Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You're correct, but the limitations you are referring to are specific to software.



It's their control of the software that allows them to control what people do with the hardware both via technical and legal means. It is, after all, a computing device.

While I suppose that people wouldn't have this problem if they were using it as, say, a doorstop, that's not really the issue people are having here.


That's not accurate. Apple's only control of the hardware is how you use it via their software. The hardware is not sold to you under the provision that you must only use Apple's software with it. Replace their software with your own and Apple has no control over the hardware. Therefore, Apple has no control over the hardware - you do.

The claim "I bought the hardware, I own it, therefore I should be able to do what I want with it and Apple is preventing me", which is the general argument being made, is fundamentally false. You bought the hardware, you own it and you can do what you want with it.


> Apple's only control of the hardware is how you use it via their software. The hardware is not sold to you under the provision that you must only use Apple's software with it.

You have to jailbreak an iPhone to install other software, or so claims PC World. That's definitely a technical barrier, just like I explained. And a legal one, with the DMCA "trafficking" problem. Having established that their opposition is not merely passive, your complaint rings hollow, unless when you said that, you were trying to say that they were less than upfront about disclosing the restrictions?

No link will be given to those instructions. They're incredibly easy to find, but I don't want to run afoul of the nebulous contributory infringement claims like "inducement." My recommendation is for people like me with a problem with this to avoid buying the products to begin with. It's the approach I have selected.


There are an assortment of technical barriers that limit my ability to convert my toaster into an ice-making toaster. Starting with those annoying screws which were clearly put there to prevent me from easily accessing the inside of my toaster!

That's not the manufacturers problem.

The govt has already declared that jail breaking your phone is legal.


> There are an assortment of technical barriers that limit my ability to convert my toaster into an ice-making toaster. Starting with those annoying screws which were clearly put there to prevent me from easily accessing the inside of my toaster!

That's a terrible argument to make in Apple's case:

http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110125/0207...

It wasn't accidental, necessary or even cheaper to make the iPhone require a jailbreak before you could install your own stuff, after all.

> The govt has already declared that jail breaking your phone is legal.

That's a very misleading way to put it.

I already explained why the Librarian of Congress' exemption for jailbreaking an iPhone is useless because they do not (and cannot) exempt anyone from the ban on trafficking in such tools.

You can read more about how the DMCA works here: http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/blakereid/new-dmca-exe...

Hopefully that will be enough that you can understand why the Librarian of Congress wrote, "Nor is this rulemaking about the ability to make or distribute products or services used for purposes of circumventing access controls, which are governed by a different part of section 1201."

Source: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/Librarian-of-Congress-120...

That's the statement in which the Librarian of Congress exempted people from the ban on circumvention (but not trafficking) things like iPhones. The specific phone exemption is exemption #2.

Now then, how does one jailbreak an iPhone legally if they're not allowed to make or distribute the means to do so?

If you read the Freedom to Tinker article, you'll remember that the DMCA says that you cannot "manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof" that is "primarily designed" to circumvent, has only "limited commercially significant" non-circumvention purposes, or is "marketed" for circumvention purposes.

That word "manufacture" is the sticky one, not that you can't run afoul of the others. Damn hard to circumvent things when you can neither make nor import the tools to do so.

The DMCA is one big catch-22. Claiming that the government has declared this legal is very dangerous. IANAL and you need proper legal advice before dealing with this stuff.

I solve it by not owning an iPhone in the first place.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: