DMCA: The Push For Console And Tablet Jailbreak Exemptions Begin

[qubit]

Last year, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) successfully lobbied to make the jailbreaking of smartphones a legal exemption in the DMCA, much to the displeasure of Steve Jobs, who wanted to keep total control over what users could do with their expensive gadgets, but no longer could. Now, in a totally unsurprising and welcome move for ordinary consumers everywhere, the EFF have explained in a press release what the DMCA was supposed to do, how it can be misused and what they plan to do about it:

"The DMCA is supposed to block copyright infringement. But instead it can be misused to threaten creators, innovators, and consumers, discouraging them from making full and fair use of their own property," said EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry. "Hobbyists and tinkerers who want to modify their phones or video game consoles to run software programs of their choice deserve protection under the law. So do artists and critics who use short excerpts of video content to create new works of commentary and criticism. Copyright law shouldn't be stifling such uses - it should be encouraging them."

Then they explained how they want to expand the scope of the exemption to cover more devices:

"We were thrilled that EFF won important exemptions to the DMCA in the last rulemaking," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "But technology has evolved over the last three years, and so it's important to expand these exemptions to cover the real-world uses of smartphones, tablets, video game consoles, DVDs, and video downloads.

One can question why an expansion is needed at all though. Since all these devices work digitally and have related functionality, which is to process sound and video in some way, it's not completely clear why separate exemptions are needed for consoles and tablets when an exemption has already been established for smartphones. However, if successful, it will make the imposition on the ordinary consumer of draconian and ineffective DRM schemes by big corporations against the war on "piracy" even more futile. Perhaps the whole misbegotten DMCA will be repealed in time?

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[white phantom]

Put it this way...

it is MY tech that i purchased to use how I WANT wither thats legal or not its MY choice i paid for it i will do what i want with it fook the rules or laws needed

As for piracy there is one simple rule...

When there is DRM or Copyright protection newly released or not, there is always a way around it released you can never stop piracy unless you pull down the web

 

[AphexDreamer]

Put it this way...

it is MY tech that i purchased to use how I WANT wither thats legal or not its MY choice i paid for it i will do what i want with it fook the rules or laws needed

As for piracy there is one simple rule...

When there is DRM or Copyright protection newly released or not, there is always a way around it released you can never stop piracy unless you pull down the web

I wonder what Sony and Microsoft have to say about this.

 

[Undead46]

I fully support the ability to unlock your phone legally, but the problem I see is when this allows free hotspot use, I can see the anger coming from service providers.

 

[Darkleoco]

If we purchase the technology we should be able to modify it in any way we wish however that could open the way for harsher penalties on abusing that privilege to get benefits such as free hotspot usage.

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

f we purchase the technology we should be able to modify it in any way we wish

As much as I wish this was true, read an license agreement and you will see you might own the hardware, but you are renting the software, and therefore you am not able to make modifications to it if the agreement states that. It is not as simple as "I own it," because multiple parts of a smartphone make it work. Can you modify your hardware? Sure, put Hello Kitty stickers all over it, you own it. Can I modify the software? Well you rent it, and the agreement says in order for you to comply you can't modify it. Would you like it if you rented your house and someone put Hello Kitty stickers all over it? Probably not.

 

[laszlo]

As much as I wish this was true, read an license agreement and you will see you might own the hardware, but you are renting the software, and therefore you am not able to make modifications to it if the agreement states that. It is not as simple as "I own it," because multiple parts of a smartphone make it work. Can you modify your hardware? Sure, put Hello Kitty stickers all over it, you own it. Can I modify the software? Well you rent it, and the agreement says in order for you to comply you can't modify it. Would you like it if you rented your house and someone put Hello Kitty stickers all over it? Probably not.

and what if i modify the software? will apple send head-hunters to catch me?i consider i own the paid phone and in the price is already there the soft % as is not free no? i know i break the rule but i don't like a crippled phone which can do more as had the needed hardware from beginning but lack the soft intentionally

 

[hhumas]

it is our right that we are paying the cost of technology .. and we can do what ever we want

 

[ensabrenoir]

Foolish mortals......only Apple ownss Apple.... you just paid a life time rental fee... for hard and software

 

[Steve-007UK]

I own a pc and can do pretty much anything i want to it so why should other devices be any diffrent? This is not about piracy its about being able to make the most out of what we own and is the reason i hate apple and sony and other companys. I understand why they try and lock down things but if i own a ps3 and want to put linux on it i should damn well be able to, not everyone wants to unlock there devices to pirate stuff.

Its like the iphone, All my friends ever do is moan because they cant put things on it so they then ask me to jailbreak it but i refuse as its not something i care about or want to get into.

 

[MTnumb]

As much as I wish this was true, read an license agreement and you will see you might own the hardware, but you are renting the software, and therefore you am not able to make modifications to it if the agreement states that. It is not as simple as "I own it," because multiple parts of a smartphone make it work. Can you modify your hardware? Sure, put Hello Kitty stickers all over it, you own it. Can I modify the software? Well you rent it, and the agreement says in order for you to comply you can't modify it. Would you like it if you rented your house and someone put Hello Kitty stickers all over it? Probably not.

The House rental is not a good example since if you rent a house eventually they will need to return in to you.
Imagine you sell a house to someone but rent the paint. whoever buys the house is limited to whatever paint you chose and if you decide to change it they just have to live with it.
Even though you actually bought the damn place you can't really do anything with it since serious modification will screw with the paint, can't make a new room since you'll have to make a door and that's gonna mess with the paint (you can't paint the new room either). you could get new furniture (although in apples case it needs to be certified first).
What we're trying to say is that if you buy a house, changing the curtains is not freedom and there is no reason behind not letting us do whatever we want with what we paid for.

 

[devguy]

Pretend an EULA says that if you modify their software, they will send a group of men in suits to beat you senselessly, eat all the food in your fridge, and then leave. When you get your console with such an EULA, naturally you click okay on the agreement when you first power the console on without reading it, and go off and play games. A couple years later, you decide you want to try and modify the software by tinkering with it (like GeoHot). Sony finds out and sends a group of people to beat you and eat your food. Should you be able to sue for such assault and theft, even though you agreed to such terms?

My point is, how harsh of terms is a company allowed to put in their EULA and get away with? And my example may seem intense, but the sad truth is that it isn't too far off what happened to Graf_chokolo by Sony (twice).

 

[Easy Rhino]

people simply do not understand a contractual agreement, they are too lazy to read it, or they simply do not care about what it says. sad state of affairs today when free citiznes who freely purchase products made by other free people are unwilling to abide by a simple use agreement.

 

[1freedude]

EFF made parts of EULA null/void. How far you interpret the terms depends on the device and its fair use.

 

[Moose]

As much as I wish this was true, read an license agreement and you will see you might own the hardware, but you are renting the software, and therefore you am not able to make modifications to it if the agreement states that. It is not as simple as "I own it," because multiple parts of a smartphone make it work. Can you modify your hardware? Sure, put Hello Kitty stickers all over it, you own it. Can I modify the software? Well you rent it, and the agreement says in order for you to comply you can't modify it. Would you like it if you rented your house and someone put Hello Kitty stickers all over it? Probably not.

I would be fine if they gave me the option to uninstall their software from my hardware, but alas they do not!