DMCA Fair Use act

[moutaindewdope]

It is my understanding that with the New DMCA act, if I have a phone thats CDMA capable, as well as a Valid contract with a CDMA wireless network, that under fair use exception I can use that phone on that network?

If this is true, when do the wireless carriers have to comply with this, and remove the blacklist preventing me from using my Sprint Phones on verizon networks?

 

[kyler13]

The act covers the legality of unlocking your phone. It has nothing to do with ESN blacklisting which basically falls under "right to refuse service". Sorry. Unfortunately this is a far more useful law for SIM-based GSM networks where the network ID is separate from the device.

 

[Josh2]

Probably the wrong place to ask but could I use a EVO on verizon?

 

[codeyh]

Probably the wrong place to ask but could I use a EVO on verizon?

No.

 

[Hangdog42]

The act covers the legality of unlocking your phone. It has nothing to do with ESN blacklisting which basically falls under "right to refuse service". Sorry. Unfortunately this is a far more useful law for SIM-based GSM networks where the network ID is separate from the device.

Actually the DMCA has nothing whatsoever to do with phones (it is about copyrights), and that was the reason for the recent court ruling. Among other things, the DMCA prohibits circumventing DRM restrictions, and the morons at Apple were claiming that jailbreaking was equivalent to circumventing DRM. The court didn't buy that argument and said the DCMA simply doesn't apply.

 

[najaboy]

Actually the DMCA has nothing whatsoever to do with phones (it is about copyrights), and that was the reason for the recent court ruling. Among other things, the DMCA prohibits circumventing DRM restrictions, and the morons at Apple were claiming that jailbreaking was equivalent to circumventing DRM. The court didn't buy that argument and said the DCMA simply doesn't apply.

Not quite...

There was no ruling regarding the applicability. The ruling was in regards to a alwful use exception to the DMCA.

 

[Hangdog42]

Correction on my part, it wasn't a court case, it was the Library of Congress (where the Copyright Office lives) issuing an exception for the DMCA. This exception allows:

Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications, when they have been lawfully obtained, with computer programs on the telephone handset.

Basically, according to the Copyright office, the DMCA doesn't apply to an individual jailbreaking their phone. What is less clear is the status of people providing tools that are used to jailbreak. Those may still be illegal under the DMCA.

 

[Old Man]

Actually, the portion relating to using handsets on other carriers is the next paragraph after the one quoted, which seems to apply more to apps. I believe the general idea behind this interpretation was that the software or firmware involved did not represent a sufficiently unique work to be protected under the DMCA. It was not actually addressing the legality of jailbreaking or anything else, only whether the software was copyright protected by the DMCA or not.

Thus I interpret it to be saying that circumventing any protection on a used phone to access the software in order to activate that phone with another carrier with whom you have a legal contract is not a DMCA violation. However, as previously noted, it is not saying that such protection is not allowed or that circumventing it is acceptable or that circumvention must be allowed. And the specific limitation to used phones is interesting as I'm not quite sure of the related definition for a "used" phone.