US legalizes jailbroken iPhones

Unlockers shielded from Jobsian storm


Updated US citizens can legally jailbreak and unlock their smartphones — notably Apple's iPhone — and videographers can circumvent copy protection to use short movie snippets for "criticism or comment".

This rulemaking decision by the US Copyright Office's Librarian of Congress to grant exceptions to the Digital Milleneium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a clear victory for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which submitted a request for the three exceptions in late 2008, and an equally clear defeat for Apple and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), which opposed them.

"By granting all of EFF's applications, the Copyright Office and Librarian of Congress have taken three important steps today to mitigate some of the harms caused by the DMCA," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick in a statement. "We are thrilled to have helped free jailbreakers, unlockers and vidders from this law's overbroad reach."

MPAA spokesperson Elizabeth Kaltman told The Reg in an email: "The Librarian's decision unnecessarily blurs the bright line established in the DMCA against circumvention of technical protection measures and undermines the DMCA, which has fostered greater access to more works by more people than at any time in our history."

Apple did not immediately respond to our request for comment. *

The rulemaking decision that explains which type of activities are exempt from DCMA restrictions is admittedly written in legalese, but its implications are clear:

Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications, when they have been lawfully obtained, with computer programs on the telephone handset.

Computer programs, in the form of firmware or software, that enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telecommunications network, when circumvention is initiated by the owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the network is authorized by the operator of the network.

In addition to these two "wireless telephone handset" exemptions, the Copyright Office also allowed the disabling of DVD copy protection "when circumvention is accomplished solely in order to accomplish the incorporation of short portions of motion pictures into new works for the purpose of criticism or comment."

In December 2008, the EFF petitioned the Copyright Office, arguing for DMCA exemptions for jailbreaking (running "unapproved" apps on a handset), unlocking (connecting a handset to the wireless network of one's choosing), and circumventing DVD DRM for non-commercial use

The EFF argued that the DMCA unnecessarily infringed upon handset owners' "freedom to tinker", and blocked remix video creators from access to snippets of videos and movies that they wanted to use in creative, commentary-focused, or educational works.

Apple and the MPAA disagreed. In February 2009, Apple filed a 27-page rebuttal (PDF) to EFF's argument that jailbreaking be granted an exemption, arguing against the "host of bad consequences that will flow from it":

Apple is opposed to the proposed ... exemption because it will destroy the technological protection of Apple's key copyrighted computer programs in the iPhoneTM device itself and of copyrighted content owned by Apple that plays on the iPhone, resulting in copyright infringement, potential damage to the device and other potential harmful physical effects, adverse effects on the functioning of the device, and breach of contract.

At a rulemaking hearing in May 2009 in Palo Alto, California, Apple vice president of iPods and iPhone products and marketing Greg Joswiak argued against jailbreaking. He cited as dangers system instability, product safety (battery charging was one concern), possible invasion of privacy, viruses and malware, the inability to update software, and — of course — porn.

"When you modify and hack the iPhone OS, anything can go wrong," Joswiak said in the introduction to his 3,500-word statement.

EFF's counsel, Fred von Lohmann, countered Apple's argument in part by saying: "I have a Toyota. Toyota would, of course, prefer that I use nothing but authentic Toyota parts and Toyota dealers for service, and that they would also prefer that I not modify my Toyota in ways that might be dangerous to me. I appreciate all that, but it is my automobile at the end of the day."

The MPAA's counsel, Steve Metalitz, suggested in his remarks at that same hearing that educational institutions need not circumvent DRM, but that that they could instead merely film a clip "off a monitor" to acquire footage.

In response, UC Berkeley Assistant Professor Abigail De Kosnik noted: "As a teacher, one could copy entire passages of a book onto a blackboard and ask students to copy those words onto their notebooks, but this would simply be highly inefficient and not the most rapid means of teaching or learning available today. Asking us to 'film off' a monitor is akin to going back to copying whole passages to a blackboard, as my mother had to do in the Philippines in her village in the 1940s."

In the end, the EFF and its supporters won the day — you can read the full rulemaking statement by Librarian of Congress James Billington, which details the painstaking process that led to the decision, here (PDF). ®

Bootnote

In addition to the three EFF petitions, the Copyright Office also granted three additional exemptions to the DMCA, covering: "good faith testing for, investigating, or correcting security flaws or vulnerabilities" of DRM-protected video games, the need to circumvent software-protection dongles when the companies that supplied them are out of business and "if a replacement or repair is no longer reasonably available," and — finally — bypassing an ebook's DRM to enable a "read-aloud function or... screen readers that render the text into a specialized format."

* Update

Although Apple did not respond to our request for comment on the Copyright Office's rulemaking, they did provide The Cult of Mac with the following statement:

Apple’s goal has always been to insure [sic] that our customers have a great experience with their iPhone and we know that jailbreaking can severely degrade the experience. As we’ve said before, the vast majority of customers do not jailbreak their iPhones as this can violate the warranty and can cause the iPhone to become unstable and not work reliably.

It's up to you to decide whether or not jailbreaking will "severely degrade" your iPhone experience — that's a judgment call, after all. But it's up to Apple to decide whether doing so will violate your warranty — and their position is: "Yes, it can."


Other stories you might like

  • Workers win vote to form first-ever US Apple Store union
    Results set to be ratified by labor board by end of the week

    Workers at an Apple Store in Towson, Maryland have voted to form a union, making them the first of the iGiant's retail staff to do so in the United States.

    Out of 110 eligible voters, 65 employees voted in support of unionization versus 33 who voted against it. The organizing committee, known as the Coalition of Organized Retail Employees (CORE), has now filed to certify the results with America's National Labor Relations Board. Members joining this first-ever US Apple Store union will be represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM).

    "I applaud the courage displayed by CORE members at the Apple store in Towson for achieving this historic victory," IAM's international president Robert Martinez Jr said in a statement on Saturday. "They made a huge sacrifice for thousands of Apple employees across the nation who had all eyes on this election."

    Continue reading
  • Apple’s M2 chip isn’t a slam dunk, but it does point to the future
    The chip’s GPU and neural engine could overshadow Apple’s concession on CPU performance

    Analysis For all the pomp and circumstance surrounding Apple's move to homegrown silicon for Macs, the tech giant has admitted that the new M2 chip isn't quite the slam dunk that its predecessor was when compared to the latest from Apple's former CPU supplier, Intel.

    During its WWDC 2022 keynote Monday, Apple focused its high-level sales pitch for the M2 on claims that the chip is much more power efficient than Intel's latest laptop CPUs. But while doing so, the iPhone maker admitted that Intel has it beat, at least for now, when it comes to CPU performance.

    Apple laid this out clearly during the presentation when Johny Srouji, Apple's senior vice president of hardware technologies, said the M2's eight-core CPU will provide 87 percent of the peak performance of Intel's 12-core Core i7-1260P while using just a quarter of the rival chip's power.

    Continue reading
  • Apple may have to cough up $1bn to Brits in latest iPhone Batterygate claim
    Lawsuit took its time, just like your older iOS handset

    Another day, another legal claim against Apple for deliberately throttling the performance of its iPhones to save battery power.

    This latest case was brought by Justin Gutmann, who has asked the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) to approve a collective action that could allow as many as 25 million Brits to claim compensation from the American technology giant. He claims the iGiant secretly degraded their smartphones' performance to make the battery power last longer.

    Apple may therefore have to cough up an eye-popping £768 million ($927 million), Gutmann's lawyers estimated, Bloomberg first reported this week.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022