U.S. government makes jailbreaking, unlocking and ripping DVDs legal

The U.S. Government Library of Congress Copyright Office announced today new policy changes that let owners of electronic devices break security protections within the device to allow non-authorized code and programs to be run on the operating system.

The decision came earlier today as The Library of Congress Copyright Office reviews and authorizes exemptions for electronic devices and copyright material to ensure that the current law allows for lawful use of non-infringing use of copyright-protected material.

This is fantastic news for everyone, especially iPhone users. The law now makes jailbreaking and unlocking of devices, like the iPhone, legal in the United States, allowing for unauthorized code and programs like Cydia to be run on the device without warranting criminal prosecution. The change will allow for cell phone owners to legally “unlock” their devices for use with other available carriers.

Not only is the law affecting how cell phone owners may use their devices, but college professors, film students and documentary filmmakers may use tools that break copy-protection to use media without legal prosecution.

The list of items includes:

  • Allow owners of used cell phones to break access controls on their phones in order to switch wireless carriers.
  • Allow people to break technical protections on video games to investigate or correct security flaws.
  • Allow college professors, film students and documentary filmmakers to break copy-protection measures on DVDs so they can embed clips for educational purposes, criticism, commentary and noncommercial videos.
  • Allow computer owners to bypass the need for external security devices called dongles if the dongle no longer works and cannot be replaced.
Report a problem with article
Previous Story

HP set to shun Windows Phone 7, use webOS for mobiles

Next Story

Citigroup warns of security flaw in their iPhone mobile banking app

164 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

While I personally like the new ruling very much and think it is about damn time some common sense was used in copyright law, does anyone else besides me see how horrible and dangerous this is?

The Librarian of Congress - a position appointed by the President of the United States, just reversed/altered/changed the meaning of a law passed by Congress with the stroke of a pen. If you ask me this is really a horrible abuse of power - there are separate branches of government - Legislative, Executive, and Judicial specifically so that no one branch can become too powerful. This country was founded on that principle so we would never lose our freedoms under a dictator or monarch.

I'd rather see this change in policy come legitimately from the legislature, and not from the stroke of the executive pen.

The opposite, this new rules are evil. They are NOT ALLOWING to do most task with some minor exception. So, Hacker are still outlawed.

Now that it is legal, they just have to make it illegal for companies to make those things against their Terms of Service. AFAIK unlocking was never illegal.

ArmedMonkey said,
Now that it is legal, they just have to make it illegal for companies to make those things against their Terms of Service. AFAIK unlocking was never illegal.

I can't say I agree with that; unlocking should not be illegal true but that does not mean it should be illegal for a company to not support it. It means if you unlock your device you can't be sued, not that the company should be forced to continue to support that product's warranty and provide service to you.

TRC said,

I can't say I agree with that; unlocking should not be illegal true but that does not mean it should be illegal for a company to not support it. It means if you unlock your device you can't be sued, not that the company should be forced to continue to support that product's warranty and provide service to you.

Though you doubtlessly have the best intentions, that blanket statement does not take into consideration some cases.

Let me explain. As it stands, unlocking your phone won't do anything that can't be undone, in most cases. Obviously if you install custom firmware for it, that's different, but I'll get to it. "locking" a phone is unethical and in my opinion should be illegal, especially if you buy unsubsidized. If you break a contract early, you get charged for it, and then you and the provider are supposed to be 'square' right? So there's no need for the extra protection. They are only doing it as a dirty means of keeping customers.

If it were illegal for ToS to forbid it, unlocking would become easy again, like it was in the old days (where it was just a code to punch in) and it wouldn't be a warranty issue because your software would be unmodified.

They should continue to support the software as long as you are willing (and have not bricked your phone so bad so as to prevent doing so) to go back to 'authorized code'.

ie: "flash back to a standard firmware and we'll talk".

ArmedMonkey said,

Though you doubtlessly have the best intentions, that blanket statement does not take into consideration some cases.

Let me explain. As it stands, unlocking your phone won't do anything that can't be undone, in most cases. Obviously if you install custom firmware for it, that's different, but I'll get to it. "locking" a phone is unethical and in my opinion should be illegal, especially if you buy unsubsidized. If you break a contract early, you get charged for it, and then you and the provider are supposed to be 'square' right? So there's no need for the extra protection. They are only doing it as a dirty means of keeping customers.

If it were illegal for ToS to forbid it, unlocking would become easy again, like it was in the old days (where it was just a code to punch in) and it wouldn't be a warranty issue because your software would be unmodified.

They should continue to support the software as long as you are willing (and have not bricked your phone so bad so as to prevent doing so) to go back to 'authorized code'.

ie: "flash back to a standard firmware and we'll talk".

Should it be illegal for the Playstation 3 to not work on XBox Live? There's no reason it should be illegal for a phone manufacturer to lock their phones, since you are not forced to buy phones from them. If Apple was the only phone manufacturer in the world then yes that would be different but they aren't, you're free to buy a phone from any company you want. It should not be illegal to unlock a phone you purchased, but it should also not be illegal for a company to lock them to begin with. The government has no business in this really since Apple is not a monopoly.

If fair-use was the initial intent, 99,9999% of the people who read this are thinking about piracy and modding. If this law ends up multiplying by tenfolds the number of modders on games networks and end up with my mod-chip is bigger than your mod-chip, thanks but no thanks.
I am tired of 12 y/0 modders/cheaters.

This is unlikely given the provider can still refuse service to modified products. You can do this but it is at your own risk. There just isn't much of a legal threat anymore. As for gaming, if you are that serious about Xbox live or PS3 you might want to think about finding other avenues of entertainment. It is only and simply a game and nothing more.

Vykranth said,
If fair-use was the initial intent, 99,9999% of the people who read this are thinking about piracy and modding. If this law ends up multiplying by tenfolds the number of modders on games networks and end up with my mod-chip is bigger than your mod-chip, thanks but no thanks.
I am tired of 12 y/0 modders/cheaters.


Don't cry... it's ok..

Vykranth said,
If fair-use was the initial intent, 99,9999% of the people who read this are thinking about piracy and modding. If this law ends up multiplying by tenfolds the number of modders on games networks and end up with my mod-chip is bigger than your mod-chip, thanks but no thanks.
I am tired of 12 y/0 modders/cheaters.

I agree with you as far as the 99.99% of people reacting with: "OMG! I can has warez nows!"

Not sure I care about modders and cheaters, though. Both Xbox live and PSN have rules against that and don't allow users with modded consoles to log on, going as far as to ban the console itself from accessing their networks. I'm not sure exactly where you're running into 12 y/o modders and cheaters in that case.

Vykranth said,
If fair-use was the initial intent, 99,9999% of the people who read this are thinking about piracy and modding. If this law ends up multiplying by tenfolds the number of modders on games networks and end up with my mod-chip is bigger than your mod-chip, thanks but no thanks.
I am tired of 12 y/0 modders/cheaters.

No one is talking about getting banned from Xbox live; if you are using a mod chip you SHOULD be banned from those services because they can be used to cheat. We're talking about the law here, as in being able to buy a mod chip without any legal issues. They do have other uses; the original Xbox makes an excellent media center for example. If people want to unlock their console to run unsigned software they should be allowed to; doesn't mean Microsoft should allow them to play online of course.

To all the people who applaud this:

If "in certain circumstances" was added at the end of the headline, you might pay more attention.

It is NOT free reign to rip what you want for your own use. I personally don't care about jailbreaking anything since I have a cell phone (not a smartphone or PDA), so i could care less. Think about that for a minute.

In Australia you can download it. But it must be proved you uploaded the entire thing. Hard feat with Bit Torrent and it's sometimes thousands of parts.

ISP's always send me warnings that can't be enforced though. lol.

Nashy said,
In Australia you can download it. But it must be proved you uploaded the entire thing. Hard feat with Bit Torrent and it's sometimes thousands of parts.

ISP's always send me warnings that can't be enforced though. lol.

Read TPB's legal threats, they are the same, pretty much un-enforceable and the replies are hilarious

Laws always have catches. In my country its legal to download copyrighted material via p2p but its illegal to share which is IMPOSSIBLE since p2p shares automatically.

hackson said,
Laws always have catches. In my country its legal to download copyrighted material via p2p but its illegal to share which is IMPOSSIBLE since p2p shares automatically.

You can always block your client from uploading anything.

Does this mean Lightning UK could actually re-release DVD Decrypter in the states? The professors have to have some tool to break the encryption right?

notta said,
Does this mean Lightning UK could actually re-release DVD Decrypter in the states? The professors have to have some tool to break the encryption right?

Forget it. He's already responded on his forums.

Now if we can just legalize marihoochie we can all sit around baked, watching our 'backup' movies muahahaha ...and who said the US still ain't got it?

Also yesterday a case ruled that DMCA is not preventing any "fair use" like when it prevent you to access something. It's like Blu-ray not working on Component cable. And now this... what i understand is, if we are now having all theses rights to break DRM, why we need to put it by now?

Wow! Looks like the entertainment industry lobbyists didn't make enough campaign contributions recently. This is a step in the right direction for fair use, but there's still more that can be done.

Metodi Mitov said,

How did you reach that conclusion?

"new policy changes that let owners of electronic devices break security protections within the device to allow non-authorized code and programs to be run on the operating system."

Seriously, it's the very first sentence in the article. You know what a mod chip is right?

TRC said,

"new policy changes that let owners of electronic devices break security protections within the device to allow non-authorized code and programs to be run on the operating system."

Seriously, it's the very first sentence in the article. You know what a mod chip is right?

That depends on... "Mod chips for what?" and "What do you understand when you say unauthorized software?"

If you stuff a mod chip in your PS3 to run pirated games, then you're still in the illegal zone, never mind this new law. I don't know if that's what you intend to do, but every time I hear of mod chips, that's what it leads to.

Metodi Mitov said,

That depends on... "Mod chips for what?" and "What do you understand when you say unauthorized software?"

If you stuff a mod chip in your PS3 to run pirated games, then you're still in the illegal zone, never mind this new law. I don't know if that's what you intend to do, but every time I hear of mod chips, that's what it leads to.

Unauthorized software isn't some difficult concept to understand, it's software that the device manufacturer does not normally allow you to run. Emulators for example, which are 100% legal. Homebrew games and other freeware programs, also completely legal. Apple trying to tell you what programs you are allowed to run. They can go take a flying leap. If I buy an iPad (not that I ever would) I'll run whatever I like on it.

You can't make laws based on what people MIGHT do with something. If that were the case blank DVDs would be illegal because they can be (and are) used for piracy. Yet I have no problem walking into a store and buying them. Mod chips are no different, they unlock a device and allow you to run unsigned programs on it, simple as that. Exactly what the article says is now legal to do hence why I brought it up.

guru said,
what about blueray, and consoles? is breaking them legal too

Are you embedding clips of them for educational purposes, criticism, commentary and non-commercial videos? No? That's the answer to your question.

It's about d*mn time! My phone, I should be able to do with it as I please.
My HTC TP2 (tilt2) NEVER was even turned on with the OEM firmware. I didn't allow them to
set it up at the deathstar store. Took it home, blew out the firmware, unlocked it and installed a custom rom from XDA-developers.

Cool318 said,
so this means i can use the phone i used with AT&T with Verizon??

Nope. AT&T / T-Mobile both use GSM, Verizon and Sprint use CDMA.

This also doesn't mean Apple will agree with the decision and stop trying to prevent jailbreaking / unlocking, it just means it's not illegal and you can't be prosecuted for doing so.

That's good news ... Maybe now Realnetworks can release
their DVD app that make a backup of your DVDs now ... I think
it was called RealDVD ... only time will tell ....

GenBlood said,
That's good news ... Maybe now Realnetworks can release
their DVD app that make a backup of your DVDs now ... I think
it was called RealDVD ... only time will tell ....

RTFA?
[QUOTE]Allow college professors, film students and documentary filmmakers to break copy-protection measures on DVDs so they can embed clips for educational purposes, criticism, commentary and noncommercial videos.[/QUOTE]
This doesn't apply to every Tom, Dick, Harry or Joe Schmoe.

GenBlood said,
That's good news ... Maybe now Realnetworks can release
their DVD app that make a backup of your DVDs now ... I think
it was called RealDVD ... only time will tell ....

Real needs to just die, I wouldn't support that company if they paid me to use their products.

GenBlood said,
That's good news ... Maybe now Realnetworks can release
their DVD app that make a backup of your DVDs now ... I think
it was called RealDVD ... only time will tell ....

DVDFab's been out and running for years...

ir0nw0lf said,

RTFA?

This doesn't apply to every Tom, Dick, Harry or Joe Schmoe.


Yes, but those teachers, students, etc. would still require software in order to do this, so this exemption should legalize that software in the US finally.

So does this mean we can legally make backup copies of DVDs now? This is a huge issue for me, I know some people who really mistreat their DVDs, at last its legal for them to make copies for their own use Right?

Angel Blue01 said,
So does this mean we can legally make backup copies of DVDs now? This is a huge issue for me, I know some people who really mistreat their DVDs, at last its legal for them to make copies for their own use Right?

Yes, if your a student or educator for school related work, yes.

This is awesome, but I think people need to perhaps read a little bit better....its not a free pass to do whatever you want, its protecting specific rights and promoting educational uses.

Shadrack said,
Doesn't this go directly against the DMCA?

No. The DMCA authorizes the LOC to periodically review policies and make exemptions like this. It's one of those little known parts of the DMCA that actually is there to protect consumers. Too bad it doesn't allow them to do these reviews more often.

How do they plan to enforce this. Will carriers be required to report jailbroken phones(im not sure if theyre even detectable during activation or w/e)...

And if so..the iphone just became useless lol

Neoauld said,
How do they plan to enforce this. Will carriers be required to report jailbroken phones(im not sure if theyre even detectable during activation or w/e)...

And if so..the iphone just became useless lol


Read the title again (;

Neoauld said,
How do they plan to enforce this. Will carriers be required to report jailbroken phones(im not sure if theyre even detectable during activation or w/e)...

And if so..the iphone just became useless lol

Oops. xD

schiz-o-phren-ic said,
Chalk one up for us!

I'm curious though... how does this affect unlocking/JBing as far as voiding Apple warranty...

Why don't you try reading other comments before asking.

xpablo said,
WOW! Talk about opening a can of worms!

Actually, this nails shut the can of worms that the DMCA opened up. One thing that copyright holders and their representatives (RIAA and US Copyright Group, anyone?) had been notorious for doing was engaging in lawsuit-bombing against non-commercial copyholders of ripped audio and video; this tactic is now blocked. Criminal penalties against such content holders are also rendered moot.

"Jailbreaking/rooting" of cellular phones is also addressed by this decision (and made legal for the phone's owner). While carriers are still free to block jailbroken and otherwise non-stock phones, that has to be explicitly stated in the carrier's TOS/AUP; further, it puts the onus on the *carrier* to detect and block such phones if they have such a provision. (While Apple has stated that the jailbreaking or rooting of an iPhone voids the device warranty, AT&T Mobility does not, contrary to opinion, explicitly bar jailbroken iPhones or iPads. None of the other major US cellular carriers has a policy barring jailbroken or rooted phones; yes, this includes VZW, Sprint, and T-Mobile USA.) Apple is free to void the warranty of a jailbroken iPhone/iPad.

PGHammer said,

Actually, this nails shut the can of worms that the DMCA opened up. One thing that copyright holders and their representatives (RIAA and US Copyright Group, anyone?) had been notorious for doing was engaging in lawsuit-bombing against non-commercial copyholders of ripped audio and video; this tactic is now blocked. Criminal penalties against such content holders are also rendered moot.

I don't think so. Show me examples of what you're talking about. They only go after file sharers AFAIK.

aarste said,
Will DVD Decrypter come back now?

Considering Macrovision (copy protection company) bought out the technology and the product from the creator, I doubt it.

The title of this story needs to be completely changed, as mentioned above, this doesn't give the public at large the right to bust DVD protections. Poorly worded title.

ir0nw0lf said,
The title of this story needs to be completely changed, as mentioned above, this doesn't give the public at large the right to bust DVD protections. Poorly worded title.

The decision came earlier today as The Library of Congress Copyright Office reviews and authorizes exemptions for electronic devices and copyright material to ensure that the current law allows for lawful use of non-infringing use of copyright-protected material.

Ripping a DVD for your own purposes (converting to other formats) is considered fair use anyway, so I'm assuming this new change would protect that.

ir0nw0lf said,
The title of this story needs to be completely changed, as mentioned above, this doesn't give the public at large the right to bust DVD protections. Poorly worded title.

I agree, such a sensational title is just poor reporting...

ir0nw0lf said,
The title of this story needs to be completely changed, as mentioned above, this doesn't give the public at large the right to bust DVD protections. Poorly worded title.

Ripping a DVD you purchased to make a backup or convert to a format for another device you own is not infringing and is fair use. The title didn't say it's ok to rip DVDs and share them with people or sell copies, so there's nothing wrong with it.

I hope people understand this is mainly for educational purposes. Though, I wonder what this means for YouTube videos. Of course, uploading full movies is still illegal, but what about short clips (ex. a favorite scene in a movie)?

xiphi said,
I hope people understand this is mainly for educational purposes. Though, I wonder what this means for YouTube videos. Of course, uploading full movies is still illegal, but what about short clips (ex. a favorite scene in a movie)?

YouTube, as a private entity, can choose to delete whatever clips they want. So, I doubt any change in the immediate future.

xiphi said,
I hope people understand this is mainly for educational purposes. Though, I wonder what this means for YouTube videos. Of course, uploading full movies is still illegal, but what about short clips (ex. a favorite scene in a movie)?

It's called *fair-use* (educational institutions and personal usage; in fact, all non-commercial use), and was specifically addressed under the Home Audio Recording Rights Act (part of the aftermath of the "Betamax decision" by the United States Supreme Court). The LOCCO got handed the hot potato under the DMCA, as all previous attempts to keep things as they had been under the DMCA failed in the courts or never made it out of Congress alive. (This provision passed court muster because this is an arm of the legislative branch.)

While the Library is *chartered* by Congress, like any other public library, it keeps regular hours, and is easily accessible by the general public (there is also an online component - http://thomas.loc.gov).

OMG, NO WAY!!!! How did anything like this ever pass?!!! It is completely amazing and great!!!! Someone must have thought the bills said "illegal" and passed them through. Oh well, Win for us

Thats it I'm moving to the US, great result.

Now just need it to be illegal for companies to release updates which breaks jailbreaking/rooting/etc <looks at you Sony, Apple, et al>

So while it doesn't make the actions illegal, I read it as also not forcing said companies into trying to prevent you from circumventing their systems, for example:

You won't be unbanned from Xbox Live
New iPhone updates will still brick your jailbreak
Just because you've rooted a phone doesn't mean the competing wireless carrier needs to accept it on their infrastructure (GSM exempt for obvious reasons)

Of course, I don't recall too many cases in which people went to jail for doing these things. It was what they did in conjunction with these things that forced authorities to move.

Troll said,
So while it doesn't make the actions illegal, I read it as also not forcing said companies into trying to prevent you from circumventing their systems, for example:

You won't be unbanned from Xbox Live
New iPhone updates will still brick your jailbreak
Just because you've rooted a phone doesn't mean the competing wireless carrier needs to accept it on their infrastructure (GSM exempt for obvious reasons)

Of course, I don't recall too many cases in which people went to jail for doing these things. It was what they did in conjunction with these things that forced authorities to move.

Yes; new iPhone updates *can* still brick a jailbroken iPhone (this is still permitted). However, that would be an absolute disaster from a court-of-public-opinion standpoint (note that this is something no Android handset maker, or carrier, has ever done).

XBL bans can hold up (the bans were due to AUP/TOS violations), and a carrier *can* specifically bar jailbroken phones under AUP/TOS provisions (the ruling did clarify that); however, the penalties are now civil, rather than criminal, in nature.

thealexweb said,
So can Americans ask the carrier to unlock their phones for free?

I'm not a legal expert but I would assume so. I would also assume the carrier will tell you no.
"Allow owners of used cell phones to break access controls" - As soon as you buy a phone it's "used".

thealexweb said,
So can Americans ask the carrier to unlock their phones for free?

Knowing carriers, I doubt any of them would do it for free. They'd probably want to charge you 50% of the cost of a new phone. But, it looks like if you want to do it yourself, you're apparently now allowed to do so.

Hackersoft MS MVP said,

I'm not a legal expert but I would assume so. I would also assume the carrier will tell you no.
"Allow owners of used cell phones to break access controls" - As soon as you buy a phone it's "used".

Maybe the key section is the "allow owners" meaning the carriers are not bound to do it for you.

Ironman273 said,

Maybe the key section is the "allow owners" meaning the carriers are not bound to do it for you.

It used to be that as long as the device wasn't under any contract terms that they were required to unlock it for you if asked. (If you've met the discount obligations it's your phone!)
Whether they'll do it or not is a different story.

Every time I have called ATT and asked them to unlock the phone, they have. Never charged me anything, or hassled me. Maybe I'm just lucky, but they've unlocked 4 phones for me in the last 2 years.

thealexweb said,
So can Americans ask the carrier to unlock their phones for free?
Does this mean Apple will allow/provide some method to do so or at least stop breaking it with updates?

homeboy rocketshoulders said,
Every time I have called ATT and asked them to unlock the phone, they have. Never charged me anything, or hassled me. Maybe I'm just lucky, but they've unlocked 4 phones for me in the last 2 years.

O2 in the UK are the same. They'll unlock your iphone as soon as you buy it, free of charge. But, of course, you're still tied into the contract so O2 are getting paid either way.

Hackersoft MS MVP said,

I'm not a legal expert but I would assume so. I would also assume the carrier will tell you no.
"Allow owners of used cell phones to break access controls" - As soon as you buy a phone it's "used".

Actually, not even AT&T Mobility (their cell-ohone arm) explicitly blocks jailbroken phones (even iPhones). VZW has no policy anywhere on the subject. They are certainly free to do so (the policy change in no way blocks that sort of action); however, is there any way, from the carrier end, to tell a jailbroken handset from one that isn't?

I wonder if Apple will unlock carrier access for iPhone in the next OS release? This will effectively kill exclusivity when it comes to cellphones.

hagjohn said,
I wonder if Apple will unlock carrier access for iPhone in the next OS release? This will effectively kill exclusivity when it comes to cellphones.

It's unlocked everywhere else in the world on the iPhone 4, except America.

hagjohn said,
I wonder if Apple will unlock carrier access for iPhone in the next OS release? This will effectively kill exclusivity when it comes to cellphones.

This doesn't say anything about regulating the manufactures and providers of cell phones to STOP locking their devices down. I believe that both Apple and AT&T can also (legally) refuse service to iPhone users who jailbreak. Just because you can't be criminally prosecuted does not mean that you cannot be in breach of a contract (EULA).

Shadrack said,

This doesn't say anything about regulating the manufactures and providers of cell phones to STOP locking their devices down. I believe that both Apple and AT&T can also (legally) refuse service to iPhone users who jailbreak. Just because you can't be criminally prosecuted does not mean that you cannot be in breach of a contract (EULA).

And you will be. Last time I checked, both AT&T and Apple already had clauses stating that jailbreaking will void the warranty on the device.

snelson said,
That's awesome! Somehow I don't see this lasting long.

Imagine how awkward that would be if Obama overruled and did a u-turn to please lobbyists.

Jack E said,
Great news, now I just need the UK to take the same stance. =/

Good luck with that, David Cameron likes people like Rupert Murdoch, that's why he's effectively caving in to him and stripping Ofcom of most of its powers so Sky can do what it wants.

Jack E said,
Great news, now I just need the UK to take the same stance. =/

Weather they take the same stance or not I'm still going to be ripping my DVDs for personal use.

3Grey said,

Weather they take the same stance or not I'm still going to be ripping my DVDs for personal use.

True but maybe we won't get those pointless FBI warnings and such on them lol

0sm3l said,

True but maybe we won't get those pointless FBI warnings and such on them lol

Did you read the article or just the title? Copying DVDs for yourself and/or for resale is still illegal. As such there is no reason for the FBI warning to be removed.

Jack E said,
Great news, now I just need the UK to take the same stance. =/

The copyright lobby is working over-time in parliament, unfortunately. According to Tom Watson MP (Lab, West Bromwich East) lobbyists have been outnumbering MPs 4:1 on the issue and spending millions of pounds on single bills (i.e. the Digital Economy Act).

Julian Huppert (Lib Dem, Cambridge) is starting an all-party parliamentary group on the internet and intellectual property and Tom Watson is on the DCMS Select Committee - both are very clued up individuals in this matter. It may be worth writing to your MP to explain why copyright sucks, what can be done about it and to contact one of those two for more information.

3Grey said,

Weather they take the same stance or not I'm still going to be ripping my DVDs for personal use.

If you are in the United States, this is now specifically permitted. It's now back to a cat-and-mouse game, with the copyright holders and handset makers no longer with that DMCA sledge in their arsenal with which to pop personal jailbreaking and copiers with. Carriers can *still* block jailbroken devices via the AUP/TOS, but that's all.

You can bet there is much gnashing of teeth over this.

Does this jailbreaking and unlocking won't be a taboo subject on neowin anymore since it's legal in the country where neowin is based?

thealexweb said,
Does this jailbreaking and unlocking won't be a taboo subject on neowin anymore since it's legal in the country where neowin is based?

It never was a restricted subject on Neowin

Sticktron said,
Jailbreaking never WAS illegal, only in breach of Apple's Terms of Service.

That's my favorite part. Suck it Apple.

Isn't ACTA or whatever it's called tryin to ban this at the present time? This seems like it came outta no where. Good news if it stays, I'm sure many companies will be upset over it.

Ryoken said,
Now just make not-for-profit filesharing legal and you'd have a real win.

Exactly. but i don't ever see this happening in the foreseeable future sadly.

chisss said,
wow... i'm speechless...

Yeah I had to do a double take on the title! This is immense news for everyone since it restores a lot of ownership back to the people who buy the products, and its a big step away from this "you don't own the device, you're just licensing it from us" culture that the mobile carriers and manufacturers have been moving towards for a long time.

Do bear in mind the restrictions that King Alexo pointed out though below. There are restrictions on these laws.

The title is very misleading though,the last 4 points show the real government "decision". Other than jailbreaking, the government did not legalize unlocking and DVD ripping in general, only very, very specific cases. Its good news, but its not unbelievable.

Majesticmerc said,

Yeah I had to do a double take on the title! This is immense news for everyone since it restores a lot of ownership back to the people who buy the products, and its a big step away from this "you don't own the device, you're just licensing it from us" culture that the mobile carriers and manufacturers have been moving towards for a long time.

Do bear in mind the restrictions that King Alexo pointed out though below. There are restrictions on these laws.

I was thinking it was April 1 in some sort of time travel situation. lol

EyasSH said,
The title is very misleading though,the last 4 points show the real government "decision". Other than jailbreaking, the government did not legalize unlocking and DVD ripping in general, only very, very specific cases. Its good news, but its not unbelievable.

exactly. but at least they headed in the right direction for once instead of the usual...

'screw the little guy and help the big corporations' mentality

EyasSH said,
The title is very misleading though,the last 4 points show the real government "decision". Other than jailbreaking, the government did not legalize unlocking and DVD ripping in general, only very, very specific cases. Its good news, but its not unbelievable.

+1

chisss said,
wow... i'm speechless...

The only good thing about the US Government, but other then that there still crooks undercover.