Apple sued over iPhone locking, DRM patent violations

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 118
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Total bullshit lawsuit. I can't say I see any reason reason why Apple is responsible for any of this. I've read every post, and I just don't agree with any of the analogies of Apple being at fault, or Apple being required to un-brick phones through warranty, and a user agreement that has been violated. They new when they violated the agreement what they were doing, and now their crying about it. How pathetic a child are you?
  • Reply 62 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by onlooker View Post


    They new when they violated the agreement what they were doing, and now their crying about it. How pathetic a child are you?



    You mean like they knew how it was legal to unlock their phones? You mean like how Apple destroyed the phones of those who did nothing illegal and offered no remedy? And now how all of us are crying about it even though I don't even own an iPhone but 1.1.1 still personally damaged me? And how this obviously makes me a pathetic child because I refuse to support corporations limiting consumer rights?



    Obviously.





    -Clive
  • Reply 63 of 118
    On a different note...



    AT&T-registered iPhone users seem to be taking great personal offense to this, and I honestly can't figure out why? Honestly, why does it bother you that Joe Schmoe unlocked his iPhone? This doesn't involve you. You made the choice to fit inside the Apple-AT&T box, so stay in it, and stay out of the hair of those who legally chose not to. Maybe they have a case, maybe they don't. I happen to think they might.



    As a potential future iPhone user, the result of this suit has particular intrest to me. For those of you with AT&T already, this will have no effect on you. Your only intent here is bashing those who think they have a right to legally use their product in an alternative way. Don't you support consumer's chioce or are you fine with corporate entities writing the laws on what we can and can't do?



    -Clive
  • Reply 64 of 118
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,035member
    What floors me about this and the arguments and justifactions people use is like you had no other choice or option. These people did not have to buy an iphone nor did they have to do business with AT&T. You and everyone else have a choose so stop acting like you do not and exercise your choose.



    If they did not want to be deal with AT&T and the iphone go somewhere else. By the way its no different than going to Verizon and getting or buying a phone then trying to take that phone to AT&T and demanding them to make the Verizon phone work on thier network. If Apple had a deal with Verizon do you think Verizon would let you use the phone with say Sprint of Altel. un top of that you know Verizon disable feature in many of the phones so your required to pay them to get ring tones, transfer pictures and so on, why hasn't people sued over this.



    People go out and read the laws around warranties and you will soon find out you can not change, modify or use a product however you like without the possibility of voiding your warranty. Remember Apple never said they are baring you from moding or doing what every you want with the phone, hell, you can throw it against the wall if you like, but there is no law that says they must honor a warranty if you do so. You got an implied warranty which mean it assume you did nothing wrong and it was due to Apples or its supplier doing. Do what every you like with any product you buy, but do not expect that you will not have to pay to replace or repair what you did to the product outside what the manufacturers says is ok
  • Reply 65 of 118
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    On a different note...



    AT&T-registered iPhone users seem to be taking great personal offense to this,

    -Clive



    Not personal offense, but protection of our interests, yes.



    This issue, which has been self-inflicted by a tiny sliver of iPhone users, has been ignorantly picked up by the MSN as proof that

    - Apple hates its customers

    - Apple has intentionally sabotaged its users

    - Apple forces its updates

    ad nauseum.



    I don't blame the media (many of whom are in the pocket of vested anti-Apple interests) and actually don't blame the 'I want my features NOWWWWW' crowd.

    I do, however, feel a responsibility to support those who have voiced reasonable arguments about personal responsibility to keep this baby from being smothered in its crib.



    BTW, the argument that those supplying these gun-jumping hacks should be the ones responsible for providing the restore feature is brilliant.

    Well put.
  • Reply 66 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ros3ntan View Post


    hey maybe i should file a suit against sony, hp, dell, gateway and all other PC computer manufacturer because they cannot install MAC OSX...



    maybe i should file another lawsuit for all the game makers that have exclusive deals with Sony or XBox or nintendo..



    Maybe i should file another lawsuit for Halo 3 makers for making it only for XBOX.. I WANT TO PLAY HALO 3 ON PS3 OR I'LL SUE YOU.



    there are many other examples.



    So what do you think of this lawsuit now?



    Exactly. You beat me to it. I was going to use the Halo 3 analogy. I'm so glad people that unlocked phones are now used as paper weights. Maybe they'll be a bit more wise next time. If you didn't want AT&T then don't buy the phone. Nobody forced you. And if you couldn't live without the iPhone then you had to make a comprimise. Just like Halo 3. A lot of people, even PS3 owners bought an XBOX360 just for Halo 3. Same concept. The iPhone was to be used ONLY on AT&T as Halo 3 was to be used ONLY on XBOX360. Some people had to try to be a smartass about it and unlock the phone, good for them. They got what they deserved.



    I do however believe that anybody who has an unlocked phone should be allowed to have to restored so that its not a paperweight. Apple should do that much.
  • Reply 67 of 118
    physguyphysguy Posts: 920member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    You mean like they knew how it was legal to unlock their phones? You mean like how Apple destroyed the phones of those who did nothing illegal and offered no remedy? And now how all of us are crying about it even though I don't even own an iPhone but 1.1.1 still personally damaged me? And how this obviously makes me a pathetic child because I refuse to support corporations limiting consumer rights?



    Obviously.





    -Clive



    OK I'll try one last time, and I'll use caps to try and get through. APPLE DID NOT BRICK THEIR PHONES, THEY DID. THEY INSTALLED 1.1.1 DESPITE AMPLE WARNINGS OF THE CONSEQUENCE!!!!! YOU ARE CORRECT THAT WHAT THEY DID WAS LEGAL BUT THEY CAUSED THEIR PROBLEMS, NOT APPLE!!!!!!



    OK????
  • Reply 68 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    What floors me about this and the arguments and justifactions people use is like you had no other choice or option. These people did not have to buy an iphone nor did they have to do business with AT&T. You and everyone else have a choose so stop acting like you do not and exercise your choose.



    They were exercising their right to choose:



    1) Don't buy an iPhone

    2) Buy an iPhone and register with AT&T

    3) Buy an iPhone an LEGALLY UNLOCK IT.



    All three are equally viable options.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    If they did not want to be deal with AT&T and the iphone go somewhere else. (1) By the way its no different than going to Verizon and getting or buying a phone then trying to take that phone to AT&T and demanding them to make the Verizon phone work on thier network. If Apple had a deal with Verizon do you think Verizon would let you use the phone with say Sprint of Altel. (2)un top of that you know Verizon disable feature in many of the phones so your required to pay them to get ring tones, transfer pictures and so on, why hasn't people sued over this.



    Point (1): No one is taking the iPhone to Verizon and asking them to make it work. The correct version of you analogy is as such: Bill buys a Vphone from the Verizon store. Later on, he decides he wants to use the Vphone on AT&T's network. He then calls the manufacturer who tells Bill that the phone was designed for Verizon only. This is an accurate analogy. My responce remains the same: Bill's options are to stay with Verizon, or legally unlock his phone to use it with another carrier.



    Point (2): Phone features are different than carrier choice, which is the subject of the DMCA exemption. Therefore hacking to gain access to those features is not legal. Few are disputing this.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    (3)People go out and read the laws around warranties and you will soon find out you can not change, modify or use a product however you like without the possibility of voiding your warranty. (4)Remember Apple never said they are baring you from moding or doing what every you want with the phone, (5)hell, you can throw it against the wall if you like, but there is no law that says they must honor a warranty if you do so. (6)You got an implied warranty which mean it assume you did nothing wrong and it was due to Apples or its supplier doing. Do what every you like with any product you buy, but do not expect that you will not have to pay to replace or repair what you did to the product outside what the manufacturers says is ok



    Point (3): Except for the following 6 exemptions:

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DMCA


    Exemptions are allowed for 1) the educational library of a university's media studies department, in order to watch film clips in class; 2) using computer software that requires the original disks or hardware in order to run; 3) dongle-protected computer programs, if the the dongle no longer functions and a replacement cannot be found; 4) protected e-books, in order to use screen-reader software; 5) cell phone firmware that ties a phone to a specific wireless network; and 6) DRM software included on audio CDs, but only when such software creates security vulnerabilities on personal computers.



    Point (4): Yes they did.



    Point (5): Uhh.... Throwing your iPhone against the wall is a malicious act which will likely disable your iPhone, and cause irreparable damage to the phone. Carrier-unlocking is not malicious and does not destroy or disable the iPhone in any way. It was the 1.1.1 firmware that did that. That's why I believe Apple should create a tool to restore the phones that they bricked to a working but locked version of 1.1.1.



    Point (6): Since unlocking is legal, users who did so (by your own statement) did nothing wrong. Thus, as you said, Apple is in charge of repairing the problem.



    Users who hacked purely to install 3rd party apps... that's a different story but unlocking is legal and Apple should remedy the phones they bricked.



    -Clive
  • Reply 69 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    OK I'll try one last time, and I'll use caps to try and get through. APPLE DID NOT BRICK THEIR PHONES, THEY DID. THEY INSTALLED 1.1.1 DESPITE AMPLE WARNINGS OF THE CONSEQUENCE!!!!! YOU ARE CORRECT THAT WHAT THEY DID WAS LEGAL BUT THEY CAUSED THEIR PROBLEMS, NOT APPLE!!!!!!



    OK????



    Okay, I see your point, users don't HAVE to install 1.1.1, but before the update, it wasn't known that the next firmware would brick the iPhone. Since there's no official complete restore, users who no longer wish to unlock don't even have a way to return back into the environment. Do you not think Apple should give them a way to do so?



    -Clive
  • Reply 70 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    Okay, I see your point, users don't HAVE to install 1.1.1, but before the update, it wasn't known that the next firmware would brick the iPhone. Since there's no official complete restore, users who no longer wish to unlock don't even have a way to return back into the environment. Do you not think Apple should give them a way to do so?



    -Clive



    Apple did give people several warnings before the update came out also. So not only did people NOT have to install the update, they were also well aware of the consequences, but they did it anyways.



    I believe there should be a complete "Restore" on iTunes that would allow the iPhone to become "new" again and eveything would be back to normal.
  • Reply 71 of 118
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    OK I'll try one last time, and I'll use caps to try and get through. APPLE DID NOT BRICK THEIR PHONES, THEY DID. THEY INSTALLED 1.1.1 DESPITE AMPLE WARNINGS OF THE CONSEQUENCE!!!!! YOU ARE CORRECT THAT WHAT THEY DID WAS LEGAL BUT THEY CAUSED THEIR PROBLEMS, NOT APPLE!!!!!!



    OK????



    No, its a subtle concept, and maybe just repetition will work as well as shouting.



    i=1;

    while (i > 0){

    Device owners are indeed perfectly within their rights to unlock their phones.

    In the real world up to this point, such hacks were additionally pretty benign, since most cell phone manufacturers manufacture crap, hard-wired devices that were rarely, if ever, updated. Most user just periodically got a new phone.





    But with the iPhone, the era of software-based, and frequently updated phones arrives.

    And if the method used for that unlock conflicts with the software manufacturer's contractual and ethical obligation to provide updates and security fixes (particularly if the fix addresses the method used for the unlocking), then I'm sorry, but the manufacturer and its 99% use-as-is base wins.



    }
  • Reply 72 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Footloose301 View Post


    Exactly. You beat me to it. I was going to use the Halo 3 analogy. I'm so glad people that unlocked phones are now used as paper weights. Maybe they'll be a bit more wise next time. If you didn't want AT&T then don't buy the phone. Nobody forced you. And if you couldn't live without the iPhone then you had to make a comprimise. Just like Halo 3. A lot of people, even PS3 owners bought an XBOX360 just for Halo 3. Same concept. The iPhone was to be used ONLY on AT&T as Halo 3 was to be used ONLY on XBOX360. Some people had to try to be a smartass about it and unlock the phone, good for them. They got what they deserved.



    I do however believe that anybody who has an unlocked phone should be allowed to have to restored so that its not a paperweight. Apple should do that much.



    For the three millionth time, it's legal to unlock your phone.



    There's no clause in the DMCA (or any law, for that matter) requiring that game developers port their software to operate on different consoles.



    There is, however, an examption made for users who want to unlock their mobile phones. It's not about people having their cake and eating it too. It's about consumers not being controlled by corporations. Apparently you want corporations to win.



    I would say to any of you who paid extra to get an iPhone (termination fees, non-expired plans with other carriers, higher plan rates) got what YOU deserved for not standing up for your rights as a consumer. Other countries look at us and see that Americans are the bitches of corporations. How come no one here can see it?



    -Clive
  • Reply 73 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Footloose301 View Post


    Apple did give people several warnings before the update came out also. So not only did people NOT have to install the update, they were also well aware of the consequences, but they did it anyways.



    There were methods of unlocking available before Apple issued any sort of official warning. There were most certainly many users who unlocked their phones before they knew it could never be officially restored again.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Footloose301 View Post


    I believe there should be a complete "Restore" on iTunes that would allow the iPhone to become "new" again and eveything would be back to normal.



    This is all I've been pushing for. A way to put all the Firmware, and all the software back to a factory state. I haven't been pushing for an Apple-sanctioned unlock, nor their support of 3rd party apps. Just a Restore Tool.



    -Clive
  • Reply 74 of 118
    taskisstaskiss Posts: 1,212member
    In fact the unlocking of the iPhone is a legal act. The necessity to jailbreak the iPhone in order to enable the particular method of unlocking normally used is illegal.



    They need to find another way to unlock the iPhone, 'cause jailbreaking the device is illegal.



    It's legal to remove your money from the bank, but you can't do it at gunpoint.
  • Reply 75 of 118
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    It's about consumers not being controlled by corporations. Apparently you want corporations to win.



    -Clive



    Actually the irony in my case is that I'm of the 'corporations as sociopaths' school of thought myself.

    But the problem is the bought-and-sold legislative and regulatory process we now have that essentially puts Apple in an untenable situation.

    They do have contractual obligations to its partners, as distasteful as you and I both find them.

    But the answer is not to shoot ourselves in the foot by laying down in front of the train (which is essentially what hacking the firmware of a nascent OS really is), or to demand that Apple forgo partnering opportunities (that, yes, will require lock-in for a period) but to work to fix the insanity of our telecom regulation mechanisms and laws.

    Starting with repeal of 'corporate personhood'.



    cheers
  • Reply 76 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post


    In fact the unlocking of the iPhone is a legal act. The necessity to jailbreak the iPhone in order to enable the particular method of unlocking normally used is illegal.



    They need to find another way to unlock the iPhone, 'cause jailbreaking the device is illegal.



    I pondered this, but I was under the impression that any means to an unlock were legal, even if it did include a jail-break...



    Is there some sort of legal mumbo jumbo that could provide clarification for this?



    -Clive
  • Reply 77 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    For the three millionth time, it's legal to unlock your phone.




    Congrats. We all know this. Its also legal to read the newspaper as you drive, but you shouldn't because of the consequences. As it is legal to unlock the phone, its not right. The iPhone was NOT designed to work on other carriers, so it should not be done. Period.
  • Reply 78 of 118
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Footloose301 View Post


    Its also legal to read the newspaper as you drive, but you shouldn't because of the consequences.



    Not in California. Let me know what state you live in so that I can avoid it.



    (edit: woah... just did a quick google search, and couldn't find ANYTHING indicating that reading while driving is indeed illegal (yet) in CA.

    That scares the crap out of me.)
  • Reply 79 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Actually the irony in my case is that I'm of the 'corporations as sociopaths' school of thought myself.

    But the problem is the bought-and-sold legislative and regulatory process we now have that essentially puts Apple in an untenable situation.

    They do have contractual obligations to its partners, as distasteful as you and I both find them.

    But the answer is not to shoot ourselves in the foot by laying down in front of the train (which is essentially what hacking the firmware of a nascent OS really is), or to demand that Apple forgo partnering opportunities (that, yes, will require lock-in for a period) but to work to fix the insanity of our telecom regulation mechanisms and laws.

    Starting with repeal of 'corporate personhood'.



    cheers



    Very good thoughts. I agree in many places, especially in reforming the whole Corporate Personhood (Juristic Person?) concept. Where to start though...........?



    -Clive
  • Reply 80 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Footloose301 View Post


    Congrats. We all know this. Its also legal to read the newspaper as you drive, but you shouldn't because of the consequences. As it is legal to unlock the phone, its not right. The iPhone was NOT designed to work on other carriers, so it should not be done. Period.



    Not designed to? How not?



    Should not be done? Why not?



    If you start talking about features like VVM, I will just laugh at you. That's a minor part of the phone as a whole.



    The associated carrier affects only a few things: the phone function, EDGE, VVM. The first has no effect on its operation. The second won't affect TMoblie users, and will barely affect users who spend most of their time in a city blanketed in WiFi (as most are these days). The third is a minor feature, like I said. You can still dial in to voicemail, like the good old days. I don't see this hampering my potential iPhone experience.



    So explain to me how it's "just not right" to unlock the iPhone.



    And while you're at it, you still have not justified how this is at all similar to running Halo 3 on PS3 or whatever. How about you explain that for me too.



    -Clive
Sign In or Register to comment.