vB Easy Archive - Is what Apple has done legal?

Pages: 1

Is what Apple has done legal?
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Red Setter

The research I've been doing tells me a resounding NO

You can read the entire article Here but let me give you the Cliff Notes version:

That it is legal to unlock your phone is a given

The unlock in and of itself does no damage the phone. The ulocked phoned were functioning perfectly fine prior to the firmware update

Quote:

Does this do damage to iPhone? There is no evidence that it does. The part of the baseband that is modified only controls SIM unlocks. For Apple to void the warranty, they would have to provide clear technical evidence and documentation... something Apple has not yet provided. Until they do, this appears to be an initial violation of Magnuson-Moss. It's no different from putting a third-party part in a car that does not damage or inhibit any other part of the car. Furthermore, it is valid and has been ruled as not a DMCA violation by the U.S. Copyright Office, so there is no tainted hand argument either.

The baseband firmware can be re-flashed and re-locked to AT&T's network. However, Apple is currently holding that any iPhone that has ever been attempted to unlocked has a voided warranty.Apple is currently holding that any iPhone that has ever been attempted to unlocked has a voided warranty. In short, if Apple changes that position to simply requiring that the iPhone be re-locked to AT&T, they are back in compliance with the law.

If an update can, unintentionally, do damage, is again a question Apple must answer before rendering iPhone's warranty void. And, Apple is legally required to prove it... at least on the civil grounds of more-likely-than-not. If Apple will release an update that intentionally detects the baseband modification, and then does damage iPhones that have it is more simple to answer; they could, but it's illegal for them to do so. Magnuson-Moss prevents Apple from intentionally voiding the warranty based on the presence of a modification. Extrapolating from that, it also prevents them from damaging other components of iPhone (such as Boot ROM or baseband components) simply because the modification has been detected (which an updater can detect by checksumming the baseband).

Quote:

The conclusion here is simple: Apple has, at least in a minor and reversible way, violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Apple should take action to correct their policy, and require that iPhone customers seeking warranty service, return their iPhone's to locked condition. Apple could also release a software tool that aides in this process, though legally they are not required to... it would make the job of the Genius Bar easier to have such a tool in-house.

Class action suit anyone?

Posted by: free_gas

Yes what they have done is perfectly LEGAL.

Also AT&T can boot you off the network if they want to just for fun! for any reason with any phone.

Even the sealed battery is legal.

-Apple was even nice enough to tell everybody that phones will be bricked before they released the update.

Posted by: kaplanfx

Yeah I really don't think this was malicious. They are likely contractually obligated with AT&T to attempt to protect the phones from being unlocked. They did give clear and fair warning that the updates may break the unlocked phones, you have every right not to upgrade your firmware.

-kap

Posted by: samab

Of course what Apple is doing is legal.

The original Phonenews.com article was written by a non-lawyer.

Both Gizmodo and Wired.com followed up on the original phonenews.com article by actually talking to a number of lawyers --- and both websites have published that what Apple is doing is within the law.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/pr-bluff...l-bs-303459.php

http://blog.wired.com/business/2007...s-iphone-w.html

Posted by: flyingdutchman

There is no law breaking here, not even on a civil basis. Sorry.

Posted by: Leo J

Honestly I say Apple is 100% correct and within their legal right, everybody wants to be a scammer and slickster to unlock the phone.

Posted by: walt1984

It became legal as soon as you agreed to the terms and condition when you activated....then again before the update. They certainly gave fair warning to everyone. It is Apple's job to help maintain exclusivity with AT&T.

Posted by: FL1134

You can still:

1. Don't buy Apple products ever again.

Stop supporting/buying proprietary software.

2. Don't use ATT wireless ever again.

Support "open access" spectrum and try to use the "least evil" provider you can. File a complaint with the FCC about how the wireless market and spectrum is not being utilized to the publics best interest.

3. Tell as many people you can also to do #1 & #2

Posted by: Red Setter

Quote:

Originally Posted by walt1984

It became legal as soon as you agreed to the terms and condition when you activated....then again before the update. They certainly gave fair warning to everyone. It is Apple's job to help maintain exclusivity with AT&T.

I gree up to a point

For myself - I am not looking for Apple to do anything - althought I'd have been willing to pay them to reflash the phone

But I do believe they are skating on the edge of the law here

I signed a EULA, I read it when I signed it. I adhered to the EULA. My phones are all on AT&T. That I wanted the ability to - at my discretion - use the phone on another netowrk if my right

I am not canceling my ATT coverage. I'm not defaulting on my ATT bills. They're all still getting their full price from me.

If you want to void the warranty, Ok do it. I don't happen to believe you have thelegal right to fr something like 3rd party apps but Ok... At least offer me the option of PAYING for the repair. If I dropped the phone and cracked the glass, the warranty would be void and I'd have to pay to repair it. That's fine. Same with any other hardware. I'm not looking for a free fix

Theyre not even doing that - and that's where I feel theyre going wrong.

Posted by: beeenieweeenie

Quote:

Originally Posted by FL1134

1. Don't buy Apple products ever again.

That is exactly what I intend on doing. I didn't buy an iphone, my husband has one though. I considered it briefly but the lack of customization ability was a huge turn off. Then I considered purchasing an ipod touch because I do like the video capabilities, but then once I realized how truly evil apple is, I just decided I will download a 3rd party app to watch video on my Treo.

Apple is not merely unsupportive of 3rd party apps & unlocking, they are maliciously trying to stop them. I agree with those who say Apple updates can't support 3rd party apps. However there is a difference between not supporting them and what Apple did with that update.

And with that, Apple can rest assured that they won't receive a dime of the money I spend on electronics, EVER.

Steve Jobs, you are on the list buddy.

Posted by: samab

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Setter

But I do believe they are skating on the edge of the law here.

Apple is nowhere near the edge of the law here.

At the very least, Apple has not sued you personally for copyright infringement yet. You are only protected from DMCA lawsuits --- you are not protected from copyright infringement lawsuit.

Posted by: Red Setter

Quote:

Originally Posted by walt1984

No it didn't.

Thats where I see the difference

They did not have the legal right to knowingly issue an update that would damage phones that were otherwise functioning and then refuse to offer a remedy - even an at cost fix. What the update did borders on vindictive - a "We'll show you who has the last laugh" kind of thing.

I'm not arguing that I should have known better - Ive concded that fact. I knew the risks and I pressed the button - it's on me. This is just an intellectual discussion of what I believe is right and wrong.

I have a paperweight - I accept that and am waiting till the Dev Team comes up with a fix - if they come up with a fix. if they dont.. I wanted an 8GB iTouch anyway :P

That I acceot it doesn't mean I can't still discuss whether its fair, right or wrong or legal

Posted by: klaze-mot

YOU ARE NOT UNLOCKING YOUR PHONE!

You are taking advantage of a BUG a FLAW a MISTAKE in the phones firmware.

It is Apples responsibility if they find a BUG in their code to fix it.

Why did you update even tho Apple told you not to?

Maybe if Apple didn't give anyone a warning and then months later it was released quietly that AT&T told apple to teach these "hackers" a lesson and release a patch that would lock or brick our phones without us knowing tricking us..

than they might have a legal problem..

Posted by: samab

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Setter

They did not have the legal right to knowingly issue an update that would damage phones that were otherwise functioning and then refuse to offer a remedy - even an at cost fix. What the update did borders on vindictive - a "We'll show you who has the last laugh" kind of thing.

"Knowingly" is a loaded word. Apple didn't nuke every unlocked iphone in existence --- iphones that were unlock by the paid unlocked service (iPhoneSimFree) did not get bricked at all.

What? You expect Apple to download every unlocking solution to test out against their firmware update.

Posted by: harlenm

The problem here is that Apple is applying an update that is meant to update the previous versions of the phone's software. However, modification to the software causes problems with the ability to update to the newest version. Therefore, it is possible that the update won't work properly, and you'll be left with a phone that is bricked.

That's like modifying your computer with new components, and then updating to Windows Vista, and not having compatible drivers for the new components you added. The computer won't work properly afterwards, and it's no ones fault but your own for not knowing it.

Posted by: kilofox

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Setter

I believe PT Barnum said it best, "You pays your quarter, you takes your chances."

Posted by: ericdraven

Here's something to read....

http://machinist.salon.com/blog/200.../unlock_iphone/

Just a part of the story...

But it's clear that the company is playing hardball. Even if hackers manage to re-unlock phones now -- which they almost certainly will -- and even if Apple reauthorizes the broken phones, the firm has certainly made its position clear: Don't dare use your phone in a way we don't allow.

Posted by: klaze-mot

This is being completely blown out of proportion..

Apple is not acting any different from any other Hardware/software manufacturer that has products that are hacked/modified..

Posted by: Ishimaru

Quote:

Originally Posted by klaze-mot

This is being completely blown out of proportion..

Apple is not acting any different from any other Hardware/software manufacturer that has products that are hacked/modified..

Hmm, I don't remember Sony purposely bricking PSP's with modded firmware...

Posted by: breaksraver13

Quote:

Originally Posted by harlenm

The problem here is that Apple is applying an update that is meant to update the previous versions of the phone's software. However, modification to the software causes problems with the ability to update to the newest version. Therefore, it is possible that the update won't work properly, and you'll be left with a phone that is bricked.

That's like modifying your computer with new components, and then updating to Windows Vista, and not having compatible drivers for the new components you added. The computer won't work properly afterwards, and it's no ones fault but your own for not knowing it.

I'm not buying this for a second WinMo, Symbian, Palm, RIM....they all do updates and don't brick phones because of 3rd party apps........What happened here was MALICIOUS to the fullest extent............all you people can go and say "its legal, its legal" and sure it probably is but, damn, what a way to piss of the people that pay your bills.............Apple has always been about customer service and they have surely thrown that out the window

Posted by: richy240

Jesus H Christ people, you didn't HAVE to buy the iPhone. I don't like what Apple's done, but I took my chances when I bought, hacked, and unlocked the device.

Quit with the "is this legal" threads. You bought it, Apple did it, STFU!

Posted by: harlenm

Quote:

Originally Posted by breaksraver13

We aren't talking about 3rd party software, we are talking about people that have modified the firmware of the phone to unlock it.

That's completely different.

Posted by: breaksraver13

Quote:

Originally Posted by harlenm

We aren't talking about 3rd party software, we are talking about people that have modified the firmware of the phone to unlock it.

That's completely different.

The unlocking stuff I'm in agreement with...........I knew that I was getting a locked phone, No biggie, Verizon does it all the time..............But as I say the 3rd party apps was malicious because they weren't getting PAID for them........It just depresses me.......But, I'm sticking with 1.0.2

Posted by: FourOhFour

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ishimaru

Hmm, I don't remember Sony purposely bricking PSP's with modded firmware...

I don't remember Apple purposely bricking iPhones with modded firmware.

If Apple were purposely bricking unlocked iPhones, do you really think iPhones unlocked with the pay one would have been safe?

If a modded firmware messed up the PSP's firmware in a way that broke a Sony update, do you really think Sony would honor the warranty?

Posted by: turbo-sc

Quote:

Originally Posted by free_gas

Yes what they have done is perfectly LEGAL.

Also AT&T can boot you off the network if they want to just for fun! for any reason with any phone.

Even the sealed battery is legal.

-Apple was even nice enough to tell everybody that phones will be bricked before they released the update.

Its perfectly legal. Im surprised att didnt make a big deal out of the unlocks. I think they handled it well.

Posted by: Aurora

Too many people (on both sides) pretending they are lawyers. I'm tired of hearing this childish argument.