Quasi means "sort of" or partially, and criminal means ... criminal. A criminal is someone who breaks the law or behaviour that is illegal.
Since a person is a technically a criminal if they break any law, (even something like running a red light, not paying your taxes on time, or violating a contract), the "quasi-criminal" term is actually being kind to the jailbreakers.
I don't see how it's contentious at all to refer to them with the relatively mild term "quasi-criminal."
Except you are using a legal term of art and applying your own definition to it.
Since you are insinuating that jailbreakers are breaking the law, maybe you can enlighten all of us as to the law that is being broken? Are you making a blind assumption that every individual that jailbreaks their iPhone is stealing apps?
I'll make my own assumption, you know nothing about jailbreaking an iPhone and nothing about the community supporting this. Maybe someone has chosen to jailbreak their phone in order to install an app similar to Little Snitch. Or one that blocks usage tracking by Pinch Media, Medialets, Mobclix, and Flurry - you are aware that this occurs? Maybe someone finds it more convenient to simply swipe their finger across the iPhone's status bar in order to turn on/off 3G, Bluetooth, Airplane mode, WiFi, etc., instead of digging through multiple menus to accomplish these tasks. Some might want to multi-task in a manner not currently allowed. And some might even want to block spam text messages. Bunch of crazy quasi-criminals!
Apple's attempts at creating a closed ecosystem will continue to fail.
People in general detest being told what or what not they can do with something they put a lot of their hardworking hours to achieve.
Anyone can get a computer and a AT&T 3G connect card and do whatever they want, disrupt the entire network if they can. Run any software they want. They are held liable for their actions.
It makes no difference with the iPhone, it's a computer and a cell phone, people should be able to do what they want, run what software they want. They are held liable for their actions just the same.
First, the statement that Apple is continuously "failing" is laughable at best... You lost all credibility in your first post sentence...
Second, the vast majority of consumers that buy Apple products appreciate the "Appliance" approach of the company products, that just work well out of the box, and continue to work well when you add new software to them. That is a comprehensive handset offer, backed up with a comprehensive app store model... This is why it is so successful.
An iphone is not a cheap handset designed for few geeks to enjoy recompiling the kernel every night or others to propagate viruses... If that is what you like, make yourself a favor and buy a cheap, good enough android like device...
"an open phone platform is what people want" just reminds me of the aging "Linux is the open desktop that people want"...
One of the main concerns about jailbreaking is piracy, as the procedure can allow users to steal software from the App Store.
I can't get an app from the iTunes store until I click on buy - which uses my credit card. I looked at the lovely link - and it doesn't support your interesting theory.
Alarmist much?
I'm thinking about it since ATT doesn't seem to want to make good on it's tethering promises from OVER 2 FREAKING YEARS AGO.
I hacked my Verizon Razr to re-enable OBEX (bluetooth management), looks like it's time to turn on what OTHER iPHONE USERS ON THIS PLANET CAN USE LEGALLY WITH THEIR PLANS.
EULA's are enforceable in court. Make of that what you will.
What the EULA is, is a contract, breaking the contract is not illegal, it's a civil matter not a criminal matter. If you break the contract, by altering the iPhone, Apple can void the warranty, I don't think that they will take you to court over one jailbreak.
If, however you offer services for a fee to jailbreak iPhones, Apple can sue you whether you have a contract or not. You might then be doing something criminal--beyond the scope of this thread, but you are free to do the research yourself.
What the EULA is, is a contract, breaking the contract is not illegal, it's a civil matter not a criminal matter. If you break the contract, by altering the iPhone, Apple can void the warranty, I don't think that they will take you to court over one jailbreak.
If, however you offer services for a fee to jailbreak iPhones, Apple can sue you whether you have a contract or not. You might then be doing something criminal--beyond the scope of this thread, but you are free to do the research yourself.
Did I ever say it was criminal?
I only said, very simply and clearly that:
1) It's against Apple's EULA
2) EULA's are enforceable in court (which they are.)
Rounded off with the disclaimer: make of that what you will.
2) EULA's are enforceable in court (which they are.)
Rounded off with the disclaimer: make of that what you will.
Your response was to my post about quasi-criminality sooooo what's the purpose of yours quotiing mine?????
Enforcement of any contract is a matter that can be taken to court, however if Apple chooses to take every jailbreakers to court, Apple's legal team will be spending too much time on these matters and less on its patent lawsuits.
2) EULA's are enforceable in court (which they are.)
Speaking of wrong - nope - you don't go to court to enforce something. You go to court to arbitrate. Once a judgement is rendered, enforcement can happen on the outcome - not counting appeals. And in civil cases, the process can take years, and nothing is ENFORCED during that time - unless there's a rare case of action meted out in advance (like a cease-and-desist), which has happened with EULAS - um - almost never.
Hard to root for Apple when I own the phone and Apple fails to allow any application on it's store. If I want the latest fart application, I have to pray Apple appreciates the same humor. Jail breaking is a good thing.
Speaking of wrong - nope - you don't go to court to enforce something. You go to court to arbitrate. Once a judgement is rendered, enforcement can happen on the outcome - not counting appeals. And in civil cases, the process can take years, and nothing is ENFORCED during that time - unless there's a rare case of action meted out in advance (like a cease-and-desist), which has happened with EULAS - um - almost never.
Hard to root for Apple when I own the phone and Apple fails to allow any application on it's store. If I want the latest fart application, I have to pray Apple appreciates the same humor. Jail breaking is a good thing.
Apple fails to allow any application on its store??
Speaking of wrong - nope - you don't go to court to enforce something. You go to court to arbitrate. Once a judgement is rendered, enforcement can happen on the outcome - not counting appeals. And in civil cases, the process can take years, and nothing is ENFORCED during that time - unless there's a rare case of action meted out in advance (like a cease-and-desist), which has happened with EULAS - um - almost never.
I J-walk when there are no cars coming in either direction but that doesn't mean I'm a bank robber. I drive above the speed limit but have never set bombs to explode on a bus if it goes below 50mph. I participate in office betting pools but have never been a bookie nor whacked a guy that couldn't pay.
Huh? I was saying that jailbreaking your own phone is pretty much harmless. Just like modifying a lot of other things you might own to suit your needs is also harmless.
Huh? I was saying that jailbreaking your own phone is pretty much harmless. Just like modifying a lot of other things you might own to suit your needs is also harmless.
I am agreeing with you. Jailbreaking doesn't mean you are a thief. Sorry, they weren't funnier (or funny) the DMV seems to suck away all original or creative thoughts.
Not true. The warranty is voided by the action of jailbreaking even if you subsequently restore the phone or pad. The question is whether anyone can tell what you did.
If you restore the phone and Apple is unable to tell it was ever jailbroken, then you are still safe, but there's nothing to stop Apple from simply putting something in the firmware, or giving their store employees tools that can detect if the phone was ever *previously* jailbroken. So you can restore the phone, but it's still a gamble and if anyone finds out you did it, the warranty is still void.
Also, relying on some shifty, anonymous, quasi-criminal on the Internet to restore your phone is almost as dumb as relying on that same person to jailbreak it for you IMO.
Not True. Your warranty is not voided the moment you jailbreak the phone. You warranty is voided when and only when Apple states it is voided. If it is restored and they cannot tell it was jailbroken they have no basis to then void the warranty. There is no magic fairy that instantly voids the warranty when you jailbreak the phone.
Shifty, quai-criminal? Really? Give me a break! So I am a shifty, quai-criminal because I rip my DVDs and then put them on my iPhone to watch while out? Just because there is a law in place doesn't always mean it makes sense. The BS that the iPhone is "in danger" because it is jailbroken doesn't make sense. If that were the case, my Macbook Pro is "in danger" from shifty quai-criminal types since I use their software without Apple giving me the thumbs up.
Shifty, quai-criminal? Really? Give me a break! So I am a shifty, quai-criminal because I rip my DVDs and then put them on my iPhone to watch while out? .......
Maybe you are not a "shifty, quasi-criminal" for ripping a DVD and putting it on your iPhone to watch when you are out, but you are a sqc in the state of California if you are watching your downloaded DVD on your iPhone while you're driving.
Quasi means "sort of" or partially, and criminal means ... criminal. A criminal is someone who breaks the law or behaviour that is illegal.
Something, you either are or are not. You be a quasi-rapist for instance. You are or you are not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
Since a person is a technically a criminal if they break any law, (even something like running a red light, not paying your taxes on time, or violating a contract), the "quasi-criminal" term is actually being kind to the jailbreakers.
Only if they actually were breaking the law. It is easy to call someone a criminal or even a quasi-criminal. Actually providing proof is another thing. Dropping baseless accusations is also easy. Takes a lot more for a person to back up their words, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
I don't see how it's contentious at all to refer to them with the relatively mild term "quasi-criminal."
Comments
Quasi means "sort of" or partially, and criminal means ... criminal. A criminal is someone who breaks the law or behaviour that is illegal.
Since a person is a technically a criminal if they break any law, (even something like running a red light, not paying your taxes on time, or violating a contract), the "quasi-criminal" term is actually being kind to the jailbreakers.
I don't see how it's contentious at all to refer to them with the relatively mild term "quasi-criminal."
Except you are using a legal term of art and applying your own definition to it.
Since you are insinuating that jailbreakers are breaking the law, maybe you can enlighten all of us as to the law that is being broken? Are you making a blind assumption that every individual that jailbreaks their iPhone is stealing apps?
I'll make my own assumption, you know nothing about jailbreaking an iPhone and nothing about the community supporting this. Maybe someone has chosen to jailbreak their phone in order to install an app similar to Little Snitch. Or one that blocks usage tracking by Pinch Media, Medialets, Mobclix, and Flurry - you are aware that this occurs? Maybe someone finds it more convenient to simply swipe their finger across the iPhone's status bar in order to turn on/off 3G, Bluetooth, Airplane mode, WiFi, etc., instead of digging through multiple menus to accomplish these tasks. Some might want to multi-task in a manner not currently allowed. And some might even want to block spam text messages. Bunch of crazy quasi-criminals!
Anyway, thanks for your quasi-definition.
Apple's attempts at creating a closed ecosystem will continue to fail.
People in general detest being told what or what not they can do with something they put a lot of their hardworking hours to achieve.
Anyone can get a computer and a AT&T 3G connect card and do whatever they want, disrupt the entire network if they can. Run any software they want. They are held liable for their actions.
It makes no difference with the iPhone, it's a computer and a cell phone, people should be able to do what they want, run what software they want. They are held liable for their actions just the same.
First, the statement that Apple is continuously "failing" is laughable at best... You lost all credibility in your first post sentence...
Second, the vast majority of consumers that buy Apple products appreciate the "Appliance" approach of the company products, that just work well out of the box, and continue to work well when you add new software to them. That is a comprehensive handset offer, backed up with a comprehensive app store model... This is why it is so successful.
An iphone is not a cheap handset designed for few geeks to enjoy recompiling the kernel every night or others to propagate viruses... If that is what you like, make yourself a favor and buy a cheap, good enough android like device...
"an open phone platform is what people want" just reminds me of the aging "Linux is the open desktop that people want"...
One of the main concerns about jailbreaking is piracy, as the procedure can allow users to steal software from the App Store.
I can't get an app from the iTunes store until I click on buy - which uses my credit card. I looked at the lovely link - and it doesn't support your interesting theory.
Alarmist much?
I'm thinking about it since ATT doesn't seem to want to make good on it's tethering promises from OVER 2 FREAKING YEARS AGO.
I hacked my Verizon Razr to re-enable OBEX (bluetooth management), looks like it's time to turn on what OTHER iPHONE USERS ON THIS PLANET CAN USE LEGALLY WITH THEIR PLANS.
It is against Apple's iPhone EULA.
EULA's are enforceable in court. Make of that what you will.
What the EULA is, is a contract, breaking the contract is not illegal, it's a civil matter not a criminal matter. If you break the contract, by altering the iPhone, Apple can void the warranty, I don't think that they will take you to court over one jailbreak.
If, however you offer services for a fee to jailbreak iPhones, Apple can sue you whether you have a contract or not. You might then be doing something criminal--beyond the scope of this thread, but you are free to do the research yourself.
Apple's attempts at creating a closed ecosystem will continue to fail.
Despite the fact that it's succeeding spectacularly and the also-rans are positively green with envy?
Are you in some separate dimension where everything is the opposite of this one?
It's amazing how your posts are nothing like your AI handle.
What the EULA is, is a contract, breaking the contract is not illegal, it's a civil matter not a criminal matter. If you break the contract, by altering the iPhone, Apple can void the warranty, I don't think that they will take you to court over one jailbreak.
If, however you offer services for a fee to jailbreak iPhones, Apple can sue you whether you have a contract or not. You might then be doing something criminal--beyond the scope of this thread, but you are free to do the research yourself.
Did I ever say it was criminal?
I only said, very simply and clearly that:
1) It's against Apple's EULA
2) EULA's are enforceable in court (which they are.)
Rounded off with the disclaimer: make of that what you will.
Did I ever say it was criminal?
I only said, very simply and clearly that:
1) It's against Apple's EULA
2) EULA's are enforceable in court (which they are.)
Rounded off with the disclaimer: make of that what you will.
Your response was to my post about quasi-criminality sooooo what's the purpose of yours quotiing mine?????
Enforcement of any contract is a matter that can be taken to court, however if Apple chooses to take every jailbreakers to court, Apple's legal team will be spending too much time on these matters and less on its patent lawsuits.
Despite the fact that it's succeeding spectacularly and the also-rans are positively green with envy?
Are you in some separate dimension where everything is the opposite of this one?
It's amazing how your posts are nothing like your AI handle.
Nintendo's a big pile of fail with their closed systems too according to him.
2) EULA's are enforceable in court (which they are.)
Speaking of wrong - nope - you don't go to court to enforce something. You go to court to arbitrate. Once a judgement is rendered, enforcement can happen on the outcome - not counting appeals. And in civil cases, the process can take years, and nothing is ENFORCED during that time - unless there's a rare case of action meted out in advance (like a cease-and-desist), which has happened with EULAS - um - almost never.
This isn't about semantics either.
Speaking of wrong - nope - you don't go to court to enforce something. You go to court to arbitrate. Once a judgement is rendered, enforcement can happen on the outcome - not counting appeals. And in civil cases, the process can take years, and nothing is ENFORCED during that time - unless there's a rare case of action meted out in advance (like a cease-and-desist), which has happened with EULAS - um - almost never.
This isn't about semantics either.
Got my words mixed up. Je m'excuse.
Hard to root for Apple when I own the phone and Apple fails to allow any application on it's store. If I want the latest fart application, I have to pray Apple appreciates the same humor. Jail breaking is a good thing.
Apple fails to allow any application on its store??
Speaking of wrong - nope - you don't go to court to enforce something. You go to court to arbitrate. Once a judgement is rendered, enforcement can happen on the outcome - not counting appeals. And in civil cases, the process can take years, and nothing is ENFORCED during that time - unless there's a rare case of action meted out in advance (like a cease-and-desist), which has happened with EULAS - um - almost never.
This isn't about semantics either.
Thank you for the clarification.
I J-walk when there are no cars coming in either direction but that doesn't mean I'm a bank robber. I drive above the speed limit but have never set bombs to explode on a bus if it goes below 50mph. I participate in office betting pools but have never been a bookie nor whacked a guy that couldn't pay.
Huh? I was saying that jailbreaking your own phone is pretty much harmless. Just like modifying a lot of other things you might own to suit your needs is also harmless.
Huh? I was saying that jailbreaking your own phone is pretty much harmless. Just like modifying a lot of other things you might own to suit your needs is also harmless.
I am agreeing with you. Jailbreaking doesn't mean you are a thief. Sorry, they weren't funnier (or funny) the DMV seems to suck away all original or creative thoughts.
Not true. The warranty is voided by the action of jailbreaking even if you subsequently restore the phone or pad. The question is whether anyone can tell what you did.
If you restore the phone and Apple is unable to tell it was ever jailbroken, then you are still safe, but there's nothing to stop Apple from simply putting something in the firmware, or giving their store employees tools that can detect if the phone was ever *previously* jailbroken. So you can restore the phone, but it's still a gamble and if anyone finds out you did it, the warranty is still void.
Also, relying on some shifty, anonymous, quasi-criminal on the Internet to restore your phone is almost as dumb as relying on that same person to jailbreak it for you IMO.
Not True. Your warranty is not voided the moment you jailbreak the phone. You warranty is voided when and only when Apple states it is voided. If it is restored and they cannot tell it was jailbroken they have no basis to then void the warranty. There is no magic fairy that instantly voids the warranty when you jailbreak the phone.
Shifty, quai-criminal? Really? Give me a break! So I am a shifty, quai-criminal because I rip my DVDs and then put them on my iPhone to watch while out? Just because there is a law in place doesn't always mean it makes sense. The BS that the iPhone is "in danger" because it is jailbroken doesn't make sense. If that were the case, my Macbook Pro is "in danger" from shifty quai-criminal types since I use their software without Apple giving me the thumbs up.
........
Shifty, quai-criminal? Really? Give me a break! So I am a shifty, quai-criminal because I rip my DVDs and then put them on my iPhone to watch while out? .......
Maybe you are not a "shifty, quasi-criminal" for ripping a DVD and putting it on your iPhone to watch when you are out, but you are a sqc in the state of California if you are watching your downloaded DVD on your iPhone while you're driving.
"However, its 3G frequencies are only compatible with AT&T in the U.S."
Well I think not. Its 3g compatible with many providers here.
Quasi means "sort of" or partially, and criminal means ... criminal. A criminal is someone who breaks the law or behaviour that is illegal.
Something, you either are or are not. You be a quasi-rapist for instance. You are or you are not.
Since a person is a technically a criminal if they break any law, (even something like running a red light, not paying your taxes on time, or violating a contract), the "quasi-criminal" term is actually being kind to the jailbreakers.
Only if they actually were breaking the law. It is easy to call someone a criminal or even a quasi-criminal. Actually providing proof is another thing. Dropping baseless accusations is also easy. Takes a lot more for a person to back up their words, no?
I don't see how it's contentious at all to refer to them with the relatively mild term "quasi-criminal."
Of course you don't.