iBooks is entirely on the device, the cloud isn't, of course. Not saying they wouldn't try, or even succeed, but it's not the same. The Siri hacks would probably be closer.
If their ToS for the service requires an unmodded installation of iOS, then they'd have the right. If this happens, I see it most likely as a response to some security issue that a jailbreak would reveal/introduce.
Very absurd. How can Google, Samsung and HTC sue us if Android is open source and based in Linux? I'll tell it to the Linux fans, we'll boycott Google and we'll demand Google to remove the kernel or OS based on Linux and replace for their own code. To sue the people for hacking or rooting the Android which is based on Linux is against the GNU/Linux Public License. I'm going to become anti-Android and anti-Google by them disrespecting Linux and the GPL.
While the source maybe open, the manufacturer of the device does not want their own additions and IP to it to be modified. Google may not care very much, but HTC/Samsung might. They could go after people for breaking through the device's safeguards to prevent piracy and breaking the DRM. Google could use the DRM cracking as a way to go after them as well. Just because something is open sourced, doesn't mean it's exempt from the DCMA. DMCA explicitly prohibits the circumvention of encryption and other protective measures implemented in software. Rooting an Android device breaks through this encryption and falls into the illegal zone. Even modifying the bootloader on devices where it isn't allowed by the manufacturer falls into the illegal category because you're breaking the device's encryption and protective measures. In some cases the OEM doesn't even need to bring Android into the courtroom. If the bootloader is locked and the OEM prohibits it's unlocking, then that would be the whole case and the bootloader for the device is closed source and designed to prevent tampering with the device's operating system.
But jailbreaking itself is copyright protection circumvention? I guess you could say that you can jailbreak THEN install stuff that circumvents copyright protection, but you can do that anyway on any PC and many smartphones. Actually, in iOS, you can pirate movies without jailbreaking.
There's a Cydia package called iBooks fixer or something that gets around the problem. It worked for me.
The issue is the 1201 section http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap12.html
Jailbreaking circumvents the protections against "unauthorized access" built into iOS - which is a copyrighted work.
That is/was the main method Apple could of (tried) to pursue against jailbreaking in the past.
Jailbreaking circumvents the protections against "unauthorized access" built into iOS - which is a copyrighted work.
That is/was the main method Apple could of (tried) to pursue against jailbreaking in the past.
How can a you buy something and not OWN it? It's NOT like a song where you don't own it, you own the right to use it.
It's a computer, you buy it, you OWN it. How can they say what you can or can't run on it.
If you buy a PC, you can run OS/2, Windows, Dos, Linux, etc... this is legal, how is the hand held tablet computer any different?
Complete BS, someone is buying themselves politic power and our rights are being taken away. If you buy a car, you can paint it any color you want, yet if you buy a tablet computer you don't have that right? This is just WRONG!
It's a computer, you buy it, you OWN it. How can they say what you can or can't run on it.
If you buy a PC, you can run OS/2, Windows, Dos, Linux, etc... this is legal, how is the hand held tablet computer any different?
Complete BS, someone is buying themselves politic power and our rights are being taken away. If you buy a car, you can paint it any color you want, yet if you buy a tablet computer you don't have that right? This is just WRONG!
You own the iPad, but you don't own the software. This is not new. You buy a computer, you own that computer, but you do not own windows.
Wasn't that an issue that came to head when a bunch of people demanded a refund from Microsoft?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_refund
http://marc.merlins.org/linux/refundday/
IIRC, several lawsuits were filed and it was found that not only did the customers OWN the computer, not only did they have the right to install another OS, but they were entitled to a REFUND for the License
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/02/06/2329228/lenovo-ordered-to-refund-microsoft-tax
How could this be any different from buying a tablet computer? It comes with iOS, or Windows, you have the legal right to remove the OS and put another OS on there. You might also be entitled to get a refund on the OS license.
A tablet _IS_ a computer, it just a different design layout from a notebook/netbook ... but it is still a computer with an OS.
Someone needs to stand up on this issue.
While true, it still isn't really the topic at hand. The question is why can't people modify or install modified versions of a copy written piece of software on an iPad. You can do as you wish with the hardware, but the software remains fully owned by Apple.
Awww, great point, I haven't JB before. It's still iOS.
Ok, someone get busy and make a Linux OS that'll run on the iOS devices