Thread: iPad Jailbreak released

As far as I can tell, it only violates the EULA but if it went to court, Apple would have to show that violating the EULA somehow caused harm to the company. While they appear to have lots of lawyers ready to press any ridiculous case they want, the only organization I know of that has been stupid enough to sue its customers is RIAA.

Originally Posted by optikalefx

There have been many discussions weather jailbreaking is "illegal". There is nothing that states that you have to use the device as apple intends, the only reasoning people have is that apple keeps removing or blocking the jailbreaks therefore it must be forbidden. But nothing states that you can't do it. Therefore not illegal, therefore, link is a go.

i am kind of thinking the same thing-- i am quite sure that gm, toyota, etc. are not too happy to see car electronics people like us ripping our cars apart to fit our needs.

this can be seen in the way that newer cars are getting harder and harder to replace the factory radio, without crippling the rest of the car..(wasn't that in a vid from the last afk fest? the member had to move the factory radio, but keep it connected in the car, otherwise the car would crazy trying to find in on the cars network?)

do you think that the auto manufacturers would like to have the same type of control over their products as apple does over its products? of course they do, and they kind of do-- while laws have been passed to keep it to a minimum, adding ground effects, and new wheels to your car is highly frowned upon when you bring it into the dealership..

the only organization I know of that has been stupid enough to sue its customers is RIAA

Don't forget SCO :-)

Gary (-;

It seems to me that in the spirit of this community, it is important that people talk about the limitations device manufacturers put on hardware, to control for user experience.

mp3Car as a business does not necessarily condone anything that is said or stated on these forums. But I personally think, at the very least, we need to be having the conversation about what else the iPad could do. It is in the end your hardware upon purchase.

Guys, breaking an EULA is basically breaching a contract. It's similar to bypassing windows activation. Even though you've purchased the license for the software, you are not free to use it however you want.

And yes, jailbreaking is in breach of the EULA. It could also be called illegal since (and I'm not at all familiar with this, just regurgitating) some (or all) of the jailbreak solutions require modified, and therefore pirated or unlicensed, copies of the bootloader.

Sources:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...olates_the_law
http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/06/a...nse-agreement/

Where's the EULA when you buy an iPad or iPhone? It's not like you have to click somewhere to accept it. So your claim that it's breaking an EULA is plain wrong. I bought my iPhone without being required to read anything. Unlike Windows 7, for instance.

Secondly, braking the EULA is not automatically against the law: it's a contract of adhesion, and it can be very limited in its scope. Some EULA may over extend patents and what not and they're illegal and they've been overturned by courts. So just because there's an EULA just not mean you should be scared away. Just means each one is responsible for whatever happens.

Third, the computer word article just states Apple's own position. No surprise they claim it's illegal. But as the guy from EFF said (EDIT: on the same article above):

Elsewhere, Lohmann called Apple's take on jailbreaking an "absurdity."
"One need only transpose Apple's arguments to the world of automobiles to recognize their absurdity," Lohmann said. "General Motors might tell us that, for our own safety, all servicing should be done by an authorized GM dealer using only genuine GM parts. But we'd never accept this corporate paternalism as a justification for welding every car hood shut and imposing legal liability on car buffs tinkering in their garages."

No carputers would ever come into existence at all in that case, would it?

As for whatever says Appleblog, I couldn't care less really, since it does not goes deep into the matter and just reinstates Apple position regarding some developer's issue. Nothing to do with consumers there, and certainly not an EULA (EU stands for "end-user" not "developer").

So again, Tidder, what are you on about?

I'm not "on" about anything. I'm sharing the information which I found.

Also, you've agreed to the EULA by using it I'm sure. That's how most of them work anymore. However, if I'm correct, you agreed to the EULA when hooking it up to iTunes and setting it up for the first time, or by powering it on the first time and hitting something like "yes" or "I Agree" before reading what it was. Yes?

If I did sign an EULA inside iTunes just after i bought the iPhone? As Bill Clinton said, "I don't have any specific recollection about that ever happening, your honor".


Seriously, though, the particular 3G iPhone *I* have was already activated in the store, and playing with it in a cafe I downloaded my first free app. Didn't agree to anything then, as far as I can recall. When I first installed the iTunes, I did agree with an EULA, true. But I did this while using an iPod. I have no reason to believe that it would bind me for all future products, even if I had read it. When I got home, iTunes instantly recognized my iPhone. No installation necessary, since the 1st gen was around for a while and my itunes was capable of dealing with it.

Only when I started buying apps I vaguely recall seing an agreement somewhere, but I had a reasonable expectation that it was related to the app I was buying not the iPhone itself.

Originally Posted by RipplingHurst

Only when I started buying apps I vaguely recall seing an agreement somewhere, but I had a reasonable expectation that it was related to the app I was buying not the iPhone itself.

this is what i remember when i first connected my iphone to itunes, but, it was a used iphone, so i could have missed it..