3 ms·

I don't think it's a felony to root/jailbreak one's own phone.

Yokolos 11mo ago
The problem is doing it as a company. IBM wasn't defeated by hobbyists building their own PCs. They were defeated by other companies reverse engineering their BIOS and selling their own IBM compatible systems. This isn't possible anymore. It just means you get buried in lawsuits until you go bankrupt.
immibis 11mo ago
It is. 17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems
- aspenmayer 11mo ago
  Well actually, it isn’t for individuals and certain groups, technically. Rooting/jailbreaking have had exemptions for many years now, on a three year basis which has seemingly been continually renewed, by the Librarian of Congress. Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies (2024) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/10/28/2024-24563/exemption-to-prohibition-on-circumvention-of-copyright-protection-systems-for-access-control https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/10/28/2024-24... https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca-rulemaking https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca-rulemaking
  - garbagewoman 11mo ago
    You’re breaking the TOS which is a felony according to the CFAA
    - aspenmayer 11mo ago
      Sounds like FUD to me. All of the cases I’m familiar with actually say that violating TOS isn’t against CFAA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act
      - garbagewoman 11mo ago
        Familiar with the Aaron Swartz case?
        aspenmayer 11mo ago
        Yes, I’m familiar with the case. He was caught interfering with equipment on the MIT campus in order to additionally violate TOS of JSTOR, wasn’t he? He shouldn’t have expected to prevail in court, and I’m saddened by his decision to end his own life. That said, he did a whole lot more besides violating TOS, so I’m not sure how applicable his case is to the topic under discussion, strictly speaking.
        garbagewoman 11mo ago
        The charge of computer fraud was based on the breaking of TOS for MIT and JSTOR
        aspenmayer 11mo ago
        > The charge of computer fraud was based on the breaking of TOS for MIT and JSTOR He wasn’t convicted, so that’s not been proved to be against the law in this case, so it doesn’t support the argument you’re advancing in this thread.
matheusmoreira 11mo ago
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-business-model-lexmarks-anti-competitive-legacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-busine... It's not your phone, it's theirs. They're just letting you use it, and only if you're a good boy who follows all their policies and terms and conditions. Subvert this in any way and it's a felony.

The problem is doing it as a company. IBM wasn't defeated by hobbyists building their own PCs. They were defeated by other companies reverse engineering their BIOS and selling their own IBM compatible systems. This isn't possible anymore. It just means you get buried in lawsuits until you go bankrupt.

immibis 11mo ago

It is. 17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems

aspenmayer 11mo ago
Well actually, it isn’t for individuals and certain groups, technically. Rooting/jailbreaking have had exemptions for many years now, on a three year basis which has seemingly been continually renewed, by the Librarian of Congress. Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies (2024) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/10/28/2024-24563/exemption-to-prohibition-on-circumvention-of-copyright-protection-systems-for-access-control https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/10/28/2024-24... https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca-rulemaking https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca-rulemaking
- garbagewoman 11mo ago
  You’re breaking the TOS which is a felony according to the CFAA
  - aspenmayer 11mo ago
    Sounds like FUD to me. All of the cases I’m familiar with actually say that violating TOS isn’t against CFAA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act
    - garbagewoman 11mo ago
      Familiar with the Aaron Swartz case?
      - aspenmayer 11mo ago
        Yes, I’m familiar with the case. He was caught interfering with equipment on the MIT campus in order to additionally violate TOS of JSTOR, wasn’t he? He shouldn’t have expected to prevail in court, and I’m saddened by his decision to end his own life. That said, he did a whole lot more besides violating TOS, so I’m not sure how applicable his case is to the topic under discussion, strictly speaking.
        garbagewoman 11mo ago
        The charge of computer fraud was based on the breaking of TOS for MIT and JSTOR
        aspenmayer 11mo ago
        > The charge of computer fraud was based on the breaking of TOS for MIT and JSTOR He wasn’t convicted, so that’s not been proved to be against the law in this case, so it doesn’t support the argument you’re advancing in this thread.

matheusmoreira 11mo ago

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-business-model-lexmarks-anti-competitive-legacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-busine... It's not your phone, it's theirs. They're just letting you use it, and only if you're a good boy who follows all their policies and terms and conditions. Subvert this in any way and it's a felony.