Jailbreaking: taboo?

Sexy Patrol · Jun 20, 2010

I've been trying to gain some clarity on where the forum stands on this issue: is it frowned upon on here or not? More specifically, jail breaking an iPhone to be used with a different carrier..? What's the general consensus here? From what I've gathered outside of the forum the legality of the issue is rather murky, that said I'm just curious what everyone (including the admins) think here.

clayneal · Jun 20, 2010

http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/community-suggestions-feedback/182471-jailbrake-question.html

dtravis7 · Jun 20, 2010

Jailbreaking is not to use the iphone with a different carrier. That is Unlocking. Unlocking is to make it work with carriers other than AT&T.

Jailbreaking is to basically hack the OS to run applications that Apple will not allow to run on the OS. That is against the rules at Mac Forums.

That URL Clay provided explains it quite clearly.

XJ-linux · Jun 20, 2010

If you have to ask, then it's probably a problem. A life lesson in general.

schweb · Jun 20, 2010

dtravis7 said:
Jailbreaking is not to use the iphone with a different carrier. That is Unlocking. Unlocking is to make it work with carriers other than AT&T.

Jailbreaking is to basically hack the OS to run applications that Apple will not allow to run on the OS. That is against the rules at Mac Forums.

That URL Clay provided explains it quite clearly.

Actually let me clarify...

The guidelines only forbid discussion of illegal activity (as defined by US law), we will not be enforcing EULA.

We won't prevent discussion of using a jailbroken device but we won't allow discussion of the actual process of jailbreaking since that is more likely to be a violation of the DMCA.

Unlocking is absolutely permissible to discuss here as it's fully legal and even has an exception in the DMCA.

Chris1111 · Jun 21, 2010

Are there any jailbreak style apps that make the iphone an fm receiver? I just saw an ad for a sprint phone that had the only 2 things I really want out of a phone, an fm stereo and a tethering option. So if I could get those on an iphone I'd definitely get it.

baggss · Jun 21, 2010

schweb said:
Actually let me clarify...

The guidelines only forbid discussion of illegal activity (as defined by US law), we will not be enforcing EULA.

We won't prevent discussion of using a jailbroken device but we won't allow discussion of the actual process of jailbreaking since that is more likely to be a violation of the DMCA.

Unlocking is absolutely permissible to discuss here as it's fully legal and even has an exception in the DMCA.

Ok schweb, you have more or less contradicted what at least two other members of the staff have stated (and have been enforcing) both publicly and privately. Namely that jail breaking threads are not welcome and will be closed.

No offense, but I think the staff all need to get on the same page with this one. It's been frowned upon here for quite some time.

Aptmunich · Jun 21, 2010

baggss said:
Ok schweb, you have more or less contradicted what at least two other members of the staff have stated (and have been enforcing) both publicly and privately. Namely that jail breaking threads are not welcome and will be closed.

No offense, but I think the staff all need to get on the same page with this one. It's been frowned upon here for quite some time.

We'll have a chat about it... thanks.

schweb · Jun 21, 2010

baggss said:
Ok schweb, you have more or less contradicted what at least two other members of the staff have stated (and have been enforcing) both publicly and privately. Namely that jail breaking threads are not welcome and will be closed.

No offense, but I think the staff all need to get on the same page with this one. It's been frowned upon here for quite some time.

Actually I don't see it as contradicting at all...just a little clarification.

The discussion of how to jailbreak a device is not permitted as that is a violation of the DMCA. That is in complete agreement with what the two others have said.

The only additional piece of information I'm throwing out is that we won't stop people about talking about a device that's already jailbroken or the apps that can be installed because at that point, it's merely a EULA violation.

TattooedMac · Jun 21, 2010

schweb said:
The only additional piece of information I'm throwing out is that we won't stop people about talking about a device that's already jailbroken or the apps that can be installed because at that point, it's merely a EULA violation.

And thats where baggss was leaning towards as a contradiction, as in the past, Mods have closed threads because of JUST talking about a phone that has been JB............ so the *clarification* that you do needs to be at all Mods and Admin so EVERYONE is on the same page ... and if not chuck something into "news and community announcements" so members know exactly what we can mention, as there are certain OTHER members that try to force the rules around here too

Cheers

XJ-linux · Jun 21, 2010

TattooedMac said:
And thats where baggss was leaning towards as a contradiction, as in the past, Mods have closed threads because of JUST talking about a phone that has been JB............ so the *clarification* that you do needs to be at all Mods and Admin so EVERYONE is on the same page ... and if not chuck something into "news and community announcements" so members know exactly what we can mention, as there are certain OTHER members that try to force the rules around here too

Cheers

Well said. The earlier post confused the heck out of me as well. Hot or cold please, lukewarm just don't taste right.

schweb · Jun 21, 2010

An announcement post will be coming to clarify the jailbreaking discussion policies (similar to our DVD ripping announcement).

XJ-linux · Jun 21, 2010

So can we talk about running OS X applications on OS X, which is running on non-Apple hardware? According to case law, it would appear that merely running an OS X on a non-Apple Intel based system is only EULA, whereas the selling or assembly with intent to resell is the illegal part. Opens a rather wide door one the horse is out of the barn. I'm assuming jailbroken iPads are fair game, as well as getting full iOS4 multi-tasking functionality on the iPhone 3G. I'm a bit surprised to be honest. NO offense, but it seems like a slippery slope.

schweb · Jun 21, 2010

XJ-linux said:
So can we talk about running OS X applications on OS X, which is running on non-Apple hardware? According to case law, it would appear that merely running an OS X on a non-Apple Intel based system is only EULA, whereas the selling or assembly with intent to resell is the illegal part. Opens a rather wide door one the horse is out of the barn. I'm assuming jailbroken iPads are fair game, as well as getting full iOS4 multi-tasking functionality on the iPhone 3G. I'm a bit surprised to be honest. NO offense, but it seems like a slippery slope.

Only the illegal act, as defined by US law, is not permitted to be discussed, we do not enforce EULA provisions as it's impossible to effectively enforce considering the wide range of EULAs on every piece of hardware and software in each jurisdiction.

Slippery slope could be applied to alot of things. Should we stop allowing Handbrake discussions because it could be used to rip commercial DVDs or just not allow discussion of ripping commercial DVDs? Should we not allow people to discuss Quicktime because you could potetially watch a pirated video with it? Should we not allow discussion of TextEdit because you could write something illegal on it?

Kash · Jun 21, 2010

Nothing slippery about it. You violate the law (in most cases the DMCA) and you can't talk about it. You violate an EULA then you're fine.

Why this seems odd is that this forum USED to enforce EULAs before the rules changed. Personally, I like it better this way since the rules aren't overly strict.

schweb · Jun 21, 2010

Kash said:
Why this seems odd is that this forum USED to enforce EULAs before the rules changed. Personally, I like it better this way since the rules aren't overly strict.

Yep we changed it because realistically, it's impossible for the mods to be completely fluent on every EULA every written for every piece of hardware in every country. And at this point the legal enforceablitiy of EULAs is dubious at best.

If it every were to come to a point where the US determined that EULA enforcement is 100% valid and a criminal offense, then our policy might change.

XJ-linux · Jun 21, 2010

schweb said:
Only the illegal act, as defined by US law, is not permitted to be discussed, we do not enforce EULA provisions as it's impossible to effectively enforce considering the wide range of EULAs on every piece of hardware and software in each jurisdiction.

Slippery slope could be applied to alot of things. Should we stop allowing Handbrake discussions because it could be used to rip commercial DVDs or just not allow discussion of ripping commercial DVDs? Should we not allow people to discuss Quicktime because you could potetially watch a pirated video with it? Should we not allow discussion of TextEdit because you could write something illegal on it?

So, in your first paragraph, you focus on ignoring the EULA-based issues and their difficulty to enforce, and specifically call or focusing on legal aspects. In your second paragraph, you expound on legal aspects in scenarios (some very relevant like Handbrake, and others which have precedence in consumer liability law, such as the potential liabilities of text editing software usage - paper basically) and their difficulty to enforce.

So, with all due respect... which is it? EULA, legality or both (that is too much the slippery slope to enforce? That is where I get lost. For the record, I have no interest in discussing such issues in general, but would still like to know where the lines are drawn for future reference in posting.

XJ-linux · Jun 21, 2010

Question answered by another post. Thanks!

1991-C4 · Jun 21, 2010

Chris1111 said:
Are there any jailbreak style apps that make the iphone an fm receiver?

That would require additional circuitry. It is not something the can be added through additional software. The good news is that there are several apps that provide streaming audio like Pandora and Last.fm. As far as actual radio stations, I like Pocket Tunes. They carry many of my local FM stations, including many HD stations. (This is really cool because I live in the Central time zone and I can listen to "Car Talk" an hour earlier than I normally do by listening to an NPR station on the East coast!)

schweb · Jun 21, 2010

XJ-linux said:
So, in your first paragraph, you focus on ignoring the EULA-based issues and their difficulty to enforce, and specifically call or focusing on legal aspects. In your second paragraph, you expound on legal aspects in scenarios (some very relevant like Handbrake, and others which have precedence in consumer liability law, such as the potential liabilities of text editing software usage - paper basically) and their difficulty to enforce.

So, with all due respect... which is it? EULA, legality or both (that is too much the slippery slope to enforce? That is where I get lost. For the record, I have no interest in discussing such issues in general, but would still like to know where the lines are drawn for future reference in posting.

I'm failing to see the contradiction? If the post is referencing blatant illegal activity, it's not permitted. If the post is describing behavior that is merely a potential violation of a EULA, that we will not actively enforce.