H Y P O C R I T E S ! ! ! ! ! . . . . . . .
Posted on 08/24/2010 7:08:20 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi
Apple is apparently ramping up its battle to prevent iPhone and iPod owners from jailbreaking their devices.
The company has applied for a patent, titled "Systems and Methods for Identifying Unauthorized Users of an Electronic Device," that covers a series of security measures to automatically protect devices from thieves and other "unauthorized users." Unauthorized users apparently applies to those who engage in jailbreaking, which allows devices to run apps not approved by the company producing the operating system--such as Apple, the main target of such bypasses.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.cnet.com ...
If Apple want to keep this level of control over their devices, they should lease them rather than sell them.
What I don't think he understands, however, is that if someone can 'jailbreak' an iphone, they can bust any counter-software Apple installs.
If someone buys the device, they own it.
Apple cannot prevent someone from using it as they wish, as long as they aren’t stealing Apple’s intellectual property.
H Y P O C R I T E S ! ! ! ! ! . . . . . . .
Oh good, finally something in the news that has no effect on me:
don’t own one, never will. Gave up on Apple after they gave up on the real System 10.
Apple has become their own parody of their own commercials............
will anyone object to the patent?
will this be declared an illegal patent since jail breaking and unlocking is legal?
isn’t this monopoly since they are restraining trade for third parties? (ie you can only change you oil at the car dealer, you can only buy tires at the car dealer...)
Here's a question to ponder: If Apple is successful in deploying technology where they can monitor the "approved" use of their products after the sale doesn't that make them liable for people who use their products to commit crimes? Gun manufacturers are routinely held accountable for crimes committed with their products. Why, after exhibiting such control, would Apple not be equally accountable?
It seems that Steve Jobs has hired the same publicist that Obama uses. Pick issues that are adamantly opposed by the vast majority and double-down on them.
Could it be they both think they are smarter than everyone else?
It’s for our own good, after all....right?
Exactly my point. If Apple wants to retain this level of control over the device, they should not sell them, but lease them. Once Apple sell the device, the buyer owns it.
cry “widows” and unleash the car accident ambulance chasers!!!!!
cry “windows” and unleash the car accident ambulance chasers!!!!!
H Y P O C R I T E S ! ! ! ! ............
cry “windows” and unleash the car accident ambulance chasers!!!!!
Yes, you own the device. But do you own or license the OS?
I really have not idea, but I wouldn’t be surprised that if you read the fine print you actually agree to a license on the OS.
If that’s the case, he can stop you from using it in an unautorized fashion.
Yeah, I know, It sucks. But it’s that way for most software now.
As for the business philosophy, Jobs knows his followers will line up to eat his turds. They’ll swallow this too.
At this point they have too much invested in it to label themselves “uncool”. :)
The device, you own. Rights to use the OS, not so much. Read the fine print in the EULA.
LOL! Yeah, I don't think the legal eagles at Apple have thought this one all the way through......
“will this be declared an illegal patent since jail breaking and unlocking is legal?”
No such thing.
There’s nothing illegal about patenting a system to do something.
Any illegality would be attached to using it in specific circumstances.
But I believe it’s completely legal.
” doesn’t that make them liable for people who use their products to commit crimes?”
No, it wouldn’t.
My thought as well. Retain ownership.
Lets see how Apple would fare after that business model hits the street.
It’s just the opposite: jailbreaking a device is usually to use a different software on it. It’s about the right to not use the OS.
For a PC, you have a choice of Windows or Linux. So licensing the OS vs. owning the device make sense. However, if the device is useless w/out the OS, and the OS is licensed, then the device should be leased to the consumer. This would let them know there are certain obvious restrictions to the use of the device. Right now, Apple gains the full monetary benefit of selling the device, but still acting as if it owns the device.
Why not? Let's say someone breaks an Iphone, then uses that Iphone to commit a crime before Apple can disable it. Apple, by it's own admission, is an accessory to the crime. The criminal can say Apple should have stopped them. In our litegeous legal climate I could see Apple being deluged with law suits over something like this. Sooner or later a Jury will bust Apple on this because "they have the money".....
It’s my device i’ll do what I like. F aapl and their fascism
litegeous = litigious
I am not sure what a ‘jailbreak’ is but I would assume that once I buy something I can do anything I want to it. I am a computer software engineer and there is nothing they can say that would cinvince me that there is some good reason not to “allow” me to program the thing to do backflips if I want it to.
If its mine, it’s none of their business
This is why I dont buy apple products
Someone will just jailbreak the anti-jailbreaking device.
I just jailbroke my iphone last week. There are some pretty cool apps available including better ringtones, wallpaper and programs. The ones that come with the phone stink.
Jobs is gonna look like a fool if he pursues this. It’s bad enough this liberal nanny won’t let Verizon sell this phone.
Yup, and the name of the game is measure/counter-measure.
I was under the impression it was to use different apps, not OS’s.
If it truly is another OS you’re using, then this new telltale app will not be running anyway.
Right?
I’m a programmer as well.
This goes to the meaning of “jailbreak”.
You do own the device, and can do anything you want with it.
You do not own unlimited rights to the OS. Check the EULA.
So if you remove their OS, you’re good to go.
But I believe (perhaps incorrectlY) that “jailbreak” just refers to gaing the ability to run unaproved apps on the Apple OS and BIOS.
That’s a no-no.
That gets to the “root” of it. jailbreaking doesn’t remove the os and reinstall a new one. It installs a hacked version of the firmware and os.
The application is not limited to prevent running homebrew apps. It prevents modifications that would allow running a different OS. Yes, I know that using apps that don't come from the store is Apple's current hot topic. This patent application is not limited to that.
Good point.
That ad would make great material for a spoof on what they are doing today
I should be able to run a different OS on my device if I want to.
Ever wonder if they can turn your phone on when your asleep?.
Seems that if you buy something, you should be able to whatever you want with it. You can with computers.
will this be declared an illegal patent since jail breaking and unlocking is legal
The recent decision on jailbreaking only means nobody can be prosecuted under the DMCA for doing it. Manufacturers can still use technological measures to try to stop you from jailbreaking. Amazon doesn't have to make its e-book DRM easier to crack just because there's an exemption for screen reading in e-books.
There is quite a bit of unwarranted extrapolation in this article; probably a result of the writer’s own bias and his desire to elicit an emotional response.
Here is the one fact I read in the article: Apple is using their device’s hardware and software to come up with ways of protecting that device from unauthorized use.
Here is the writer’s spin: Apple is trying to flag down jailbreakers and brick their iDevices. Apple is trying to be Big Brother.
Personally, I don’t see that the latter follows from the former. This need not be anything other than an extension of their “locate my phone” feature, which has enabled some to recover their stolen iPhones. Note that this feature is optional with a mobileme subscription (I don’t have it). There is absolutely no reason to believe that the “unauthorized user” feature would be the mandatory and pernicious program this writer is making it out to be. Chances are if I want to jailbreak my future iPhone, I will be able to do so and not subscribe to the ‘unauthorized user” feature. On the other hand, I can see where corporate users might be want to be able to promptly locate and recover a stolen device, and to make sure it is not accessed by someone else. I wouldn’t be surprised if Gray Powell had something to do with this patent.
I do agree that this needs to be raised as an issue and I’m sure it will be if Apple does include this patent in a future iOS update. However, the leap made here, that the patent means Apple is going after jailbreakers, is not warranted by the patent.
Many terms of which should be declared invalid as copyright abuse. When you read a EULA, ask yourself whether the same terms would make sense with a dead-tree book. If they don't, then the developer is probably abusing copyright.
Meant to flag.
What was the "real System 10."? NeXT Step? BeOS?
I truly don't know/can't read your mind. Please explain...
It does seem odd that Apple has decided to engage in a software war against the rest of the world. What sane person would throw such a blatant challenge to both black and white hat hackers?
It was a significant step from System 9, which was an evolution from System 7.
When the Mac was first released, there were various evolutionary changes, leading up to System 7 which was a huge step - although it came with quite a few teething problems. The various versions of 8 and 9 fixed those problems, and we ran a later version of 9 for years.
System 10 was to be the one that would at last put the PC out of our misery. It was to be the first true multi tasking system. I had a beta copy that was full of bugs but did give you an idea of the promise.
About this time Apple ran out of money and Jobs came back to save them. After all kinds of talk and promises, the reality was that when system 10 was finally released, all of the true “Mac” code was gone and it was UNIX with a fancy coat of paint. Sad story IMO.
Getting my ipad today. I must be special.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.