Hackers claim Siri port to iPhone 4 avoids copyright infringement

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    Blue boxes actually. Black boxes are what airplanes have, altho they are usually orange or some other easy top spot color





    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_box





    There are also links for black and red boxes (receiving calls and generating coin sounds) as well. By the early 90s the coin sound could be produced on a microcassette recorder as well, as seen in the movie Hackers. With everything being digital now, plus how few pay phones there are anymore, many of the old phreaking tools are extinct



    Yeah, Woz, Jobs and Draper (Cap'n Crunch)... the original phone phreaks.



    Of the three Woz was the only one with the talent to build the boxes.



    Draper went to prison for his exploits -- but he was allowed to periodically go on furlough...



    During that time, once every month or so, Woz would bring Draper into our store so he could code/test the latest version of his program EasyWriter. EasyWriter was written in the "Forth" programming language.



    Draper was a real misanthrope... but we tolerated him because of Woz!



    John would get upset and yell at anyone who disturbed him (staff and customers, alike).



    Things like: "I can't work if everybody keeps talking".



    or: "Someone's smoking -- you can't smoke around me".



    There was one time when he was trying to get a early release of EasyWriter out for the IBM/pc...



    Draper would code for 15 minutes or so and the screen would scroll up to a blank screen and he'd lose all his work. He'd explode, stomping around the store shouting at anyone -- accusing them of sabotaging his work.



    Woz would go over and talk to him: "now, John... take it easy..." just like a parent talking to a child throwing a tantrum. He'd settle down and repeat the whole process.



    Eventually, the whole troupe would leave to fight another day.



    Most of our staff and customers tolerated these episodes -- and found them entertaining in a weird way...
  • Reply 22 of 43
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Just curious, what federal law? Also curious, what contract, as when I buy an iPhone I have no contract with Apple.



    Someone didn't read the terms. Uh-oh.



    http://www.southparkstudios.com/full...-humancentipad
  • Reply 23 of 43
    Apple have been having a bit of bad press of recent.



    So considering Siri was culled for the iPhone 4 but it is obvious that it is still there. So hitting the ON switch again would improve their situation.
  • Reply 24 of 43
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post




    Since jail breaking a device is illegal if your intent is illegal








    That certainly is a bold claim. Got any support for it?



  • Reply 25 of 43
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak's first business was selling Black Boxes, which allowed people to make free long distance phone calls on Ma Bell's network.



    Steve was a saint. He has more than made up for stealing things. And AT&T used to charge too much for long distance calls. Steve was doing them a favor.
  • Reply 26 of 43
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jameskatt2 View Post








    Since Siri gets your Apple ID and phone number and phone information, this can easily be determined to be authorized and sent to the FBI.





    Do you think Apple is going to sic the FBI on its customers with iPhones who use Siri?
  • Reply 27 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post


    I don't think 20 million people are going to go through this process.



    And where did you come up with that number? You think there are 20 million jailbroken iPhone 4s out there? Besides, even if a large number of people did start using Siri on older devices, Apple would work hard to expand accordingly or block the older devices through some new means. They're not going to allow something like that to mess up service for everyone else. That, and I expect they've already got plans in place to expand Siri far beyond what we see in it today.



    I think it is to Apple's benefit to get Siri on every capable Apple device ASAP... but consistent with an orderly rollout.



    The iP4S only was, likely, made because there was limited availability of the 4S. I suspect that the next device that supports Siri will be the iPad 2... then iP4 and iPad 1.



    Further, I think that Siri will be enhanced in steps.



    At some point, Apple will have learned enough from the current implementation so they can do some/much of the work (of the current implementation) on the device itself without going to the servers except to handle exceptions and requests that require data or services not available on the device.



    It's kind of a continuous process where new Siri capabilities are added to Apples Servers (to understand and refine) -- and older capabilities are migrated to the iDevices (to improve performance and reduce server load).



    This should ease the load on the servers.



    Concurrently, Apple will add support for more languages to support the current Siri capabilities.



    And Apple will expand the breadth and depth of Siri's integration into the OS and the apps. This, New Siri will require the learning experience [for Apple] that routes these "new" requests through Apples servers.



    So, I believe we'll see staggered rollout of new languages and features to an ever increasing number of devices. And as Siri features become well-understood (by Apple) and refined -- more and more of the processing will migrate to the devices, themselves.
  • Reply 28 of 43
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem View Post


    Apple have been having a bit of bad press of recent.



    So considering Siri was culled for the iPhone 4 but it is obvious that it is still there. So hitting the ON switch again would improve their situation.



    As others have said, I'm sure once out of beta and once they have all the servers up to the task, any Apple device with the capability will have access to a form of Siri. In the mean time, given it is a server side beast, Apple can stop any particular category of device in a heart beat if they wished. No need for lawyers.
  • Reply 29 of 43
    successsuccess Posts: 1,040member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ezduzit View Post


    apple can just make a move, to the jailbreak phones, by making this 'siri' addition totally useless and not removable.



    you can hear them screaming now. 'how can you interfere with my illegal move". sort of reminds me of 'ows' except when these miscreants get caught they are really look for a new career.



    Actually It is now well known within the community that Apple purposely releases updates with really mind boggling missteps [blatant openings] so that they can observe, study copy and reuse ideas that hackers/designers have implemented. Sometimes the ideas are so original and/or require real talent that they hire those people. Other times it's just easier to rehash or tweak a new idea and use it in a new update without recruiting/head hunting.



    If you think this is not the case then you probably also believe that 911 was carried out by Muslims screaming, 'Allahu Akbar'.
  • Reply 30 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    The iP4S only was, likely, made because there was limited availability of the 4S. I suspect that the next device that supports Siri will be the iPad 2... then iP4 and iPad 1.



    While I want to believe in your future this time, absolutely no part of me can agree with the idea that Apple will give Siri to any product released before the iPhone 4S.
  • Reply 31 of 43
    Just because you "can" do something, doesn't mean you "should". But then the freedom freaks will climb all over this with the usual "you can't stop me from [insert action here] on MY device", and "teh machines, they wantz to be freez", and "we're fightin' the MAN baby! We are your best last defense against corporate greed and monopolies". Which of course is moot at best. To which Apple can respond, "well, you can't access our devices (servers, services, etc) that support what you are trying to do, if we don't want you to".



    Ironically, this still requires spoofing off of someone else's iPhone 4S authentication tokens (or your own if you purchased/"obtained" one yourself), and setting up a separate proxy, which should be indicative of the level of permissability on this activity. But hey, since we all ought to be free to do whatever we want, it's cool. Right? Which reminds me I need to swing by chpwn's house and find some nice hardware I like, to like, take - because I can.



    The problem I have with most of this, is that chpwn and the rest of the jailbreakers, are merely derivative - even parasitic if you will. They do not develop original ideas into bleeding edge products. They do not mature concepts and ideas into disruptive technologies, they simply feed off the work of others to do what they do. In the end it's not about being free or sticking to the man so much as it is about ego-driven bragging rights, like the suburban adolescent who puts a street can on his exhaust and jacks the engine cpu with his laptop to do some street racing.
  • Reply 32 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post


    ...Ironically, this still requires spoofing off of someone else's iPhone 4S authentication tokens (or your own if you purchased/"obtained" one yourself), and setting up a separate proxy, which should be indicative of the level of permissability on this activity. ...



    Yeah, it's sort of like, "Gangsters claim drive by shooting technique avoids breaking traffic laws."
  • Reply 33 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post


    ...



    The problem I have with most of this, is that chpwn and the rest of the jailbreakers, are merely derivative - even parasitic if you will. They do not develop original ideas into bleeding edge products. They do not mature concepts and ideas into disruptive technologies, they simply feed off the work of others to do what they do. In the end it's not about being free or sticking to the man so much as it is about ego-driven bragging rights, like the suburban adolescent who puts a street can on his exhaust and jacks the engine cpu with his laptop to do some street racing.



    Aren't you being a little bit dramatic here?



    I don't understand your, "they do not develop original ideas into bleeding edge products," argument because that's not the point of jailbreaking your iPhone; the idea is to simply to extend the amount of things you can do with iOS beyond what Apple is capable or willing to do. You're argument of how they "feed off of others to do [what they want]," is such a childish and extremely negative way to twist their ideas, purposely to inspire emotional drive in people who read your post. Jailbreakers do build off of Apple's work to make it better, just like how Apple releases new features to make iOS better. Had Apple not gone with the closed garden approach, you would see more applications doing things similar to what many apps in Cydia do now - and just because they're not Apple doesn't mean that their concepts and ideas are not mature. The method of delivery (via App Store, iOS software updates, Cydia, or however else) does not effect whether they are solid techs or not. Apple, too, "feeds off of others' [works]." iOS, while creating leaps and bounds in touch screen mobile OSes, has ideas mimicked from other platforms, but you're not going off on how Apple ripped Android's notification swipe down gesture...



    Did you know the concept of apps was greatly influenced by the explosive development in custom apps provided by the ability to jailbreak the original iPhone and install apps? Or that the notification system designed for iOS 5 was aided by a developer who created a pretty powerful notification framework for jailbroken phones prior to the release of iOS 5?



    As for Siri, that's another story because it does use Apple's services that are provided to and only to 4S users. It's not ethical to some, though ethical to others (such in the case that Apple is being just as unethical by not allowing it on older devices when it does work), so the idea is very much on the grey line. Hell, let's bring up the whole Ping and Facebook conundrum - Apple couldn't settle with Facebook before Ping was released, but Apple decided to go ahead and push for support until Facebook officially said no and cut Apple's API keys. Was Apple in the wrong for trying to force Facebook's hands by including their services in iTunes Ping initially? No, because Facebook's terms were unreasonable, but yes because Apple went ahead and did what they wanted (even though they did not get the intended result). There is absolutely no black or white answer to these problems; to argue that jailbreakers who are attempting to expand Siri access are bad is complete bologna because neither you nor I know anything about why Apple is keeping Siri from older devices. We can only speculate.



    But do your research before you go out and smut every jailbreaker out there. Jailbreaking has its positive perks and there are people who are doing what they can to port Siri to Apple without breaking the laws of distribution (and not supporting methods that do) and trying to achieve a Siri driven i4 without using Apple's servers.
  • Reply 34 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nobodyy View Post


    ... It's not ethical to some, though ethical to others (such in the case that Apple is being just as unethical by not allowing it on older devices when it does work), so the idea is very much on the grey line. Hell, let's bring up the whole Ping and Facebook conundrum - Apple couldn't settle with Facebook before Ping was released, but Apple decided to go ahead and push for support until Facebook officially said no and cut Apple's API keys. Was Apple in the wrong for trying to force Facebook's hands by including their services in iTunes Ping initially? No, because Facebook's terms were unreasonable, but yes because Apple went ahead and did what they wanted (even though they did not get the intended result). There is absolutely no black or white answer to these problems; to argue that jailbreakers who are attempting to expand Siri access are bad is complete bologna because neither you nor I know anything about why Apple is keeping Siri from older devices. We can only speculate. ...



    First, this isn't an ethical question, it's a question of legality. The "hackers" who developed this exploit seem to realize there are legal issues, in their attempt to avoid copyright infringement, but apparently aren't intelligent enough to realize that those aren't the only applicable laws.



    Secondly, your Ping/Facebook analogy is invalid because there is no public Siri API.



    Lastly, Apple providing Siri only on the IP4S isn't an ethical question at all, and why they are doing so is entirely irrelevant, from both an "ethical" or legal standpoint.



    So, no, no one is, "being a little bit dramatic," except perhaps yourself.
  • Reply 35 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    First, this isn't an ethical question, it's a question of legality. The "hackers" who developed this exploit seem to realize there are legal issues, in their attempt to avoid copyright infringement, but apparently aren't intelligent enough to realize that those aren't the only applicable laws.



    Secondly, your Ping/Facebook analogy is invalid because there is no public Siri API.



    Lastly, Apple providing Siri only on the IP4S isn't an ethical question at all, and why they are doing so is entirely irrelevant, from both an "ethical" or legal standpoint.



    So, no, no one is, "being a little bit dramatic," except perhaps yourself.



    I'm not going to argue with you on the legality of the Spire and various other Siri ports because I do not know the specific laws that are involved and I assume that most others, including you, do not know them entirely, either. But speaking in terms of right and wrong, jailbreakers who are attempting to port Siri, are attempting to violate as less as possible.



    My Facebook API anology is not invalid: Facebook's API is not public for the use of commercial and high traffic operations - such as Ping. Just because Siri's API is not public means nothing. Facebook's APIs are not available to Apple without an agreement and Apple did the exact same thing jailbreakers are doing with the Siri API: using a service without permission.



    I don't understand how you can't say that Apple shelving its previous loyal customers on great services (when this doesn't have to be the case) for profits does not involve ethics at all. But Apple and ethics is a point less pronounced than jailbreakers and ethics (which I tried to weigh correctly in my first post). I believe you may have gotten my last point somewhat confumbled, so I'm not going to dig into ethics and legality in order to make your last issue more relevant (I realize that it probably won't matter since you most likely will refuse to accept my alternative views and yours), but I do suggest you take a look at a few books regarding this (overall) issue, just for the sake of knowledge.



    *Sorry for removing my links to the books I posted; I can't seem to remember the names of the few I have on my mind and realized that those were really not the right ones. My apologies; if I can remember I will be more than willing to post them.
  • Reply 36 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by success View Post


    Actually It is now well known within the community that Apple purposely releases updates with really mind boggling missteps [blatant openings] so that they can observe, study copy and reuse ideas that hackers/designers have implemented. Sometimes the ideas are so original and/or require real talent that they hire those people. Other times it's just easier to rehash or tweak a new idea and use it in a new update without recruiting/head hunting.



    If you think this is not the case then you probably also believe that 911 was carried out by Muslims screaming, 'Allahu Akbar'.



    I actually thought there might be some truth to your post until I read the last paragraph. Yeah, George Bush masterminded the whole thing. And none one of the hundreds or thousands of people that would have been in on it have spoken out. Time to take the tin hat off you whackjob!
  • Reply 37 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    I think it is to Apple's benefit to get Siri on every capable Apple device ASAP... but consistent with an orderly rollout.



    The iP4S only was, likely, made because there was limited availability of the 4S. I suspect that the next device that supports Siri will be the iPad 2... then iP4 and iPad 1. [...]



    It does seem reasonable to expand Siri in a future update. The iPad 2, iPhone 4, and perhaps the latest iPod Touch seem like reasonable candidates. I doubt the original iPad will ever receive it. I suspect one of the reasons why it was only released for the iPhone 4S was to make sure they could scale it up in a more reasonable manner. Siri had more than a few hiccups scaling after the iPhone 4S release?I can appreciate the amount of problems they would have faced if it were included with a range of recent models, or if it came standard with iOS 5.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    At some point, Apple will have learned enough from the current implementation so they can do some/much of the work (of the current implementation) on the device itself without going to the servers except to handle exceptions and requests that require data or services not available on the device.



    This would be a nice upgrade. It would eliminate network usage, dependency, and response lag. It would be especially useful if they expand Siri to control more aspects of the native OS and applications. On the other hand, I can appreciate the technical hurdle involved in this type of processing and the extent to which voice recognition features may be difficult to implement natively may also limit their options. It does seem like a natural progression if viable.
  • Reply 38 of 43
    There is another thing that comes into play with the whole "copyright infringement" ELUA discussion. A lot of people actually do not agree to the terms and agreements. When one buys an iPhone from say AT&T 99% of the time, the representative will activate the phone. Therefore, the representative is actually agreeing to the EULA, not the actual end user. Obviously at least here in the United States, a person can not be bound to a binding contract that they never agreed to.

    Therefore, downloading publicly available unencrypted software where one is not bound by the ELUA on either end would deem the end user actually not liable. Sure Apple could come down and file a suit. But once a discovery plan has been drawn out, and then approved by the US District Court magistrate or judge(assuming thats where Apple would file suit) a simple deposition of a matter of some AT&T employees would easily cause a motion for summary judgment for dismissal of all charges. In my opinion, such a motion would be granted though probably without prejudice. Of course, this is a timely process, and I tried to dumb it down. But I just wanted to give a simple legal perspective.

    The fact of the matter is, if you did not see a contract, and agree to a contract you can not be governed by such contract.
  • Reply 39 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chaosman View Post


    post



  • Reply 40 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post






    All I am saying is, the mere fact of putting the Siri software onto another device, may not be a copyright violation in a lot of cases. The connection to Apple's servers for Siri to interpret, may be violation of other laws. However, if one were to create a server that would FULLY emulate the Siri server, meaning no connection to apple at all(by the server or the client) then one may be fully absolved from any wrong doing. The siri proxy in itself if provided for a commercial service could be serious violations. And I would expect that if some big providers come up they will see some C&D letters coming their way.

    I am just giving a legal perspective as a lawyer who has had practice in this area for ~ 7 years.

    Though I am not giving an opinion that should be construed as legal advice. Nor does it create an attorney/client relationship.
Sign In or Register to comment.