• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

DMCA strikes again

Another Engadget misquote.

The finding was that jailbreaking eReaders comes into question because it takes them into the tablet space.

How they arrived at that or if it's really going to stand is another matter.
 
Can you still get your carrier to unlock phone? I hand mine down to kid in UK. We are GSM. Will Google be allowed to sell Nexus? Can I still buy unlocked European from Amazon?

Specific Ereaders usually belong to a bookstore. Amazon has Kindle, B&N has Nook and someone else picked up what Borders had. Not sure what Google books does, but it doesn't have a reader only device.

Amazon just wiped someone's Kindle in EU - gave books back, but won't say why.
If you jailbreak, they have no control over what is on the Ereader. Jailbreak and new ROM should wipe out any of the calling home apps they use. I had it out with B&N over some third party crap in the TOS. I did own a Nook, but never bought any books from either Amazon or B&N. I use Baen, Creative Commons, Obooko, etc. As long as it did EPUB and PDF, I was fine. B&N didn't like it. I won't bother with B&N or Amazon apps, either. I'll buy print from Amazon, but that's it.

I did some other reading and it just might have to do with copyright. If you have a US Kindle and US credit card, you can buy books from the US wherever. The lady whose Kindle got wiped was Norwegian, and she bought books from the UK. So maybe copyright between all countries is the point. If not copyright, then maybe tax. Amazon UK has a rather nice tax fiddle.

news.techeye.net/internet/amazon-steals-cash-from-british-customers. This is a couple of days old and won't hyperlink.

We are anti-social, unAmerican, and probably terrorists according to one marketing idiot. (This was over IE "do not track") We just don't make their lives easy since most of us prefer to do our own thinking. Right, wrong or indifferent, at least most here HAVE an opinion and can state WHY they have that opinion. Not just parrot.
 
zuben el genub said:
Can you still get your carrier to unlock phone? I hand mine down to kid in UK. We are GSM. Will Google be allowed to sell Nexus? Can I still buy unlocked European from Amazon?

Specific Ereaders usually belong to a bookstore. Amazon has Kindle, B&N has Nook and someone else picked up what Borders had. Not sure what Google books does, but it doesn't have a reader only device.

Amazon just wiped someone's Kindle in EU - gave books back, but won't say why.
If you jailbreak, they have no control over what is on the Ereader. Jailbreak and new ROM should wipe out any of the calling home apps they use. I had it out with B&N over some third party crap in the TOS. I did own a Nook, but never bought any books from either Amazon or B&N. I use Baen, Creative Commons, Obooko, etc. As long as it did EPUB and PDF, I was fine. B&N didn't like it. I won't bother with B&N or Amazon apps, either. I'll buy print from Amazon, but that's it.

We are anti-social, unAmerican, and probably terrorists according to one marketing idiot. (This was over IE "do not track") We just don't make their lives easy since most of us prefer to do our own thinking. Right, wrong or indifferent, at least most here HAVE an opinion and can state WHY they have that opinion. Not just parrot.
Click to expand...

Yes carriers can still unlock phones. Yes Google can still sell unlocked phones.



For more information check out android police. They do a much better job at this than endagadet
 
Rooting/jail breaking isn't going anywhere anytime son.

The only reason tablets aren't allowed is because they are well defined enough yet.

Glad I own a nexus 7. Not illegal to root
 
A big part of the issue here is jailbreaking, because that's what drove the decision forward.

When you jailbreak an iPhone, you can circumvent copy protection. (And I'm not disparaging the many fine jailbreakers who don't do that, I'm simply stating a fact.)

When you root an Android product, you can lose access to DRM material. It's more rare these days, but the cases are there and well known, the companies won't take the chance.

Unlike jailbreaking, rooting doesn't remove you from our Google ecosystem the way jailbreaking an iDevice removes you from Apple's.

When you root an eReader, you go from being locked to one content provider into getting access to all of them, courtesy of the Kindle, Nook, Play Store and Amazon apps.

Because federal decision makers are uninformed on this point, we've been lumped into jailbreaking when we ought not have been in the first place. To my knowledge, no content provider ever said that rooting led to DRM bypass - indeed, as I mentioned, they can detect and choose to not do business with you.

It was in the Apple world that the jailbreaking as a gateway to theft issue first surfaced.

To protect us, it was thought that lumping us in with the jailbreakers was a good protection for us.

In point of fact - the term itself doesn't apply to our community.

Rooting an eReader or owning an Android device gives access to more copyright content legally, not the other way around.

Because the heart of the matter is about protecting the entertainment industry, I think a competent study and competent argument could be easily made that we're simply not the same case.

Words mean things.

The piracy problem that Android presents, being a Linux offshoot, is the same problem they face on desk and laptops - downloading content illegally. And they're already fighting that on a separate front.

And what drove this decision?

Some years ago, a Linux library came about that lets you watch movies on a Linux PC, same as you could on a Windows or Mac PC. And that wasn't sanctioned by anyone.

The decision here was part of the hearing concerning that library on the Linux desktop.

Without a DVD player, we fall under the same category as making a personal copy of a cd to play in a car - perfectly fine and that's already been challenged and upheld for us.

Again - the blogosphere is mucking this up a lot, and it probably doesn't help that the parties involved in the decision find the blogosphere sensationalism as believable.

In my opinion, I'm not speaking for the site, thanks.
 
EarlyMon said:
A big part of the issue here is jailbreaking, because that's what drove the decision forward.

When you jailbreak an iPhone, you can circumvent copy protection. (And I'm not disparaging the many fine jailbreakers who don't do that, I'm simply stating a fact.)

When you root an Android product, you can lose access to DRM material. It's more rare these days, but the cases are there and well known, the companies won't take the chance.

Unlike jailbreaking, rooting doesn't remove you from our Google ecosystem the way jailbreaking an iDevice removes you from Apple's.

When you root an eReader, you go from being locked to one content provider into getting access to all of them, courtesy of the Kindle, Nook, Play Store and Amazon apps.

Because federal decision makers are uninformed on this point, we've been lumped into jailbreaking when we ought not have been in the first place. To my knowledge, no content provider ever said that rooting led to DRM bypass - indeed, as I mentioned, they can detect and choose to not do business with you.

It was in the Apple world that the jailbreaking as a gateway to theft issue first surfaced.

To protect us, it was thought that lumping us in with the jailbreakers was a good protection for us.

In point of fact - the term itself doesn't apply to our community.

Rooting an eReader or owning an Android device gives access to more copyright content legally, not the other way around.

Because the heart of the matter is about protecting the entertainment industry, I think a competent study and competent argument could be easily made that we're simply not the same case.

Words mean things.

The piracy problem that Android presents, being a Linux offshoot, is the same problem they face on desk and laptops - downloading content illegally. And they're already fighting that on a separate front.

And what drove this decision?

Some years ago, a Linux library came about that lets you watch movies on a Linux PC, same as you could on a Windows or Mac PC. And that wasn't sanctioned by anyone.

The decision here was part of the hearing concerning that library on the Linux desktop.

Without a DVD player, we fall under the same category as making a personal copy of a cd to play in a car - perfectly fine and that's already been challenged and upheld for us.

Again - the blogosphere is mucking this up a lot, and it probably doesn't help that the parties involved in the decision find the blogosphere sensationalism as believable.

In my opinion, I'm not speaking for the site, thanks.
Click to expand...

Well said. Cos last time I checked, I pay Hulu and Netflix 9 bucks, each, a month to access content I paid for. Until recently, however, Hulu Plus was not supported on my Nexus. So I used a modified copy of the app to access content, I paid for, on my phone. Now that the Nexus is supported I use the official app. Either way, Android needs to be taken out of this filthy equation. I root (not jailbreak) to have the ability to backup my device as I would and can from my laptop, as well as customize my clock speed and kernel. ROMs are fun, too. :D. Opinion here as well:D
 
Ah, I never like ipads anyways... And I may never own a tablet, I don't see the point. :)

One more reason to shy away from companies like Apple and Microsoft.... They're control freaks and both hate open source, just returning the hate. ;)
 
And this bit about not being able to rip DVDs to play on another device is also corporate control...

Seriously? I'm about ready to live like the Amish. They want to keep constricting things with unreasonable laws, I just won't technology anymore. And I won't put another dime into the entertainment industry.
 
Satires said:
And this bit about not being able to rip DVDs to play on another device is also corporate control...

Seriously? I'm about ready to live like the Amish. They want to keep constricting things with unreasonable laws, I just won't technology anymore. And I won't put another dime into the entertainment industry.
Click to expand...

That gets shot down over and over and they keep putting it back up. On its own, they can't rule against that.

What they are ruling against is one Linux library that allows DVD access.
 
EarlyMon said:
That gets shot down over and over and they keep putting it back up. On its own, they can't rule against that.

What they are ruling against is one Linux library that allows DVD access.
Click to expand...

I guess I'll have to dig up the article again. From what I understood, you could rip certain section out of a dvd for documanteries and such, but you cannot rip an entire movie to play it on another device.
 
Satires said:
I guess I'll have to dig up the article again. From what I understood, you could rip certain section out of a dvd for documanteries and such, but you cannot rip an entire movie to play it on another device.
Click to expand...

I will as well to ensure that I'm not wrong.

If they try to inhibit space shifting because it removes DRM, then they have to base that on the DMCA. Every time that's gone up against personal use, it loses.

And the merry go round begins again.
 
Will the rooting sections of this site remain if it is deemed illegal? For the record, I'll JB my iCrap.

See you all in Jail.
 
Rxpert83 said:
Yes carriers can still unlock phones. Yes Google can still sell unlocked phones.
Click to expand...

And I might suggest that a carrier selling a rooted phone is legal and not part of the legal decisions (whatever they end up being). Unless I am mistaken.

After all, they make the decision to offer such devices, so regardless of what the LOC decides, I am not sure rooted devices direct from the carrier are even an issue; they will not become illegal.

Do not act surprised people . . . I knew this decision (well, whatever and whenever the gavel falls) would arrive some time ago. Few people believed me when I said rooting and jailbreaking are not set in stone forever.
 
Bob Maxey said:
And I might suggest that a carrier selling a rooted phone is legal and not part of the legal decisions (whatever they end up being). Unless I am mistaken.

After all, they make the decision to offer such devices, so regardless of what the LOC decides, I am not sure rooted devices direct from the carrier are even an issue; they will not become illegal.

Do not act surprised people . . . I knew this decision (well, whatever and whenever the gavel falls) would arrive some time ago. Few people believed me when I said rooting and jailbreaking are not set in stone forever.
Click to expand...

Maybe all of us iPhone and Android users should start occupy movements! lol

Could you imagine? lol :D
 
EarlyMon said:
A big part of the issue here is jailbreaking, because that's what drove the decision forward.

When you jailbreak an iPhone, you can circumvent copy protection. (And I'm not disparaging the many fine jailbreakers who don't do that, I'm simply stating a fact.)

When you root an Android product, you can lose access to DRM material. It's more rare these days, but the cases are there and well known, the companies won't take the chance.

Unlike jailbreaking, rooting doesn't remove you from our Google ecosystem the way jailbreaking an iDevice removes you from Apple's.

When you root an eReader, you go from being locked to one content provider into getting access to all of them, courtesy of the Kindle, Nook, Play Store and Amazon apps.

Because federal decision makers are uninformed on this point, we've been lumped into jailbreaking when we ought not have been in the first place. To my knowledge, no content provider ever said that rooting led to DRM bypass - indeed, as I mentioned, they can detect and choose to not do business with you.

It was in the Apple world that the jailbreaking as a gateway to theft issue first surfaced.

To protect us, it was thought that lumping us in with the jailbreakers was a good protection for us.

In point of fact - the term itself doesn't apply to our community.

Rooting an eReader or owning an Android device gives access to more copyright content legally, not the other way around.

Because the heart of the matter is about protecting the entertainment industry, I think a competent study and competent argument could be easily made that we're simply not the same case.

Words mean things.

The piracy problem that Android presents, being a Linux offshoot, is the same problem they face on desk and laptops - downloading content illegally. And they're already fighting that on a separate front.

And what drove this decision?

Some years ago, a Linux library came about that lets you watch movies on a Linux PC, same as you could on a Windows or Mac PC. And that wasn't sanctioned by anyone.

The decision here was part of the hearing concerning that library on the Linux desktop.

Without a DVD player, we fall under the same category as making a personal copy of a cd to play in a car - perfectly fine and that's already been challenged and upheld for us.

Again - the blogosphere is mucking this up a lot, and it probably doesn't help that the parties involved in the decision find the blogosphere sensationalism as believable.

In my opinion, I'm not speaking for the site, thanks.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the De-CSS thing? I wanna say that is where the 'illegal-prime' came from..?

It's a really interesting world we live in. But I agree, you probably lose access to content in the android world by rooting, not true for Apple's iOS (from what I know of it).
 
Satires said:
Seriously? I'm about ready to live like the Amish. They want to keep constricting things with unreasonable laws, I just won't technology anymore. And I won't put another dime into the entertainment industry.
Click to expand...

I already do. Except for me, it is Rumspringa every night. I get the best of both worlds. I get to raise a barn, raise a goat and party all night long. Or until I get tired. Which is every night.
 
350X said:
but I can still use tethering?
Click to expand...

No, that is banned to. Sorry.

And you cannot change your desktop background or icons or install anything that does not come from iTunes, Google Play, The Rim Marketplace or The Microsoft Store. If we catch you, you will go to jail!

Sorry, but the new law makes it illegal to use your computer to visit any site not on the approved list.

You vill run ze apps ve install on ze device and you vill like it!

Seriously, if they are worried about IP theft and illegal downloads, why not make a law that forces us to use a locked PC? That way, the problem is solved and IP theft is a thing of the past.

Until three mintes past twelve when someone cracks the system.

The public "understands" that we jailbreakers steal IP so they are in favor of such a ban. Until the same logic is applied to them and they are forced into living with the same restrictions.
 
Do you plow with oxen? My father did when he was young.

I don't really support the entertainment industry anyway. I do support PBS. I support the sporting part as far as baseball and football. Haven't been in a movie theater for over 20 years. I'll support a BBC channel, especially for scientific and nature programming.

I'll also continue to root phone as long as I can. I simply don't like others deciding what I want to do with my own property. Since I don't buy subsidized phones, the phones are mine. I'm GSM, so most of the carrier's stuff is on the SIM, and not the phone. Amazon sells unlocked and so does Google.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom