Uh oh, Ashton, it looks like Apple might have a thing or two to say about that
jailbroken iPhone of yours. Every three years the Copyright Office asks for proposed exemptions to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act's rules against breaking access protections, and this time around the lovable scamps at the Electronic Frontier Foundation have asked that jailbreaking phones -- like, yes, the iPhone -- be classified as one of those exceptions. As you might have guessed, Apple's response to the EFF isn't exactly supportive of the idea: it says the proposed rule will "destroy the technological protection of Apple's key copyrighted computer programs in the iPhone device itself and of copyrighted content owned by Apple that plays on the iPhone." Both sides have filed long briefs supporting their positions with extremely detailed legal arguments, but the main takeaways are that the EFF thinks that allowing jailbreaking will result in more apps and innovation, and Apple points out that the App Store is already hugely successful and that jailbroken phones are technically running unauthorized modifications of Apple's copyrighted iPhone code that allows them to run
pirated applications. Interestingly, Apple's
convoluted App Store approval process is the center of a lot of discussion, and Apple is totally disengeniuous about it, saying there's no "duplication of functionality" rule and as proof claims to have allowed "
multiple general web browsers... and multiple
mail programs." Note to the Copyright Office: if you believe this we have a very nice bridge to sell you.
Now, let's be clear: while we're definitely hoping the EFF pulls this one out, the worst thing that can result of all this is the status quo -- Apple isn't asking for jailbreaking to specifically be ruled illegal, it's just asking that it
not be specifically ruled
legal. If that sounds like a fuzzy distinction, well, it is, but that's the sort of gray area that keeps everyone else out of court for the time being. We'll find out more in the spring, when the Copyright Office holds hearings -- final rulings are due in October.
Read - EFF page on the jailbreaking debate
Read - EFF's brief (PDF)
Read - Apple's reply (PDF)
Read - EFF's second brief (PDF)
You may have seen some reports today about a new app from Ripdev called InstallerApp, which some people have mistakenly been covering as a desktop client that lets you install Cydia and Installer apps without having to jailbreak your iPhone using something like PwnageTool. Just to set the record straight, here's the deal: InstallerApp is a kind of jailbreaking tool (let's call it "jailbreaking lite") coupled with a separate application management client for your computer. From what we can tell, the first thing it does is jailbreak your device (or, if you're already jailbroken, installs some additional software so it can talk to your phone). In no way is it allowing you to install non-Apple-approved apps onto a non-jailbroken phone: it's tweaking your underlying system to allow for those apps to run, and giving you an iTunes replacement to add and delete programs on your device. Keep in mind, RipDev is charging $7 for this, which isn't a bundle, but not free either... unlike PwnageTool and QuickPwn, which essentially do the same thing (minus the desktop client). We're not saying it's not a useful app -- it might be to some -- it just isn't the "get into jail free" solution that you may have heard it is. And now you know... which is half the battle.
