DMCA
Latest
White House announces support for unlocking cell phones
A petition on the White House's website to work for a new law universally allowing the unlocking of cell phones recently raised more than 100,000 signatures from the public, and the White House has now officially responded to the idea, stating its support. The petition refers to Section 1201 of the Library of Congress' rules, which disallows users from unlocking their cell phones (including iPhones) for any reason, even when any contracts associated with the phones has expired. The phone industry says the rule is needed in order to keep illegal phone trafficking down, but obviously lots of consumers disagree, saying that the rule is prohibitive and often leads to lots of expensive fees. The White House's statement of support isn't exactly legally powerful, as it doesn't have any direct control over the rule or the Library of Congress. But the president's office can push for a new law to overturn the rule, and of course an official statement of support from the White House can do a lot to push the issue forward. The Library of Congress sent TUAW a statement saying that "we also agree with the administration that the question of locked cell phones has implications for telecommunications policy and that it would benefit from review and resolution in that context." So there's more "review" to be done on this issue. But for now, it sounds like there's both public and administration support for a change to the rule, which means there may come a time in the future when you're guaranteed to the right to unlock your phone whenever you want.
White House responds to petition: unlocking phones should be legalized
The recent ruling that effectively bans third-party phone unlocking has ruffled more than a few feathers, and the people have spoken with their electronic signatures -- 114,322 of them, to be exact. Now the petition to the White House, which asks that DMCA protection of phone unlockers be reconsidered, has finally received an official response, and it appears that it's for the positive. The author of the letter is R. David Edelman, Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation and Privacy. "The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties," Edelman writes. All told, the response matches that of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which wrote a letter to the Librarian of Congress in support of extending the exemption last year. So what does this mean for us? Edelman states: "The Obama Administration would support a range of approaches to addressing this issue, including narrow legislative fixes in the telecommunications space that make it clear: neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation." We're not going to see immediate change, but it appears that a chain of events is now in motion in which the FCC and Congress potentially play a huge role. We're not out of the woods yet, but it's relieving to see such a positive response -- along with a call to action -- from the government. Read the response in its entirety below.
Smartphone petition breaks 100,000 signatures, forces White House response
The petition to reinstate the DMCA protection of smartphone unlockers has reached 100,000 signatories on We The People. As it's now hit the golden limit, the White House will have to issue an official response explaining its stance on the matter. The petition also asked that if the Librarian of Congress wouldn't bring back the exemption, that a bill should be passed that enshrines the right into law. As soon we see the message from the West Wing, we'll let you know what they say.
Engadget Primed: making sense of the US' new phone unlocking policy
Primed goes in-depth on the technobabble you hear on Engadget every day -- we dig deep into each topic's history and how it benefits our lives. You can follow the series here. Looking to suggest a piece of technology for us to break down? Drop us a line at primed *at* engadget *dawt* com. On October 25, 2012, the US librarian of Congress ruled that the act of unlocking your phone was no longer allowed under copyright law. The ruling, which has been severely criticized by consumer advocacy groups and tech enthusiasts across the country, declares that it's a copyright violation if you unlock your phone without the permission of the carrier it's locked to. Why would such an unthreatening action result in heavy fees and possible jail time? After the break, we'll discuss what the ruling means for the future of the mobile industry, how it will impact consumers and if we should worry that our dentist's uncle's third cousin (once removed) is in trouble because he has an unlocked phone.
RIAA copyright takedown requests to Google reach 10 million
Something tells us they won't be handing out gold watches for this milestone. Just eight months after Google added copyright takedown requests to its Transparency Report, the search firm can claim to have almost exactly 10 million such requests from the RIAA. A dive into the numbers very quickly explains just how they built up so quickly. The RIAA and the music labels attached to it have topped at least the most recent monthly requests, and they're collectively issuing hundreds of thousands of notices every week. We certainly don't expect the industry group to hang up its hat just because it's at a nice, round figure: when pirate sites rarely stay down for long, and the RIAA all but accuses Google of being an accomplice to piracy despite censorship concerns, the current game of infringement whack-a-mole is only likely to continue.
Unlocking new phones now banned under DMCA, the EFF weighs in
It was great while it lasted, but the days of users legally unlocking their own phones is over. Back in October of last year, the Library of Congress added an exemption to the DMCA to allow folks to free their new phones for 90 days. That three month window has now closed. Of course, carriers are still free to offer unlocked handsets themselves, and some will also unlock them for you as long as certain conditions are met. "Legacy" or used handsets purchased before today can still be unlocked without any finger-wagging from federal courts. So, what does this mean exactly? Well, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Mitch Stoltz told us, "What's happening is not that the Copyright Office is declaring unlocking to be illegal, but rather that they're taking away a shield that unlockers could use in court if they get sued." This does make lawsuits much more likely according to him, but it's still up to the courts to decide the actual legality of phone unlocking. Indeed, it's a grim day for those who want true freedom over their own devices. Stoltz said to us, "This shows just how absurd the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is: a law that was supposed to stop the breaking of digital locks on copyrighted materials has led to the Librarian of Congress trying to regulate the used cellphone market."
Unauthorized unlocking of new phones to be illegal in US
Have you been thinking about unlocking your iPhone? Unlocking is the process that allows your iPhone to work on multiple networks that use the same wireless standard, so it's perfect for international travelers who buy SIM cards from local carriers instead of being tied to international roaming charges. Other folks love the ability to switch carriers on a whim. Well, effective January 26, 2013 -- tomorrow -- unauthorized unlocking of new phones becomes illegal in the US. If you want an unlocked iPhone, there are several legal workarounds. For example, if you buy an iPhone 5 from Verizon, it's unlocked out of the box. AT&T unlocks phones for customers once they're out of contract (usually after two years). Most carriers will sell you an unlocked iPhone at full price, as will Apple. Anyone buying a new iPhone today who wants to personally unlock the phone before tomorrow needs to ask their carrier if they'll unlock the phone for you. Once they reject you, you're free to unlock the phone yourself using one of many online unlock services. However, starting tomorrow you'll be breaking the law if you do so. What law, you may ask? The Digital Millennium Copyright Act is a federal anti-hacking law. In October 2012, the Librarian of Congress decided that personally unlocking phones would no longer be allowed. A 90-day grace period during which consumers could buy phones and legally unlock them started at that time, and that grace period runs out tomorrow. [via MacRumors]
iPhone jailbreaking legal, iPad not
The latest round of exemptions added to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) may be problematic for iOS owners who unlock or jailbreak their device, according to a report in Ars Technica. Signed into law in 1998, the DMCA bans the production and dissemination of technology designed to circumvent digital rights management systems. This broad-based law gives the Librarian of Congress the power to add exemptions to the law every three years. The latest exemptions were announced on Thursday and will go into effect on October 28. Among them is an exemption that will let users jailbreak their smartphones, but not their tablets. This Librarian decided not to include tablets because the "tablet" category of devices was not well-defined and could include devices like an e-reader, an iPad and even a tablet PC. It's likely that this decision will have a negative effect on the jailbreak community which releases tools that work with both the iPhone and iPad. The Librarian also decided to revoke the exemption allowing customers to unlock their device and use them on a new carrier. The new provision lets you unlock any smartphone purchased before January 2013. Phones purchased after that date can only be unlocked with the permission of the carrier. The librarian noted that carriers have policies that allow for unlocking and felt there was no compelling reason why customers should be allowed to unlock their phones themselves.
DMCA update shuts down new phone unlocking next year, allows rooting (but not for tablets)
And so it passed that Congress didst layeth its blessing on the jailbreaking and rooting of all manner of devices; the hacking community saw the miracle and rejoiced. But that amendment to the DMCA two years ago was just a temporary exemption and the Electronic Frontier Foundation has been vigorously lobbying to get it reinstated. The Library of Congress has now done just that through a new three year extension, but with some serious caveats: After 90 days, unlocking of new phones will be verboten and all tablet mods will still be illegal. This differs from the 2010 decision which did allow unlocking, because the Librarian decided that a recent copyright ruling means fair use rules no longer apply to a handset's OS. It also said the exception isn't needed anymore because carrier rules regarding unlocking are now more liberal -- although the lawmaker may be confounding chicken with egg by that reasoning.
Twitter Transparency Report shows DMCA and government actions: US is biggest busybody
Twitter dispatched its first biannual Transparency Report -- revealing government requests for user info and content holdback along with DMCA takedown notices -- which spotlights the US as the most active by far. The company claimed it was aroused to action by Google, which has been doing it for the last two years and recently added copyright takedowns to its own reports. So far, Twitter says that while most nations requested user data 10 times or fewer, the US government made 679 such appeals, more than the entire rest of the world combined. It also showed how often it obeyed -- 75 percent of the time in the US; much less elsewhere -- and said that affected users are always notified unless the company is prohibited from doing so. As we also noted with Google's reports, DMCA takedowns were by far the most numerous requests, with 3,378 total affecting 5,874 users, and 599 offending items actually pulled (38 percent). Those appeals aren't broken down by company like Mountain View's, but if you think that Usher photo mashup you're using as an avatar might be a problem, check the source to see all the data.
Viacom wins appeal against YouTube, gets another chance to prove copyright infringement
It's been almost two years since YouTube's triumph in its copyright infringement case against Viacom. As is the way of things, Viacom appealed the decision, and now the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to breathe new life into Viacom's case. Apparently, the appeals judge didn't see eye to eye with the District Court's ruling that no reasonable jury could have found that YouTube had actual knowledge or awareness of infringement on its site.You see, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) requires such awareness for service providers like YouTube to be guilty of copyright infringement, and that safe harbor provision was the grounds for YouTube's victory on summary judgment. Furthermore, to succeed on summary judgment, YouTube had to prove that no reasonable jury could find that it knew of any infringing activity. While the lower court felt that YouTube carried that burden, the appeals judge disagreed, and has remanded the case back down for the District Court to determine if YouTube knew about or willfully ignored the infringement. What does this mean? All we can say for sure is that it'll expend more judicial resources and make more money for the attorneys involved. The result could very well end up, once again, in YouTube's favor, but we'll have to wait and see.
'What's it like to have your indie game stolen?'
No journalist, friend or decent human being wants to ask that question, especially not to an 18-year-old first-time developer who recently saw success as a student finalist in IGF 2012. Unfortunately, today we asked Mattia Traverso that very thing about his game One and One Story, after the events unfolded live on his Twitter feed: Traverso alerted the community that One and One Story had been counterfieted with "THEY STOLE MY GAME" and a succession of five tweets that included seven capitalized f-bombs.One and One Story hadn't been cloned or copied, but it was completely stolen -- code, graphics and all. The group that stole it implemented a few unused assets that were hidden in the game file, Traverso told Joystiq, and its version has completely broken animations and stretched graphics."It's kind of hilarious," Traverso said hours after his initial discovery. But when he first got the Google Alert and tracked down the stolen game to the App Store this morning, Traverso didn't find anything about the situation amusing."I panicked. I didn't know what to do, so I screamed on Twitter," he said.His screaming didn't go unnoticed and it drew the attention of other indies, including Canabalt's Adam Saltsman. Saltsman instructed Traverso to fill out a DMCA takedown, and two hours after his discovery Traverso was able to breathe a little easier.
EFF petitions to extend legal iPhone jailbreaking
In 2010, the Copyright Office said jailbreaking a handset did not violate the DMCA and the jailbreak community breathed a sigh of relief. What many people didn't realize was that the exemption covering jailbreaking will expire later this year. When it expires, companies can go after jailbreak developers like the iPhone Dev Team using the DMCA. They could face jail time and monetary penalties for their involvement in creating jailbreaking tools. Needless to say, this would put a halt to most, if not all, jailbreaking. To prevent this from happening, the EFF created a webpage that tells you how to contact the Copyright Office and ask them to extend this exemption. The advocacy group also wants to extend this protection to tablets and video game consoles. They have instructions on where to send your comments and a guideline about what to say in your communication with the government agency. Comments are due by February 10 at 5 PM Eastern Time. If this is a cause you believe in, head over the EFF and take some time to help keep jailbreaking alive. [Electronista]
Jailbreaking exemption to DMCA is about to expire, EFF would rather it didn't
Back in 2010, the US Copyright Office added a set of anti-circumvention exemptions to the DMCA, effectively making it legal for smartphone users to jailbreak and/or root their devices. These exemptions, however, were never made permanent and now, they're about to expire. The EFF doesn't want this to happen, which is why it's decided to launch a campaign dedicated to the jailbreaking cause. With this initiative, the EFF is hoping to convince the Copyright Office to renew its exemptions and expand them to a wider range of devices, including tablets and videogame consoles. To achieve this, the organization is calling upon programmers and other jailbreaking enthusiasts to contact the Copyright Office directly, explaining why the ability to freely modify software is so vital to their lives or livelihoods. As the EFF argues, "Concrete examples will help show the Copyright Office why they should renew and expand the exemptions for jailbreaking." If you're interested in getting involved, you can contact the Copyright Office at the coverage link below, though all comments are due by February 5th. Hit up the source link for more details on the EFF's involvement.
Apple reportedly cracking down on App Store pirates
According to a post this morning on Ars Technica, Apple is taking legal measures to make it more difficult for pirated copies of App Store apps to make their way to the hands of iOS device owners. The company is sending takedown notices to Apptrackr, a site that commonly directs users to cracked versions of popular apps. The takedown notices are being sent under the auspices of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which is the US implementation of two treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization. Apptrackr developer "Dissident" says that Apple has scraped links from Apptrackr, and then sent takedown notices in an attempt to cut off access to the cracked apps. To combat Apple's anti-piracy efforts, Apptrackr has moved to servers outside of the US, and -- according to Ars -- is "using a form of redirection to avoid 'direct' links to infringing content." Some developers have reported that piracy rates for their apps are as high as 80 percent, which would result in losses in the millions of dollars for individual developers and possibly billions of dollars to Apple. Apptrackr defends their activities by saying that their "service" is "for application trials, and nothing else." On the Apptracker site "About Us" page, Dissident claims that "pirates who do not choose to purchase the applications they install are not lost sales. They were very, very likely never potential customers in the first place. Piracy's conversion rate is absurdly low, and developers know that." Regardless of how you personally feel about software piracy, it's fascinating to see that Apple is coming to the defense of App Store developers by attacking Apptrackr with takedown notices.
UMG v. Veoh: victory has never been so pyrrhic
The US appeal court has ruled that "YouTube on steroids" site Veoh can't be sued for copyright infringement under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Judge Raymond Fisher said that rights holders (like UMG) were in a better place to identify infringing content than the video sharing site, putting the burden of finding and reporting dodgy vids on the record company's shoulders. The old-slugger's victory means that Viacom has less of a leg to stand on in its upcoming appeal against YouTube, since Judges can use the case as precedent to make their decisions. Sadly, victory will ring hollow for Veoh since the onslaught of litigation caused it to file for chapter seven bankruptcy before getting flogged on the cheap to Qlipso last year.
LG gets ready for CES with a new gang of IPS monitors
It looks like LG couldn't wait until next month's CES to share its very latest selection of monitors. They're all IPS screens, and include the D43 3D monitor, which offers a conversion mode from 2D images and a 3D hotkey. It's joined by the 27-inch, slim-bezeled DM92 and the DM82; a 23-incher with built-in seven-watt speakers. The DM52 straddles both sizes and will be up for grabs alongside the rest of LG's new display family starting February. Monitor mavens can consult the press release below.
EFF working to make console modding legal
Your Humble Indie Bundle dollars at work! The Copyright Office is taking submissions about possible new exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation is petitioning the office to protect "jailbreaking" of consoles, tablets, and other devices to run software other than that supported by the manufacturer. A year ago, a similar EFF initiative resulted in an exemption on "jailbreaking" smartphones. "The DMCA is supposed to block copyright infringement," said EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry. "But instead it can be misused to threaten creators, innovators, and consumers, discouraging them from making full and fair use of their own property." McSherry asserted that "artists and tinkerers" who want to modify their devices to run whatever they want deserve legal protection. The use of jailbroken consoles -- or any technology -- to violate copyright (by, for example, playing an unauthorized copy of a retail game) would remain illegal. But the act of modding a console itself would no longer be. The Copyright Office will hold hearings on DMCA extensions in the spring.
SCEA vs. Geohot: Sony wins a not-quite flawless victory
Well, after all the talk of TROs, tweets, and YouTube user info, it seems that the SCEA vs. Geohot litigation has come to a rather uneventful conclusion. According to Sony's Playstation Blog, the case has been settled, and Hotz has agreed to a permanent injunction preventing him from distributing his PS3 jailbreak hack ever again. Of course, while this settlement has cowed the man who did the initial distribution deed, the jailbreak genie's out of the bottle, and no court order can ever put it back. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
Sony granted access to GeoHot's PayPal records
A federal magistrate has authorized Sony to subpoena PayPal for information about California-based funds sent to accounts associated with PS3 jailbreaker George "GeoHot" Hotz, reports Wired's Threat Level blog. The US District Court ruling in San Francisco is the latest development in a jurisdiction dispute to decide whether Sony can proceed with its lawsuit against Hotz in California or must instead do so in Hotz's home state of New Jersey. Sony alleges that Hotz received donations for his PS3 hack from Northern California residents (via PayPal), and, if true, the evidence could bolster Sony's case to keep the case in San Francisco court. In a court order, Magistrate Joseph Spero defined the "limited information" that PayPal could be ordered to present as "documents sufficient to identify the source of funds in California that went into any PayPal account associated with geohot@gmail.com for the period of January 1, 2009, to February 1, 2011." Additionally, Judge Spero ordered Hotz to consent to Sony obtaining all of his tweets dating back to Jan. 1, 2009 and to appear in California for a deposition relating "solely" to the jurisdiction matter (with Sony paying for his "reasonable" expenses). As for Hotz's "impounded devices," a neutral third party, known simply as "The Intelligence Group" (or "TIG"), has been tasked with conducting a "forensically sound" probe of Hotz's encrypted hard drives (and a calculator) for any data related to his PS3 system circumvention hack. Hotz and Sony will split the first $7,000 charged by TIG, with Sony agreeing to pay any additional fees. [Pictured: George Hotz (screencap); source: G4tv.com]
