A Web site operator has sued Apple seeking protection for online discussions of ways to circumvent iTunes.
(Credit: Apple)Apple has been sued by the operator of a wiki site over legal threats Apple made to stifle discussion of iTunes workarounds.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation announced Monday that OdioWorks, which runs a Web site called Bluwiki, has sued Apple in hopes of securing a legal ruling that would allow it to host discussions regarding the use of alternative music software to manage an iPod or iPhone. Earlier this year, Apple sent OdioWorks a cease-and-desist letter invoking the Digital Millennium Copyright Act after Bluwiki users began discussing a plan to develop software that could sync music or videos to iPods or iPhones from sources other than iTunes.
OdioWorks complied with the request to remove the discussions, but now wants legal cover to continue those discussions. According to a copy of the complaint (PDF) filed against Apple, none of the discussions had advanced as far as to constitute development of a way to bypass iTunes.
Apple recently told the U.S. Copyright Office that it believes iPhone jailbreaking is a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and infringes on its copyright, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Jailbreaking an iPhone with software like Installer.app or Cydia constitutes copyright infringement, according to Apple.
(Credit: CNET Networks)The EFF is trying to get the Copyright Office to grant a DMCA exemption on behalf of iPhone owners who have chosen to jailbreak their iPhones, or bypass the restriction Apple places on standard iPhones that only allows the installation of applications from approved sources: the App Store. In its response to the Copyright Office (click here for PDF), Apple disagreed that such an exemption was proper because the very act of jailbreaking the iPhone results in copyright infringement.
Current jailbreak techniques now in widespread use utilize unauthorized modifications to the copyrighted bootloader and OS, resulting in the infringement of the copyrights in those programs. For example, the current most popular jailbreaking software for the iPhone, PwnageTool (cited by the EFF in its submission) causes a modified bootloader and OS to be installed in the iPhone, resulting in the infringement of Apple's reproduction and derivative works rights.
The EFF's argument is that jailbreaking your iPhone is protected under fair-use doctrines, and that the Copyright Office should grant an exemption because "the culture of tinkering (or hacking, if you prefer) is an important part of our innovation economy." But Apple's response is that few users of jailbroken iPhones actually jailbroke it themselves; instead, they downloaded software created by other parties to make that happen.
Don't expect Apple to come knocking on your door if you're using a jailbroken iPhone; they used a similar argument in the Psystar case and no one has confiscated my Open Computer yet. But Apple could be trying to build momentum behind the recognition of jailbreaking that does more harm than good; already this week, iPhone developers have been discussing writing software that only works on jailed iPhones as a way of preventing application bootlegging.
- prev
- 1
- next
