Jobs' Next Fight — Dealing With iPhone Hackers 341
An anonymous reader writes "With Steve Jobs' recent announcement of his intention to fight off the independent iPhone developers, the question worth asking is: How will Apple try to defeat the hackers: Software updates, or lawsuits? Will Apple risk losing its most frequently (ab)used legal tool, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, in order to try and punish the developers of the iPhone unlocking tools? This CNET article explores the legal issues involved in this, which make it perfectly legal to reverse engineer your own iPhone, but illegal to share your circumventing source code with others."
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Easy to pay! (Score:5, Insightful)
...ummm no, it means that people in a position too are trying to help others not get screwed by a vendor locked-in product that wants to charge you for a ringtone that you can make yourself. Instead of attacking developers who wish to enlighten a public entranced by Apple, perhaps they shouldn't base a revenue stream on vendor lockin and ripoff ringtones. If you ask me (flame on that noones asking), they should be the ones providing such a ringtone app. They are all about ease of use for the masses... oh wait, I forgot its easier for someone to pay them then do it themselves.
Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
The only people this really harms is AT&T, and Jobs has never shown the slightest inclination before towards caring about a business partner getting fucked over. If it suits his needs, he'll probably want Apple to subtly encourage it.
I would.
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:0, Insightful)
I'm sorry, you were forced to purchase an iPhone by who?
asswipes (Score:5, Insightful)
iPhone - good idea... but it's from Apple! (Score:1, Insightful)
Since it's from Apple, the product will be ridden by lock downs, law suites, harassment of people who create addons etc. Just like every other Apple product and which is why I have always stayed clear of Apple.
Totally missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
But it the manufacturer doesn't have to allow or enable it. If you can figure it out, great. But if they also stop that same unlocking procedure in future software or hardware iterations of the phone, they can.
And I really don't think Apple will be "relocking" phones...they'll likely just be plugging the holes that allowed them to be unlocked in the first place in future firmware versions. That said, I guess I wouldn't be stunned if some unlocked phones broke, intentionally or otherwise. But all of this has NO BEARING on the DMCA exception. The vendor is under zero obligation to enable unlocking.
So it's not "too bad for Jobs" at all, unfortunately.
Thats what the business world calls... (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
"Independent Developers" are Apple's Best Friends (Score:3, Insightful)
Except when some company becomes egomaniacal and starts trying to grab it all for itself. Even Microsoft did not go so far as to actually try to block "independent developers" outright.
lip service more than anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Correct (Score:2, Insightful)
Learn from RIAA woes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:5, Insightful)
on the other hand, it seems that they are trying to force someone who did buy the iphone and ATT package not to unlock the phone and goto another provider. Perhaps someone needs to move for work or goes over seas? Hell... they could pay their contract cancelation fee, but according to Apple, they shouldn't be able to open the phone and use another provider that has better service, or any service even, where they are.
He's Talking to AT&T (Score:5, Insightful)
Misplaced Optimism (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:5, Insightful)
Correction. (Score:5, Insightful)
People often get this wrong on Apple, like them or not, they don't sell hardware... or really software (much). Apple sells you a solution, an experience, a total package. Their focus and developments are all based on expected hardware and software components being in a certain order or place to ensure they can provide a specific experience to the end user.
In this case the contracts with the carriers probably have explicit clauses saying they will fight to combat unlocks in the same way they fix their aac every quarter or so to try and appease the music companies.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:"Independent Developers" are Apple's Best Frien (Score:3, Insightful)
Note that I'm not talking about SIM unlocking, which is a seperate issue. Apple should simply offer SIM-unlocked phones for a higher price to make up for the lack of AT&T subsidy.
-b.
Re:A few issues (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, "really". Whether Apple is losing money or making $150 on each handset sold pre-activation, the price is still inherently structured to depend on AT&T kickbacks. If they weren't getting $150-$200 and 3%/month for existing customers and 10%/month for new customers on each iPhone activation from AT&T, do you think they wouldn't miss that money? The price is ABSOLUTELY structured depending on that money from AT how could it not be?
And how is Apple "doing something wrong"? You don't think it's okay to build a profit structure into a product? And you likely underestimate the amount of R&D in terms of both sheer money and manpower that went into the iPhone. If you think the iPhone is really fundamentally basically the same thing as numerous other smartphone-type devices, we'd probably disagree on that.
No (Score:4, Insightful)
And AT&T doesn't even suffer, they get they subscription fee whether or not the customers use any of their service.
iPhone unlocking only have winners.
Re:Correction. (Score:5, Insightful)
If Ford sells me an "experience" like a Mustang, and I decide to rip out the Ford stock stereo or take off the Ford street tires and replace it with an aftermarket stereo or racing whitewalls, that's my decision, not Ford's. And court precedent bears this out. Apple wants to explain that this is somehow different, but it's not. I'm the customer. I decide what "experience" to have with the product, after they've sold me the goods.
I'm not arguing their ability to put junk I don't want in there. I'm arguing that unless there's nefarious anti-consumer contracts with carriers, they have no right to "fix my experience" away from the configuration I choose. A patch to re-lock SIMs to a sole vendor is explicitly against the legal and moral arguments that define SIM transferrability. And if they do have those contracts, like Ford with Firestone or Ford with Panasonic, I say this is unconscionable and such contracts should be made void.
Re:Think about Apple's business model (Score:2, Insightful)
I can buy a Mac computer, but I don't see anny way of "unbundling" OS X. (trust me, I'd love that option; a Mac Mini without OS X, or any of its built-in applications, without the Apple keyboard, mouse, or display -- something I would actually buy quite a lot of!).
I can buy OS X, without a computer (but it won't run on much other that a Mac).
I can't buy an iPhone without software.
The only "official" way to update an iPod is to use an Apple software "client". The iPod is worthless without this (or hackers to figure out what the software/firmware is doing). Compare and contrast against most other mp3 players, where the device simply appears as a disk.
Even back in the days of the Apple ][, the system was distinguished from its competition by the provided software (on that machine, its ROM).
Maybe you want to say "Apple is primarily a SYSTEMS company, not a software company".
=== Now that I have completed a post that may be construed as slightly critical of Apple, its products, or its philosophy, I expect to be modded (as usual) into oblivion. As a pre-emptive strike, let me say that I find most Apple users to be so offensive to me that I find myself prejudiced against all Apple users. Go ahead, and PLEASE make me your foe.
Re:I unlocked my Palm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh yeah, that's like, totally a secondary feature anyway, I'm certainly not missing it. Who uses the iPhone as a phone?
Funny, as a Canadian I've never paid a penny to AT&T, and my iPhone works fine. While I would like a factory unlocked phone as much as the next guy, there are plenty of ways for us technically adept people to have OUR cake and eat it too.
You're right. In fact this morning the beta for a cell-tower-triangulation tool that integrates with Google Maps just came out. iPhone development is chugging right along, and many tools are already very mature and usable.
FUD. I have every legal right in both the US and Canada to unlock my phone and install whatever the hell I want on it. Apple may not like it, and may even do pitifully ineffectual things to stop me, but the law is on MY side.
What part of ownership do you not understand? Neither AT&T nor Apple own my iPhone, I do, in EVERY sense of the law. Apple has chosen to cripple the device, I have chosen to un-cripple it. They don't own anything of mine.
Re:A few issues (Score:3, Insightful)
I could be wrong, and he might have meant something completely different, though. Who knows.
Dear Mr Jobs and Apple Executives.... (Score:1, Insightful)
If you want to lose, step on that landmine. If you want to win I suggest you instruct your lawyers to leave the building and you brainstorm with people that can come up with clever ideas as to a solution to the problem.
Capitalism run amok ... Vendor lock-in (Score:2, Insightful)
There seems to be a recurring and ever-increasing theme, especially here in the USA, that customers of any kind, for any product or service, are supposed to be forced into being limited and tightly controlled in what they can and cannot be permitted to do with any product or service they might buy and what products and services they can buy and from whom. This is most disturbing and needs to be reversed.
One of the most ludicrous examples of this kind of mentality I've seen recently was at one of my hometown's city council meetings. The council was voting on spending some money for its I.T. department to upgrade most of their desktop machines with bigger hard drives, more memory and in some cases faster processors so they would be ready to upgrade to MS Vista and Office 2007. One of the local computer vendors who had sold the city some PCs in the past got up during the public comments session and began ranting and raving like a lunatic that it should be against the law for the city govt's own I.T. employees to do this kind of work on the city's own computers, that the city should be required to always have to contract out these upgrades and that they needed to pass a new city ordinance requiring this. He accused the city of "stealing business" from him by doing the work in-house themselves. One of the city aldermen asked him if he thought the city's public works department was "stealing business" from the local plumbers too, for installing and maintaining the city's own water and sewer mains and this idiot said "absolutely".
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not a simple philosophy, it's a stupid philosophy. The better, more logical way to move is not to. If Apple were forced to deal with abysmal sales, then they'd likely respond with the product the way you want it. The message you send to Apple is "Yeah, I hate your tactics, but I'm going to give you money anyways." That's hardly going to fill them with fear.
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dear Mr Jobs and Apple Executives.... (Score:2, Insightful)
"Your stance has absolute zero support from the consumers around the world."
What? Frankly, the vast majority of consumers really don't give a rat's a**.
Re:A Company (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:4, Insightful)
ATTENTION! Slashdot User #136707, you have violated the terms of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act by circumventing the copy protection of your CD for the purposes of transferring a RIAA-copyrighted song to a cell phone. Please remain where you are. The RIAA Security Services will be arriving presently to find you guilty of the most heinous crime in America; interfering with profits. As a convicted enemy of the state, you have the option of the suicide booth. Please let your RIAA Security Services officers know if you wish to use this option. Before you decide, remember that any songs at your funeral service must be from original, unripped media, or we will be forced to vaporize your family (including your little dog, too).
Re:A Company (Score:4, Insightful)
A more effective way might be to be vocal about it, discuss it among themselves, etc. That is exactly what this article and discussion is.
Re:AT&T will NOT unlock iPhones (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I unlocked my Palm... (Score:3, Insightful)
only targeting unlock! (Score:3, Insightful)
The posting talks about "Steve Jobs' recent announcement of his intention to fight off the independent iPhone developers..."
This is incorrect. Jobs only said they have to fight the unlock. The actual quote [crunchgear.com] of what he said is,
Q: What are you going to do about iPhone unlocking?
Steve: This is a constant cat and mouse game. We play it on iPods with DRM. We promised music companies to stay ahead of this problem. We try to stay a step ahead. It's going to be the same way here with the iPhone. It's our job to keep them from breaking in. That's job security.
Jobs won't fight the hackers too hard (Score:2, Insightful)
Jobs will probably break the unlocking for the next few updates just until all the contracts with the providers all over the world are finalized, and then he will shrug his shoulders and say "we tried, but the hackers are just too good," while he watches his sales keep going up
Defintition of iPhone Developers..... (Score:3, Insightful)
There should be a very broad distinction drawn between folks writing productive applications for the iPhone, and folks trying to ruin this by deliberately trying to circumvent the protection measures in the phone.
Do not group these two separate activities together.
Lastly, the posting of articles like this to the Slashdot front page written by Anonymous Cowards should be banned. Be prepared to stand up personally to your article. Real Journalists do this.
Re:I unlocked my Palm... (Score:2, Insightful)
There's no "grudge" against good looks here -- only against trading features, freedom, and ownership for superficial glitter.
Re:Easy to pay! (Score:3, Insightful)
"Terms of a product"? Trying to prevent the owners of a product from using it however they want is no concern of the manufacturer. They can withdraw warranties if they feel justified, the rest is bullshit.
Re:American-centric coverage (Score:3, Insightful)
Our site is IE-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Our site is run by people who use IE, after all, and the vast majority of our readership use IE. We're certainly not opposed to supporting Firefox, but we don't have any formal plans for making that happen. All we can really tell you is that if you're not using IE, and you have Firefox, try using it - maybe it will work.