Tag: digital millennium copyright act

Apple still says no to jailbreaking iPhones

It is now officially legal to jailbreak your phone in the US, after a move by the Library of Congress to revise the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, but Apple is still staunchly against the idea, claiming it will brick your jailbroken phone because it loves you, wants you to be happy, and wants to save the world from bad men.

Apple previously claimed that jailbreaking a phone was illegal under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which it hoped would stop its customers installing different versions of its OS, running unsupported applications, switching to a network it doesn’t have a large dollar deal with, or switching to the rival OS, Google’s Android. It’s illegal and you’ll go to jail, it claimed.

And now it’s not, but that’s not stopping the fruity party line. It might not be illegal now, but Apple still thinks it’s immoral and the jailbreaking sinners must repent now or face eternal damnation. You see, souls are at risk here, not just mobile phones, and Apple is looking out for us all.

As part of its efforts to protect us all it issued the following statement to Cult of Mac in response to the legalisation of jailbreaking:

“Apple’s goal has always been to insure that our customers have a great experience with their iPhone and we know that jailbreaking can severely degrade the experience. As we’ve said before, the vast majority of customers do not jailbreak their iPhones as this can violate the warranty and can cause the iPhone to become unstable and not work reliably.”

So you may not be going to prison, but you certainly also won’t be going back to your local Apple store to get your iPhone 4 fixed if a jailbreaking attempt results in a bricked phone. Apple has previously sent out software updates that actually deliberately brick jailbroken phones, making them completely inoperable. In other works, if you don’t do it Apple’s way, they will break what you have paid for, and their defence is that you have violated their warranty, which is now not supported by the legal stance they had previously taken.

But Apple is doing this for a good cause. It previously claimed that unlocking an iPhone should be illegal, because it aids hackers, criminal gangs, drug lords, and terrorists. Eh, what? Apparently Apple thinks jailbreaking iPhones gives people potential access to mobile phone masts, which is a possible terrorist threat, while altering the chip identification number allows for anonymous calls, which is clearly the work of drug dealers. Only criminals could ever want an unlocked phone. It’s called jailbreaking for a reason, right?

In other words: leaving Apple’s precious walled garden leads you into sin and temptation. Do not bite the apple the serpent offers you. Wait – the Apple? There’s clearly something the Cupertino-based company isn’t telling us.

In stark contrast, Apple’s rival, Google, which has been gaining momentum with its Android operating system lately, is not against jailbreaking of its phones and has actually sold unlocked phones itself. But clearly it is evil for doing so and must also be supporting terrorists and drug dealers.

Apple users can now avail of unofficial app stores like Cydia or finally use rival Google’s free apps, without fear of Judge Jobs calling the cops, but it still violates your warranty, which, let’s face it, is the Law as far as Apple is concerned. It’s their way or the highway, folks. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act was only ever something they would abide by when it supported their policies. Typical.

Hitler gets reprieve

Downfall, a flick about Hitler’s bunker, is back in use on Youtube as an amusing piss-take of practically anything.

This week YouTube pulled multiple versions of the parody, which involves tinkering with the subtitles for comic effect. YouTube said it had been approached by the film-makers, Constantin Film, who claimed the parodies infringed its copyright.

While the defence for running such content in the US is “satire” and “fair use”, such an argument does not necessarily work in Europe which does not have constitutional rights of free speech.

Now YouTube has advised its users to fight back against attempts to remove the immensely popular clips from the site.

Earlier this week several of the parodies, created by adding fake subtitles to Hitler’s famous rant scene in the 2004 German film, vanished from YouTube. The production company, Constantin Film, argued they infringed its copyright.

The most recent parody is Hitler’s supposed reaction to Constantin’s decision to remove parodies.

In order to remove the clips, Constantin is using Content ID, a tool supplied by YouTube to enable them to set different policies depending on the proportion of their content used in a video or the length of the clip.

Ironically, the Downfall takedowns took place on what would have been Hitler’s 121st birthday.

YouTube product manager Shenaz Zack pointed out that YouTube had made it easier for users to dispute inappropriate Content ID claims.  He advised people to say that the video was fair use, and check the box that reads ‘This video uses copyrighted material in a manner that does not require approval of the copyright holder’.

Once the dispute is filed the video immediately goes back up on YouTube.

This would mean that  Constantin woud have to file a formal Digital Millennium Copyright Act notification

The director of the Downfall film, Oliver Hirschbiegel, has been quoted saying that he found the clips “so funny” and that “you couldn’t get a better compliment as a director”.