Thread: iPad Jailbreak released

But the "ignorance of the law is no excuse", right? It's about there's has ever been an agreement, not what is an agreement or what it says.

But I see your general point and I wouldn't want to drag mp3.car into trouble either. Hopefully they know what they're doing, and I'm happy with what I've seen so far. Thumbs up!

I would agree with you there. Ignorance of knowing an EULA exists *should* be an excuse.

1. Almost no one takes the time to read them
2. Probably 25% or less of the average people that actually *do* read them understand it thoroughly
3. They are so vague usually that the license issuer can do anything they want
4. Sometimes someone else already agreed to the EULA, either by having someone else set up the equipment for them, getting equipment activated at the point of purchase, etc.

However, a lot of those EULAs state something similar to this: "By using this software you have agreed to..."

EDIT: Just as I thought. This is from the iPad EULA.

IMPORTANT: BY USING YOUR iPAD, YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE FOLLOWING APPLE AND THIRD PARTY TERMS:
A. APPLE iPAD SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT
B. NOTICES FROM APPLE
C. GOOGLE MAPS TERMS AND CONDITIONS
D. YOUTUBE TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Plus I really want to see BugByte give himself an infraction.

Originally Posted by Tidder

However, a lot of those EULAs state something similar to this: "By using this software you have agreed to..."

I think everyone agrees on that. I haven't seen a an EULA that doesn't contain the "by using this software/service" clause so no doubt this is a violation of the eula. Whether or not that eula would stand up in court isn't really something we can argue. The question though is does this count as "workarounds for software copy-protection"?

Originally Posted by Tidder

Plus I really want to see BugByte give himself an infraction.

+1

Originally Posted by Tidder

I would agree with you there. Ignorance of knowing an EULA exists *should* be an excuse.

True. And thanks for the quotes, I'm not convinced, you may be right but,

Plus I really want to see BugByte give himself an infraction.

I'm not going to stand in the way!

ALERT! WALL OF TEXT!
TL;DR- I think it's legal and others agree. And I don't want to see BugByte give himself an infraction.
Else: Read on!


Riddle me this: Is reverse-engineering illegal? I'll answer my own question: as long as there are no patents/trade secrets involved, no! The iPad and iPhone all all other "i"s are patented, but the software they run, to my knowledge, isn't. *Looks at Settings-->Genera-->About-->Legal section on his JAILBROKEN/UNLOCKED iPhone 1st gen...) Nothing there shows a patent on the software. Now, trade secrets I don't know about (They're secrets, right?) so I can't say anything there. But you all are right about one thing: the DISTRIBUTION of the reverse-engineered baseband(s)/bootloader(s)/etc. is what is illegal. Now, considering the iPad jailbreak in it's current form, all it does is exploit a security hole that gives a remote user "root" privileges and uploads the jailbreak payload that way. Nothing illegal there unless there are modified files (like those above.). All it uses is a modified kernel which is completely legal! Apple even notes it in the Legal section (OpenBSD, anyone?)! Now, I don't have access to the payload that is used (I don't have an iPad to fish it from, nor do I desire to...) so I can't say whether or not the payload is within legal bounds, but I will leave you all with this little gem of a link from back in 2009 when Apple brought this whole thing to light... Enjoy! Also, BugByte, I don't want to see you give yourself an infraction.

Good read freeflashstuff! So far, 82% agree that it's not an issue. Phew! So far, I managed to avoid the dreaded infraction.

Good thing the MyThread mafia didn't get ahold of this one.

Well, I tried at least... seems the rest of the mafia is MIA.

Sorry Tidder. I have followed the Jailbreaking community and things since (almost) day one. I got this. I figured the Mafia would already know about this thread and try to get BugByte to infract himself... Oh well. It's a good thing they are MIA then.

the MFM are aware, it's like there was a disturbance in the force. Your punishment will come when you least expect it.