dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-01-29 09:22:55: As we noted last week, unlocking your phone is technically now illegal due to modified exemptions in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). ..



MacMaster

@verizon.net

Get all those new criminals!

Put them in prison. Phone unlockers could be the new scourge on society...



AnonFTW

@reliablehosting.com

100,000

The Petition needs 100,000 signatures to be addressed. The 70k noted are just the number needed by a certain date to remain on track for the 100,000 required.

I signed it.



skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS

I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital right"

The DMCA only prohibits circumvention that controls access to a "work" protected by the title.

The carrier lock doesn't protect any work under the law that I can see. A phone being locked to a carrier isn't an issue of copyright.

Even the software on the phone, the OS isn't a work of the carriers and neither is the firmware. Those are written by the software or handset makers.

Circumventing encryption it an of itself isn't a violation of the DMCA.


kerya666

join:2002-12-20
Valrico, FL

Petition

Signed.



DaveDude
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
reply to MacMaster

Re: Get all those new criminals!

i mean , is this really that important ?



AnonFTW

@reliablehosting.com
reply to skeechan

Re: I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital ri

The gist of it is that you're modifying propitiatory, copyrighted code code created by the carrier, thus, it's a DMCA violation. If the carrier creates code to lock the handset to their network and you alter that code, you're violating the DMCA. Or at least the wording is so broad that is how it can be interpreted.



nonamesleft

join:2011-11-07
Manitowoc, WI
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Callcentric
reply to AnonFTW

Re: 100,000

said by AnonFTW :

The Petition needs 100,000 signatures to be addressed. The 70k noted are just the number needed by a certain date to remain on track for the 100,000 required.

I signed it.

It use to be only 25,000 was needed. I guess they raised it because of certain petitions that they didn't like were getting past the 25,000 mark. Nice huh?


skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS
reply to AnonFTW

Re: I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital ri

SIM locks are "built" by the phone manufacturers though aren't they, not actually written by the carriers themselves. So it would have to be Apple, Samsung or Google that would have a claim of copyright if that piece of code is considered a literary work. For example it is Apple wrote that code present in the iPhone, not AT&T thus AT&T has no copyright claim on that SIM lock code.



ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
reply to nonamesleft

Re: 100,000

well it's not that they didn't like them. they were pointless and stupid petitions. The death star one is the best example.



IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

Software rights

Like I've said before, the locking algorithm is in the software and the software licensing agreement prohibits this type of modification.

Remember, even though you own the device, you don't own the software on the device, the developer owns it.



meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY
reply to skeechan

Re: I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital ri

Signed (34606)



cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7

Petition

Has any of the "We the people..." petitions ever actually resulted in a real change? Every petition that I've seen responded too was some presidential staffer giving vague, ambiguous, non-committal responses at best. I understand such a response might be warranted for petitions such as building a Death Star, but even legitimate ones never result in anything. It's about as effective as the complaint box at your local store that never is opened.

Besides, even if the President agreed with the petition and wanted to effect change, there is little he could do aside from executive order for the DOJ not to prosecute. LoC falls under the legislative branch and ultimately would require Congress to change the law. And realistically, there are too many special interest groups that would prevent any changes to the law for that to happen.



a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
reply to IowaCowboy

Re: Software rights

If the owner of a piece of software wishes to pursue legal action because Joe Schmoe unlocked his precious new iPhone, they are currently quite free to do so without any new laws... through CIVIL action. What Congress and various special interest groups are trying to do now is take a matter that was previously up to civil courts to decide, and criminalize it. The fact that we are even considering something like unlocking a phone to be a criminal act when it's not even an issue in the rest of the world merely illustrates just how broken and corrupt our legal and legislative system have become lately...
--
Physics: Will you break the laws of physics, or will the laws of physics break you?
If physicists stand on each other's shoulders, computer scientists stand on each other's toes, and computer programmers dig each other's graves.



CptSpaulding

join:2009-07-21
Cincinnati, OH

Rediculous

So if I buy a GE fridge and GE stocks it with food and says I must buy food from them only or be taken to court. Stupid. If I pay for it then it is mine to do so as i wish. BS. If they want it this way then offer phones for a $3/mo lease fee and upgrades after a year. I leave the carrier then get a phone from another. Just don't sell me something and then tell me what I am "allowed" to do with it.



MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1
reply to skeechan

Re: I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital ri

I signed the petition and I think your right, if anyone had this right it would be the phone manufacturer. Though the fact that this is considered under the DMCA is absurd in itself.


Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to skeechan

The thing is I do not know if Google could claim copyright for altering the code if it is at the OS level. the Android core at least is open source.

Apple might be able to as iOS is not open source.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


NOVA_UAV_Guy
Premium
join:2012-12-14
Purcellville, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to ArrayList

Re: 100,000

I can think of a whole host of petitions that the White House didn't like that wound up crossing the threshold on there too.

A few of the petitions for allowing specific states to leave the union come to mind for this. I think that a few of them actually crossed the old threshold, which is probably what prompted the higher numbers for everyone. Obama and his cronies, just like Bush II, doesn't really appreciate it when the people come together to voice their opinions.


NOVA_UAV_Guy
Premium
join:2012-12-14
Purcellville, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to a333

Re: Software rights

Only "lately"?

It seems like we've been beyond the level that rational people would consider absurd for at least a couple decades. Extending copyright beyond the copyright holder's death, allowing the MPAA and RIAA to act in a threatening manner toward citizens who are not proven guilty of any crime, allowing patents for things like "squares with rounded corners" (yes, Apple got a patent from the PTO for this stupidity)...

I could go on, but I'm sure you get my point.

And just exactly why does the MPAA need the FBI's help in tracking down someone who copies a movie? I wonder how much our government officials got paid off to add those FBI warnings at the start of each movie. There's nothing like a private industry stealing from the citizens by employing a law enforcement agency funded with public tax dollars to do their private bidding.



skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
reply to Kearnstd

Re: I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital ri

And google isn't going to give a crap about unlocking the phone.


NOVA_UAV_Guy
Premium
join:2012-12-14
Purcellville, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to cdru

Re: Petition

said by cdru:

Besides, even if the President agreed with the petition and wanted to effect change, there is little he could do aside from executive order for the DOJ not to prosecute.

That would be about the only way he could do it. I suppose if he believes that he has the authority to ban assault rifles with an executive order, he would also likely believe he has the authority to do something here.

NOVA_UAV_Guy
Premium
join:2012-12-14
Purcellville, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to IowaCowboy

Re: Software rights

said by IowaCowboy:

Remember, even though you own the device, you don't own the software on the device, the developer owns it.

This sounds like it would then be a private matter between the developer who owns the software and the person who reverse engineers it. Hence, no government involvement is warranted unless the developer discovers the infraction and decides to file a lawsuit in civil court on his or her own. Use of public agencies and personnel to locate and/or criminally prosecute people who hack this software is, in my opinion, a misappropriation of public funds.


plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3

Along the same lines, I would think then couldn't Microsoft go after all those 3rd party app developers like Start 8 that put functionally back into Windows 8 that Microsoft removed?

If you say its illegal to "unlock" your phone, would it also be "illegal" to modify Windows 8 to give you the start menu back?

Another example: You buy a desktop from Dell with Windows 8 on it. Once you get it home, you format the drive, and install Linux because you do not like Windows 8. Is Dell going to hunt you down and throw you in jail, because you choose to install another OS? I don't think so.

Regardless if the hardware is a phone, tablet, laptop, or desktop. You as a consumer have paid for said device. Its your hardware, and you should be allowed to install or modify the software on it however you see fit.

--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail



Bruzote

@comcast.net
reply to NOVA_UAV_Guy

Extending copyright after death has a benefit to in that it helps to discourage parties with deep pockets from stealing your copyrighted material. If you took the parties to court in a world without post mortem copyright, that party could keep you locked up in court 'til you die. (Sometimes, crime does pay.) Copyright extension beyone death ensures every stealer has to pay. I'm not saying the idea of post-mortem copyright is a good one, but it has a benefit.



intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to NOVA_UAV_Guy

Re: 100,000

said by NOVA_UAV_Guy:

I can think of a whole host of petitions that the White House didn't like that wound up crossing the threshold on there too.

A few of the petitions for allowing specific states to leave the union come to mind for this. I think that a few of them actually crossed the old threshold, which is probably what prompted the higher numbers for everyone. Obama and his cronies, just like Bush II, doesn't really appreciate it when the people come together to voice their opinions.

Ah yes, because having a rounding error number of people in the country with a moronic idea should be able to waste the time of the federal government?

Care to guess what a counter petition from just the rest of the people in those states would have garnered?


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
Reviews:
·RCN CABLE
·Comcast
reply to NOVA_UAV_Guy

The white house had no basis to trust that that petition accurately represented the people of those states. The appropriate channel would have been to go through the state government for a formal secession from the union. If that would have happened, I would hope that he would let them. The thing about that is that no Governor in their right mind would do that. None of them have the means to defend themselves and don't forget that the Federal Government owns a significant amount of land in every state.



AnonFTW

@reliablehosting.com
reply to skeechan

Re: I'm still not sure how locking a phone is a "digital ri

said by skeechan:

SIM locks are "built" by the phone manufacturers though aren't they, not actually written by the carriers themselves. So it would have to be Apple, Samsung or Google that would have a claim of copyright if that piece of code is considered a literary work. For example it is Apple wrote that code present in the iPhone, not AT&T thus AT&T has no copyright claim on that SIM lock code.

Who are they owned by, though?


nonamesleft

join:2011-11-07
Manitowoc, WI
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Callcentric

1 recommendation

reply to ArrayList

Re: 100,000

said by ArrayList:

well it's not that they didn't like them. they were pointless and stupid petitions. The death star one is the best example.

Why don't you start a petition for "give up liberty for security" then. See how many support it.


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA

ha. liberty.

Expand your moderator at work