• Your favorite

    Apple

    ,

    iPhone

    ,

    iPad

    ,

    iOS

    ,
    Jailbreak
    , and
    Cydia
    site.
  • Help the Electronic Frontier Foundation Keep Jailbreaking Legal



    The Digital Millenium Copyright Act prevents people from circumventing digital rights management and other technological measures used to protect copyrighted material. However, DMCA, just like the much talked about SOPA, has its fair share of loopholes and possible abuses companies and governments can levee against consumers.

    Every three years the U.S. Copyright Office holds a “rulemaking” meeting to consider granting exemptions to the DMCA in an effort help prevent harm from being caused to “legitimate non-infringing uses of copyrighted materials.” During the 2009 meeting the EFF won an exemption for jailbreakers and remix artists. During the 2012 meeting the EFF is asking the Copyright Office to continue to protect jailbreaking smartphones, and video game consoles as well as expand the exemption to tablets. If they don’t renew the exemption and expand it, the very basis of the MMi community becomes an illegal activity.

    According to the EFF this is how you can help:

    The Copyright Office needs to hear from people who depend on the ability to jailbreak to write, use, and/or tinker with independent software (from useful apps to essential security fixes) for smartphones, tablets, and game consoles. You can submit comments online at this link.

    Here are some questions you might want to address in your comments:

    • Which jailbreaking exemption are you supporting—smartphones/tablets, video game consoles, or both?
    • What's your background (i.e., are you a developer, hobbyist, academic, independent researcher, user, etc.)?
    • What device do you want to ensure you have the legal authority to jailbreak?
    • Please explain why you want to jailbreak this device. What limitations do you face if you aren't able to jailbreak it? Is there software you couldn't run, computing capabilities you wouldn't have, cool things you couldn’t do, etc.?
    • If you’re a developer, did an online application store or console manufacturer reject your app or game? If so, what reasons did they give?
    • Is there anything else you want to tell the Copyright Office?



    Concrete examples will help show the Copyright Office why they should renew and expand the exemptions for jailbreaking. Send your comments to the Copyright Office athttp://www.copyright.gov/1201/comment-forms/. Where the form says “Comment number(s) of proposed classes of works to which you are responding,” enter a “3” if you’re writing about game consoles or a “5” if you’re writing about smartphones or tablets.

    Comments are due by February 10 at 5 PM Eastern Time. Please send a copy of your comments to [email protected] so that we can see what people are saying. We’ll keep your comments confidential.

    We can't stress enough how important you the members of the MMi are in the process of preserving Jailbreaking. Help the EFF, and help jailbreakers everywhere. Without the necessary exemptions every aspect of the Jailbreak community can be prosecuted and shut down. Don’t let Apple and other manufacturers decide the fate of the jailbreak community.

    Source: EFF
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Help the Electronic Frontier Foundation Keep Jailbreaking Legal started by Phillip Swanson View original post
    Comments 45 Comments
    1. sziklassy's Avatar
      sziklassy -
      Quote Originally Posted by keenpois0n View Post
      I wonder if the jb devs somehow managed to completely get rid of piracy, ie cracked cydia apps and **********, that apple may embrace jailbreaking? because they'd be losing no money to app hosted by dissident. I heard sometime last year, that saurik was going to block sources of illegal activity..it'd be nice to see some help from apple! maybe not direct help, but stop making it harder to hack the devices! an iPhone without a jb to me is something that I'm not gonna buy. it's too plain, too useless
      You can still just sync a cracked app via iTunes itself. Nothing would be solved. Close one repo and another one pops up. Frankly I would hate to have the cydia store be like the appstore in that it takes the ok from the big cheese (Saurik in this case) to get apps and tweaks uploaded.
    1. keenpois0n's Avatar
      keenpois0n -
      Quote Originally Posted by sziklassy View Post
      You can still just sync a cracked app via iTunes itself. Nothing would be solved. Close one repo and another one pops up. Frankly I would hate to have the cydia store be like the appstore in that it takes the ok from the big cheese (Saurik in this case) to get apps and tweaks uploaded.
      yeah I know the sense of a 'controller' would be annoying. but I was just saying if piracy was out of the question, why would apple discourage jailbreaking. there's no reason for it - aside from apple not coming up with the idea for. (nowadays every firmware update we don't see new features, we see jb tweaks made stock. hopefully Tim cook isn't as control freak as stevie was and he'll come to his senses.
    1. Dragonx151's Avatar
      Dragonx151 -
      Quote Originally Posted by Turb02 View Post
      Unfortunately with all the tools that Cydia does allow: SSH, terminal, iFile, etc... these apps that provide the cracked app capability can be side loaded. Unless there are restrictions put in place by Saurik and the JB devs to not allow access to certain areas of the idevice's files system, it wont stop the pirates from pirating.
      Haha I think there's a dev tem that already does that and I believe their name is apple. lmao i agree but isnt that what the whole point of jailbreaking is for? I dont like when people work hard and dont get payed for it (thats why i donated for my JB.) So yes i agree sources need to be blocked that promote piracy but dont block me all together just because of the minority or majority, which ever piracy falls under, after all thats why we fight apple (to access our devices unrestricted)
    1. ahester57's Avatar
      ahester57 -
      I don't find anything wrong with modifying something you already own.
    1. ScooterComputer's Avatar
      ScooterComputer -
      A hearty "you are welcome" to everybody who commented on my post. I fought pretty hard against the DMCA when it was being passed, even confronting my Senator (Arlen Specter) at a Town Hall meeting that got pretty testy. The biggest problem was that neither the citizenship nor the legislators could grasp what the content companies (copyright holders) were really angling to get. And I specifically used the example of digital shifting DVDs as an illegal activity; Specter went on a rant about how I was for allowing terrorists to crack military encryption. He was/is a moron, but it was an amazing spectacle of ignorance (nay, stupidity).

      As I said in my post, I hope that users in the US support both the EFF push to keep Jailbreaking exempted, but ALSO support Exemption Class 10 which calls for an explicit exemption to allow commercial software to be created and distributed to enable content-owning consumers to by-pass the encryption on content with the "fair use" intent of shifting it to different media or transcoding it to different formats for use on their various electronic devices. It is unfair that the copyright holders are able to maintain control of that "right to control 'copying'" through to and including the final user who purchases the content, when previous case law and copyright law specifically upheld and allowed such activity (see the Sound Recording Act of 1971, the Sony Betamax case of 1984, the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, etc). All of that case-law ended with the DMCA. It was an end-run around the citizen's part in the deal of Copyright...and one of the narratives that the content lobby pushes most ardently is that the consumer/citizen has NO PART in Copyright, as though it is a right that is granted to the holder alone. The Constitution, as well as prior common law concepts of "copyright", completely refute that, and clearly show that "copyright"--as a concept--is a bargain between holder and consumer to protect the channel in between: both parties benefit or there is no protection. At this point, there is little evidence that consumers "benefit" from copyright; and any argument of "well they get great content" is a straw man...ultimately they paid dearly for it.