DMCA Exemption for Jailbreaking Set to Expire, EFF Needs Your Help



+ Add a Comment


No one has addressed one of what I consider the major reasons for rooting and flashing a custom ROM. Fixing what the manufacturer BROKE. When Motorola pushed Gingerbread to the Droid X, they screwed up the calendar alarm notification system. Their own forum, as well as TONS of other product forums, list long pages of frustrated owners whose calendar alarms never sound on schedule after the GB update. Motorola and the cell carriers just shrug it off, with no attempt to fix it.

I learned that Cyanogen Mod 7 ROM actually FIXES this problem. So I rooted my DX, flashed CM7, and my calendar alarms have not failed even once in several months of use since doing so. The phone is also faster and runs more smoothly. Much of rooting as about improving on the crap products vendors shovel upon us every day. It is silly to just put up with it when you don't have to. The vendor still gets their profit on the phone. The cell carrier still gets their monthly blood-letting from us for providing coverage. No one is getting ripped off. That is probably why it was deemed legal in 2010. What I don't get is why that ruling has to be 'renewed' in just 2 years? Nothing major has changed about the technology in that time.


Bullwinkle J Moose

The EFF doesn't need my help to make an exemption for slavery

To understand the real issues, just read through my comments in the Maximum PC article that is now currently on page 5 >

Colorado Woman Ordered to Decrypt Laptop to Reveal Incriminating Evidence

Just make it illegal for companies and Governments to lock down any hardware or software with proprietary encryption, DRM and closed source Operating Systems then make THEM perpetually jump through OUR hoops if they want an exemption to freedom instead of us perpetually jumping through THEIR hoops to get an exemption to slavery!

It's real simple



Just because you buy something doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it. If you own a gun, can you shoot it at someone? If you buy a program that someone else has the copyright to, can you legally modify it and resell it?



!! OMG !!

Some first rate Mr. T lookin' ass-clown says, "Just because you buy something doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it"

Actually Mr. Clown, yes you can. If I buy an iPad and want to throw it under a steam roller, that's my perogative and yours too. If I want to alter it in any other way, that's also my perogative and yours too. Short and simple. What if Ford told you you couldn't paint your car or put spinning hubcaps on it?



"Just because you buy something doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it. If you own a gun, can you shoot it at someone? If you buy a program that someone else has the copyright to, can you legally modify it and resell it?"

I don't know about everyone else, but no other product I own is at risk of being tampered with or modified by it's manufacturers. Companies think that because they can digitally access electronics via the internet, cell phone, or whatever that you don't own the product you paid money for.

Your gun analogy is terrible, and everyone knows you can't copy software because that's called piracy.

What really puzzles me is why people would defend companies from doing things like this. I'm sure if companies started sending people to come into your home and modify or remove things you own you'd be really pissed! That's basically what these guys are doing, except they can do it sitting behind their desk.



So true. If these companies could not do it over the internet and had to send some guy to my house... what do they think I would say LOL !!!!



"If these companies could not do it over the internet and had to send some guy to my house... what do they think I would say LOL !!!!"

If that happened to people I'm sure his gun analogy would be put to the test.



Worst analogy ever. Surely you're not that stupid.



comparing owning electronic devices to owning firearms really isn't that great of an idea. If they(carriers, manufacturers) want to lock down what they consider -their- devices, then they should re-word it accordingly, because you don't own anything you are renting it indefinitely.

but thats beside the point, its just not right. period. I shell out my hard earned cash for something, I should be free to modify it how I please. do I understand that voids the warranty and excludes me from tech help if i'm stupid enough to brick it? yes. Again, it was purchased with -my- money, understanding the full consequences of my actions. I don't understand what is so hard about companies to understand this. do I own the software? no. did I create the software? no. thats fine, but literally what is the problem with me loading my own software onto the device or a piece of software of my choosing? theres no good reason to deny that access other than they want to nickle and dime you to death with their own "accessories" or software.

but I guess if you want walled garden style computing, this is what happens.



There are laws that specifically address shooting at whoever you want and modifying/reselling.

So yes, buying something DOES mean you can do whatever you want relative to the limitations imposed by law.



Property rights are given in the constitution, and any law that violates the constitution is null and void and people must treat it like such. You can't limit ownership, I know people try with licenses and other similar garbage, but as a programmer myself if someone buys my program/app they can do whatever they want with it.

I'd love for someone to even try to tell me to my face that I can't do what I want with my own property and walk away. I didn't serve the country for this crap to go on.



Anything you create, you can put as few or as many restrictions on it as you want. In this case you're taking something that someone else has created, and modifying it against their will. If someone were to re-brand your program, and sell it for their own monetary gain, without paying you or crediting you, would you still be OK with it?



Your are talking out of the side of your neck bro. Sorry but it is true. You are making huge leaps to try to prove your point and none of it follows any form of real logic. Copying someone idea and reselling is not the same as me buying a product and then changing the color. We are not talking about being able to resell anything and this has nothing to do with that. This is about taking what you pay for and being able to customize it to work with in the parameters that you need. It is like saying I can't put an aftermarket radio in my car because it was built by Ford. Your argument simply does not hold any water.



So, if I bought a house and did not like the fact it was painted blue, I should do nothing. Is that the gist of what your saying? If I pay for it, it's mine and I should be able to do what I want. That's it! That's why they want to get this renewed because under the old laws, you could be fined or even jailed for doing what you want with a product you bought and paid for.

I do agree that the kind of functionality I need from my cell phone is not what you may need. With out rooting I cannot test the apps that I build in the first place. But that is me.



Your analogy fails. We're not talking about cosmetic changes. If you decided your house wasn't big enough and added a huge extension on the back that went right up to your property line, the county/city would show up with a huge fine for building in the easement.

As for these phones, if the cell carriers and manufacturers don't want people modifying the phone because it could affect the quality of their network, then they should be held to a higher tasking of delivering more frequent, quality updates that customers want.

If they don't, then they should develop a two part phone OS - one part that works with the cell carrier's network that is not modifiable, and the second part that handles apps, appearance, memory usage, cpu usage, etc, that the user is free to hack and slash, improve, expand, simply as they choose.

With the current state of the cell phone market, I don't see that happening any time soon as there are only two or three big players who don't care about useful devices - they only care about their bottom line and their huge, easily made profits.



You can't compare modifying housing to purchased goods. Even though you own it, is it legal to run a bar and nightclub out of your house without being licensed to do it?

I wasn't implying that you shouldn't root your phone, I was just stating my opinion.


Michigan PI

The concept of rooting a phone to make it function properly is more on the line of buying a shovel from Home Depot and wrapping tape around the handle to keep it from wiggling so you can properly dig a hole, ie use it for its intended purpose.

The the bigger question is why must we do this to get our devices to function as designed / advertised in the first place??

How about rooting the phone to enhance functionality such as to allow backing up the phone system? I have 3 phones in my household rooted for just that reason. The 4th is rooted to compensate for the manufacture's lack of providing proper functionality.

If someone was rooting phones, loading pirated software on them and selling them for a huge profit, that would be something else.
Gun analogy=bad (even though that is an intended purpose for a gun. Modifying a phone to detonate explosives=bad but more in line with the original gun analogy.



"You can't compare modifying housing to purchased goods." Yes you can, a house is a purchased good.

"Even though you own it, is it legal to run a bar and nightclub out of your house without being licensed to do it?" No one is talking about selling alcohol out of their phone either. Your logic is totally broken.



There's nothing wrong with the 99% of people who want to keep things as they are, who don't want to take - and risk - that $200-$600 piece of hardware to dangerous software and hacks. Some people are perfectly content with the norm, the ho-hum, the this-just-plain-works.

That said, there are legitimate reasons, even for some in that 99%, to want this legal. Chief among them is advancement: figuring out how to take the hardware where the current development software may limit you, and finding new ways to push hardware where it may not have been intended but was always capable to do. Testing software in ways, on the devices directly, that may take too long to get approval for.

Then there's the programmers - although some SDK's out there are free and will be allowed in a particular app store or device with no problem, many of them require money - sometimes in areas out of reach unless you already have a company started, or have restrictions that you need to bypass. This goes double for students, cash-strapped as they are, whose only option for making their first couple of games is either to build them on a PC or to use something more likely to be stable, like a XBox 360 or Nintendo Wii, in which the hardware may get a die shrink and a hard drive upgrade or two.

In fact, this is the best reason to allow Jailbreaking on the game consoles: Years ago, back when Commodore 64's, Apple II's and Atari's were kings, the limitations of the hardware were also their greatest strengths - What you developed and made for one machine would work on any other, unless it required a piece of particular hardware. If I made a game for the C-64, and it didn't require a special cartridge or a modem, tape drive or other device for anything other than loading the software, It would work on any other C-64. The only equivalent we have today are the game consoles, which rarely change beyond firmware and OS updates between generations: if I were to make a game that didn't require the hard drive, and didn't require a specific peripheral like a light gun or the Kinect, they'd make the perfect system to teach and train computer programming on, since you'd almost certainly be guaranteed that if it worked on that XBox 360, it'd work on any other 360.

Granted, this is an optimistic grey area in what is mostly considered to be dark - after all, most people don't mod their systems to learn something new about them, they mod them to access hardware and software that the controlling companies like Apple and Google don't want you to have. To some degrees, I am fine with this: If you really can't live without that piece of software that allows you to view some naked boobs on you tiny screen while in your cubicle, don't come crying to me when your phone breaks and you're out of a job. I don't want or need to know. However, I wouldn't want to punish someone who's trying to learn something new, improving upon something old, or doing something beyond their limitations. I don't feel it's right to punish someone whose only inability is the guarantee of safety.



And just so you know, xbox and ps3 games ARE designed on a pc not on the game console. Please read a book or at least google it for your benefit as well as ours. Thanks.



I've always thought it was silly to jailbreak/root a phone/tablet. I've never had any kind of performance issue, problem with pre-loaded apps, or any want/need to do something that the stock ROM couldn't do on the Android phones and iPod Touch that I've owned. The risk of bricking it, or voiding the warranty doesn't make it worth it to me. I can understand doing it for something like the Kindle Fire or Nook Color/Tablet, where it's so locked-down that you can't do a lot with it, but if the stock ROM does what you want it to do, why would you want to jailbreak/root it? If you don't like the stock ROM, why even buy it in the first place?

I can't understand why you would want to jailbreak a game console at all. So you can run Linux on it? I buy game consoles so I can play games on them, not so I can show everyone how nerdy I am by installing Linux on it. If I wanted to run Linux on something, I would buy/build a PC.



Im pretty sure from the sound of your argument that you have never rooted and flashed your phone. Its a fact that carrier roms SUCK. I have a Samsung Captivate and I got around a 800 score in quadrant and it lagged sometimes on the menu screens especially with the ugly iphonish GUI. Now I rooted it and put CM7 on it and now my quadrant score is 2000 without a overclock. And the fact that ATT prevents you from installing non-android market apps which is bull. I couldn't even use the amazon store until I rooted and flashed it. And on top of that, my battery life increased 30% from flashing it. You know nothing of what roms can do to phones. I have yet to see a good stock rom minus the Nexus phone and thats because google has set it to off-limits to carriers to add anything to it.



It's like not being able to have much customizations...
Like in Win7, regular users might not know it is possible to change the login screen to something else and is stuck with it. Like wise with many many other "tweaks / config".
Rooting Android allows you change and config your device which isn't possible to do with the stock ROM.
Jailbreaking in the other hand, allows you to install additional / unprotected apps and such, it also removes some unwanted and annoying stuffs. However, I would dare say you don't even need those functions. You don't need it doesn't mean some else doesn't need it.



Would you say the same thing about overclocking your CPU or graphics card? How about modding your car? I would say that at least 50% of the people on this site do the former. You may find that the stock rom is good enough for you but it may not fit the bill.

Now, you say why buy it in the first place? What if I wanted a smartphone that I can overclock, for example. No stock ROM that I know allows you to do that. Does that mean I am not allowed to buy a phone simply because it can't do that out of the box? Once I buy something I like to consider it mine and will try to make it fit my needs. If that means rooting, then so be it.

I have never tried to jailbreak a game console before, nor will I ever, but that doesn't mean that no one should be allowed to do that. When I go out and buy something,I should be allowed to do anything I want with it, regardless of whether you understand it or not.

Sorry dude but your logic is kind of flawed.



I wasn't trying to imply that it should be banned or that people shouldn't do it, I was just stating my opinion on the subject. If you buy it, you're responsible for what you do to it. I just feel that when it comes to what the stock ROM of a phone can do, versus what is possible with a custom ROM, there isn't any significant difference.

You can't really compare overclocking a CPU to rooting/overclocking a phone. When you build your own PC, you have full control over the hardware that's inside because you built it. Your CPU, GPU, and RAM can all be overclocked because the builder has full control over it. The builder has the legal right to make those adjustments. If you were to build a system for a paying customer, that had all stock parts inside, that wasn't designed to be overclocked, do you really want them making adjustments, like overclocking the system beyond a safe level, with you, the builder of the system, obligated to provide support for it? That's why manufacturers forbid it.

Why can't you overclock an HP/Dell desktop? Because they built it, and they have control over it. HP and Dell build their PC's to handle what they are intended for. If the model you bought from HP doesn't do what you want it to do, you exchange it for the one that does. If you want full control over what's inside your PC, build your own. If you could build your own smartphone, you can put whatever you want inside of it, and overclock it to whatever speed you want, because you built it. But you can't build your own smartphone, so you have to buy one from another company. Until that changes one day, that's how it goes.

There's a reason why stock ROM's don't allow you to overclock the device: the device is not designed for it. Almost every CPU can be overclocked because you can install any cooling system you want that can handle it. Phones aren't designed to be overclocked because everything has to fit inside a crammed, airtight plastic case.

Motorola, HTC, Samsung, Apple, and every other smartphone/tablet manufacturer doesn't design their products to be overclocked because they can't handle it. That's why those companies put up such a fight against those who want to do it. They design their products to do what they are intended for. That's why there isn't just one smartphone out there that you modify to do what you want it to do, there are hundreds of different models, ranging from economy to high-performance: you buy the one that is right for you out of the box. With the wide range of choices available, why would you just pick one, and modify it to suit your needs, when you can buy one that does what you want it to do out of the box?


Michigan PI

"I just feel that when it comes to what the stock ROM of a phone can do, versus what is possible with a custom ROM, there isn't any significant difference."
Dude, you are not just talking out of the side of your neck, you are talking out your arse. You obviously know absolutely NOTHING about rooting, roms, performance, etc., and I am even beginning to doubt that you have ever owned or operated a "smart phone".

You have chosen a side on a discussion that you probably should have just sat out. I really don't want to be too harsh but comments like yours gone un-challenged ARE the problem.



Sorry to argue, but you did actually blatantly say that it should be banned.

"Just because you buy something doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it"

And it is a very valid thing to compare overclocking a CPU to rooting a phone. Overclocking a CPU (until now) has been officially against the "rules" of owning a proccessor. Much like owning and rooting a phone.

Do you really think that it isn't possible to overclock a prebuilt computer? Really? All computers have a BIOS. An unlocked BIOS. and most, if not all, have the ability to be overclocked, through either direct BIOS methods, or through software within windows.

And, using a more direct analogy, What if you wanted to run Linux on a pc, say an HP computer. Would that be illegal too, unless it came prebuilt with it? What about updating it from Windows 7 to Windows 8?

And what if you overclock the cpu on your phone, and it stays within temperature tolerances and doesn't throw errors? Does that mean that you did a bad thing anyway?

also, so preventing root is for our own good? great. what if i want to do it anyway? Are we going to put rooting a phone in the same category as drugs, where the government forbids it for our own good?

I can't believe that you have the audacity to side with the corporations, saying that they lock our phones to protect our devices? No, they lock the phones to protect the service provider's profit margins. A small number of rooted ROMs allow for unmediated wifi tethering. does that mean that all ROMs other than stock should be banned?

Just an FYI, i have not rooted my phone, because it is still insured by Verizon. I still support this movement because i think that restricting the ability to do what you want with what you own is goddamn rediculous.



+1!!!! I fully support rooting devices, as it lets me extend the life of my Droid X. Also, I am easily bored with the look of my phone and change ROMs and themes on the regular to keep my phone fresh and interesting. And, having pre-installed garbage that is uninstallable on my phone is unacceptable. That is why I root, have been doing it since my first little Droid Eris (POS...) all the way to my Thunderbolt and beyond. Whether this remains legal, or becomes illegal makes no difference to me. I will continue to do it as it remains one of my favorite things about android. It's my phone and I will do what I want with it.
P.S.- I could give a crap about free tethering...

Sidenote: HTC has allowed this with unlocking bootloaders on their new phones, they should go to bat for us!

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.