5 ms·

I work on DMCA exemption issues every few years due to my involvement with iOS jailbreaking and pushing back on companies like Apple, and the App Association wo

by saurik 4y ago

I work on DMCA exemption issues every few years due to my involvement with iOS jailbreaking and pushing back on companies like Apple, and the App Association would always be there seemingly trying to throw their all into preventing any DMCA exemptions or painting jailbreaking in a negative light... only, to me, the really interesting is always that their arguments are so low quality. In one case they argued people primarily jailbreak over-the-top set top video streaming boxes so they can watch pirated content... but the website and software being linked to explicitly said that you didn't have to jailbreak your device to either install or use their app, as you could just sideload it on a normally set up device (as clearly any normal app can play video ;P). It is as if they are just hoping no one bothers to check their references. (Another time--and I honestly am not 100% sure this one was the App Association, as I am just remembering this one as opposed to having it in my notes on this, but I am pretty sure I remember it being the same guy--showed up to the hearing with a giant stack of evidence against me/Cydia trying to show I was actively involved in piracy, and it essentially lost them their credibility as I was able to quickly show every single reference in the stack was to scammers using my trademarks for fake software and that I had even had a lawyer going around trying to shut them down. They either couldn't tell what was real and what wasn't, or hoped they could pull a fast one on the panel as maybe I wouldn't be there to set it all straight.) In another case they (definitely the App Association) tried to argue that jailbreaking devices for purposes of repair (where the device is left back in a locked state for the user but the jailbreak let you replace some part or update some software or something) should not be allowed because repair manuals are copywritten, but that argument was essentially a non-sequitur as I don't think Kyle was using original manuals (much less stealing them ;P); and, even if he had somehow gotten a copy, the protection mechanism certainly wasn't protecting the manual. Honestly, I am pretty sure I could make a better argument against me for them, and it felt like whomever all was funding them must be wasting their money without realizing it; for a while I had thought about doing a big "exposé" of them with the goal of convincing people who were funding them "y'all's money is going to waste on this" in the hope that maybe the companies who were members didn't even realize what the App Association was spending their time on... but I hadn't ever realized it was (according to Bloomberg here) mostly Apple anyway (lol). FWIW, as far as I could ever tell, the App Association was essentially (in terms of who actually puts together and argued these opinions) just the one person: Morgan Reed (who is the President and is quoted in that article). I highly recommend looking around at the myriad areas of random politics and regulation that he is trying to manipulate, as they make sure to get involved--no matter how low effort--whenever there is an opportunity for public comment.

EMIRELADERO 4y ago
Thank you for your hard work. On the DMCA realm, I cannot wait for the Green v. DOJ case to bear fruit. If it succeeds, the DMCA anti-circumvention and anti-trafficking provisions will be ruled unconstitutional altogether. Last we heard about the case was the oral argument for the appeal on 9/12, but it left a sour taste in my mouth. The judges were most focused on whether Green had standing to bring the case (because the government said he would not be prosecuted for doing what he wanted to do) and on whether the appeal itself was adequate at the motion to dismiss stage. They barely even discussed the issues of fair use and constitutional balance that the 1st amendment requires for copyright law to exist (established by SCOTUS in Eldred and Golan) I don't know what to think with this new development, honestly.
- echelon 4y ago
  I know it's a lot to ask, but would you mind providing some additional background as to the different sides and the potential outcomes / ramifications of this case? You seem to have a lot of context in this area. Could this lead to a VCR/DVR future where we're once again able to record or download steaming content? Platforms and DRM have taken us a step back from the freedoms we once enjoyed. I would be overjoyed to be able to legally back up Netflix, HBO, and Disney+ for my private library. It seems only fair now that everything is morphing into the absurd "license for eternity" model.
  - saurik 4y ago
    Frankly--as someone at the front line of all of this stuff--none of these DMCA related arguments have much "practical" importance in the medium-to-long term :/. (This is not at all to say it is a waste of time or anything: the right to examine products and discuss what you learn is really really important and is the basis of security research, so these lawsuits are extremely important and this DMCA law--which likely will only ever die due to first amendment issues because it is locked in via international treaty--is extremely harmful.) The reality is that tech companies are winning this war, technologically, because asymmetric cryptography works--so there isn't some secret key embedded in the devices that you can merely extract and use--and the industry is getting better about not causing regressions. The big battle over unlocking cellphones from 5-10 years ago? That was nothing more than a gambit (which worked, btw) to change the process rules, because no one is actually using technological techniques to supply unlock codes anyway (it is now all via, shall we say... "light corporate espionage" ;P). In a world where I am allowed to make a jailbreak that doesn't mean I can make a jailbreak, as we can see in the war with Apple: the reason there aren't jailbreaks for modern iPhones right now isn't because of DMCA fears. We live in an awkward time where bugs can be features :(. The real "practical" changes are thereby going to have to come from proactive regulation that prohibits certain forms of protection or corporate behavior, not attempts to defend the rights of users to publish what they can find and build. I would more watch Right to Repair, or the various antitrust lawsuits (including my related Apple one). (Note: I know I didn't directly tackle whether anything anyone is doing might help you backup your streaming licensed content, but I also appreciate you didn't directly ask me anyway ;P. I have not heard of such, but I don't pay as much attention to that kind of content. The issue in Green and Huang's cases, though, is about being able to publish information and tools that might help you rip such content, and the reality is you can likely already do that and to the extent to which people start only letting locked down devices with encrypted cables access content, I think you will see companies win that in the next 5-10 years and the legality of publishing a workaround won't matter as there won't be any workarounds to publish. And whether it is legal to do that backup for content no one even pretended you can "buy" seems orthogonal to the efforts I have seen or been involved with.)

by saurik 4y ago

EMIRELADERO 4y ago

Thank you for your hard work. On the DMCA realm, I cannot wait for the Green v. DOJ case to bear fruit. If it succeeds, the DMCA anti-circumvention and anti-trafficking provisions will be ruled unconstitutional altogether. Last we heard about the case was the oral argument for the appeal on 9/12, but it left a sour taste in my mouth. The judges were most focused on whether Green had standing to bring the case (because the government said he would not be prosecuted for doing what he wanted to do) and on whether the appeal itself was adequate at the motion to dismiss stage. They barely even discussed the issues of fair use and constitutional balance that the 1st amendment requires for copyright law to exist (established by SCOTUS in Eldred and Golan) I don't know what to think with this new development, honestly.

echelon 4y ago
I know it's a lot to ask, but would you mind providing some additional background as to the different sides and the potential outcomes / ramifications of this case? You seem to have a lot of context in this area. Could this lead to a VCR/DVR future where we're once again able to record or download steaming content? Platforms and DRM have taken us a step back from the freedoms we once enjoyed. I would be overjoyed to be able to legally back up Netflix, HBO, and Disney+ for my private library. It seems only fair now that everything is morphing into the absurd "license for eternity" model.
- saurik 4y ago
  Frankly--as someone at the front line of all of this stuff--none of these DMCA related arguments have much "practical" importance in the medium-to-long term :/. (This is not at all to say it is a waste of time or anything: the right to examine products and discuss what you learn is really really important and is the basis of security research, so these lawsuits are extremely important and this DMCA law--which likely will only ever die due to first amendment issues because it is locked in via international treaty--is extremely harmful.) The reality is that tech companies are winning this war, technologically, because asymmetric cryptography works--so there isn't some secret key embedded in the devices that you can merely extract and use--and the industry is getting better about not causing regressions. The big battle over unlocking cellphones from 5-10 years ago? That was nothing more than a gambit (which worked, btw) to change the process rules, because no one is actually using technological techniques to supply unlock codes anyway (it is now all via, shall we say... "light corporate espionage" ;P). In a world where I am allowed to make a jailbreak that doesn't mean I can make a jailbreak, as we can see in the war with Apple: the reason there aren't jailbreaks for modern iPhones right now isn't because of DMCA fears. We live in an awkward time where bugs can be features :(. The real "practical" changes are thereby going to have to come from proactive regulation that prohibits certain forms of protection or corporate behavior, not attempts to defend the rights of users to publish what they can find and build. I would more watch Right to Repair, or the various antitrust lawsuits (including my related Apple one). (Note: I know I didn't directly tackle whether anything anyone is doing might help you backup your streaming licensed content, but I also appreciate you didn't directly ask me anyway ;P. I have not heard of such, but I don't pay as much attention to that kind of content. The issue in Green and Huang's cases, though, is about being able to publish information and tools that might help you rip such content, and the reality is you can likely already do that and to the extent to which people start only letting locked down devices with encrypted cables access content, I think you will see companies win that in the next 5-10 years and the legality of publishing a workaround won't matter as there won't be any workarounds to publish. And whether it is legal to do that backup for content no one even pretended you can "buy" seems orthogonal to the efforts I have seen or been involved with.)