6 ms·

It is legal to jailbreak an iPhone in the USA. Jailbreaking was added to a list of exemptions to the DMCA last year. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/f

by radq 16y ago

It is legal to jailbreak an iPhone in the USA. Jailbreaking was added to a list of exemptions to the DMCA last year. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jail...

eli 16y ago
Uh, yeah, I quoted that exemption. But it is NOT an absolute right. If you jailbreak an iPhone for the purpose of e.g. using pirated apps (which I imagine many people are) then you are committing a crime even if you haven't pirated anything yet.
- drstrangevibes 16y ago
  absolutely! if you look back you can see that geohot never intended to enable piracy on the platform
  - eli 16y ago
    The PS3 isn't a phone. The exemption doesn't apply.
    - elliottcarlson 16y ago
      Correct, the argument, and also the reason he should be supported, is that it should be. We bought it, we should do with it as we wish (as long as it's not causing financial loss due to piracy etc).
      - eli 16y ago
        Hey, I'm totally with you. But just because you don't like a law doesn't make it not a law. I think the DMCA is here to stay unless and until Congress fixes it.
    - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
      Doesn't apply yet because it's never been tested in court. The parallel is pretty strong so there's a good chance that the courts would extend it if they ever got as far as ruling on it.
      - eli 16y ago
        I really hope the defense argument doesn't hinge on proving the PS3 is a cell phone.
        Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
        It won't, I'd imagine it will hinge on the same arguments that were used to get the exemption for the cell phone.
runjake 16y ago
Sadly this exemption was probably added because some of the government officials involved have jailbroken iPhones for one reason or another.
- uxp 16y ago
  The exemption also specifically states that the exemption only applies to "wireless telephone handset" ... "computer software, in the form of firmware or software", where the purpose of the hack would be to enable the lawfully obtained device to operate on a different network than the one it was sold as restricted to. (Designated class C). Class B states that it is legal to build (and distribute?) programs designed for wireless telephone handsets that are legally obtained in their own right (don't reuse code that say Apple developed), but again it is restricted to "Wireless telephone handsets ... connected to a wireless ... network" Using the letter of the law, PS3 jailbreaking is not covered under those exemptions. The only exemptions relating to video games are to controlled DRM works where a hacker wishes to research security vulnerabilities, but the "information derived from the security testing is used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement". Sony might have a decent case against GeoHot based on this, since he released the keys that enable people to sign custom code that may act as a frontloader to bypass DRM checks for illegally obtained copyrighted code. Us hackers might consider the differences between a PS3 and an iPhone negligible enough that hacking either is logically the same task, but the DCMA states that they are two separate beasts and hacking one is entirely different than hacking the other. Unfortunately, people need to follow the letter of the law in order to stay out of these kinds of legal challenges, but these legal challenges are also what help craft the law to be fair. I just wish that GeoHot had a better chance at winning this. He should have been thinking about how to cover his ass a long time ago. DCMA Exemption source [PDF]: http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/07/dmcaexemps.pdf http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/07/dmcaex...
Natsu 16y ago
But the copyright office still can't absolve you of any "trafficking" charges. That is, you can be liable for distributing circumvention tools for an otherwise lawful act. In other words, you can get blamed for distributing iPhone jailbreak tools. IANAL and I haven't seen it played out in court, but it's one of the more commonly discussed flaws in the DMCA. The other fun thing is that exemptions can expire unless they elect to renew them each time.

by radq 16y ago

eli 16y ago

Uh, yeah, I quoted that exemption. But it is NOT an absolute right. If you jailbreak an iPhone for the purpose of e.g. using pirated apps (which I imagine many people are) then you are committing a crime even if you haven't pirated anything yet.

drstrangevibes 16y ago
absolutely! if you look back you can see that geohot never intended to enable piracy on the platform
- eli 16y ago
  The PS3 isn't a phone. The exemption doesn't apply.
  - elliottcarlson 16y ago
    Correct, the argument, and also the reason he should be supported, is that it should be. We bought it, we should do with it as we wish (as long as it's not causing financial loss due to piracy etc).
    - eli 16y ago
      Hey, I'm totally with you. But just because you don't like a law doesn't make it not a law. I think the DMCA is here to stay unless and until Congress fixes it.
  - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
    Doesn't apply yet because it's never been tested in court. The parallel is pretty strong so there's a good chance that the courts would extend it if they ever got as far as ruling on it.
    - eli 16y ago
      I really hope the defense argument doesn't hinge on proving the PS3 is a cell phone.
      - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
        It won't, I'd imagine it will hinge on the same arguments that were used to get the exemption for the cell phone.

runjake 16y ago

Sadly this exemption was probably added because some of the government officials involved have jailbroken iPhones for one reason or another.

uxp 16y ago
The exemption also specifically states that the exemption only applies to "wireless telephone handset" ... "computer software, in the form of firmware or software", where the purpose of the hack would be to enable the lawfully obtained device to operate on a different network than the one it was sold as restricted to. (Designated class C). Class B states that it is legal to build (and distribute?) programs designed for wireless telephone handsets that are legally obtained in their own right (don't reuse code that say Apple developed), but again it is restricted to "Wireless telephone handsets ... connected to a wireless ... network" Using the letter of the law, PS3 jailbreaking is not covered under those exemptions. The only exemptions relating to video games are to controlled DRM works where a hacker wishes to research security vulnerabilities, but the "information derived from the security testing is used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement". Sony might have a decent case against GeoHot based on this, since he released the keys that enable people to sign custom code that may act as a frontloader to bypass DRM checks for illegally obtained copyrighted code. Us hackers might consider the differences between a PS3 and an iPhone negligible enough that hacking either is logically the same task, but the DCMA states that they are two separate beasts and hacking one is entirely different than hacking the other. Unfortunately, people need to follow the letter of the law in order to stay out of these kinds of legal challenges, but these legal challenges are also what help craft the law to be fair. I just wish that GeoHot had a better chance at winning this. He should have been thinking about how to cover his ass a long time ago. DCMA Exemption source [PDF]: http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/07/dmcaexemps.pdf http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/07/dmcaex...

Natsu 16y ago

But the copyright office still can't absolve you of any "trafficking" charges. That is, you can be liable for distributing circumvention tools for an otherwise lawful act. In other words, you can get blamed for distributing iPhone jailbreak tools. IANAL and I haven't seen it played out in court, but it's one of the more commonly discussed flaws in the DMCA. The other fun thing is that exemptions can expire unless they elect to renew them each time.