Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tim Cook Delivers Speech Emphasizing Apple's Opposition to Sideloading
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As long as it’s the original copy I purchased it’s a legally protected right.
I can legally sell my jail token iPhone.
Last edited:
You can’t purchase iOS and you can’t resell it separately from the iPhone….because it’s not yours. You can make modifications to iOS and then sell it with the purchased hardware.
In Case C‑13/20,the legal protection of computer programs must be interpreted as meaning that the lawful purchaser of a computer program is entitled to decompile all or part of that program in order to correct errors affecting its operation, including where the correction consists in disabling a function that is affecting the proper operation of the application of which that program forms a part.
For example, SAS vs World Programming (C‑406/10) allowed reverse engineering for interoperability. That case, also, was the court upholding the clear intention of the statute.
Moreover there was UsedSoft vs Oracle (C-128/11), allowing the resale of software licences, including the right to download the software where necessary, upon purchasing a second hand licence.
Honesty with things like this I’m thick as ****. I have no clue what sideloading even is…..to me if someone asked me what sideloading is I’d say it was when I stood next to my Amazon prime delivery driver the other day and he side loaded the parcel into my hands.
If I modify iOS on my iPhone and then sell that iPhone, it’s sold with modifications to the software is it not?
What’s the difference to what I said?
As I said. Good luck with buying a copy of IOS separately from the hardware, modifying that code and then reselling it without the hardware it was installed on. I'm pretty sure you will end up some legal actions. If that were not the case, the same type of scenario can be applied to Windows.
The fact that you live in an unspecified EU jurisdiction and make unsupported claims about EU law doesn't make me wrong.
Copyright law in the US (which is what I was discussing) is governed by US Code Title 17. The owner of the copyright has the following exclusive rights subject to specific limitations.
17 U.S. Code § 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
You are correct that you have the right to use software that you purchased. However, you don't have the right to modify it.
You're ignoring the difference between controlling the software available on your own devices and controlling the software available on your competitor's devices.
I never said anything about purchasing iOS separately. You do get ownership of one copy of iOS software on (pick iOS device) and you own the same right to the hardware and software included in the purchase.
What I can’t do is make a copy of iOS, modify it and sell it AND keep the copy on my device. I would legally need to destroy Al my copies I have after I transfer ownership.
Same thing with windows, it’s a reselling rights(that’s what everyone in EU have), not redistribution right(nobody has this without consent of the rights holder to make multiple copies.
I have specified EU law that applies to every member state. I did post legal cases from EU court of justice supporting my claims. And under EU jurisdiction I have the right to modify it.The fact that you live in an unspecified EU jurisdiction and make unsupported claims about EU law doesn't make me wrong.
Copyright law in the US (which is what I was discussing) is governed by US Code Title 17. The owner of the copyright has the following exclusive rights subject to specific limitations.
17 U.S. Code § 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
www.law.cornell.edu
You are correct that you have the right to use software that you purchased. However, you don't have the right to modify it.
I live in Sweden where we just have even more rights.
.
Both are anti competitive. The first one is just anti consumer rights
Great. I was discussing the US. Your personal interpretation of EU cases doesn't make me wrong.
For example, you cited UsedSoft vs Oracle which directly refutes your claims because it involves transfer of a license. Not unlicensed copies.
European court confirms the right to resell used software licences | Brodies LLP
Brodies LLP offers clients the largest specialist legal resource in Scotland, with more practice areas and lawyers ranked top-tier in Scotland than any other firm.
SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd has nothing to do with making a copying and modifying software. It's about reverse engineering functionality. As you said yourself.
Top System SA v Belgian State is about fixing a bug to make properly licensed software usable.
None of these three cases support your argument.
That's certainly your opinion. But that doesn't make them "exactly" the same thing.
Nobody said you couldn't jailbreak, ie modify IOS. You made it sound as if you could download IOS, modify it and then resell it. While you believe you can download an ipsw, modify it and then resell it, I'm not sure how legal that is, even if you have a way of deleting ios from your iphone.
Do you think the US government cares about protecting anyone but their own agenda?
As usual, stereotypes are bad. Some people in the US government care. Some people don't.
After so many threads on this subject we can see:
- pirates want side loading, so developers have nothing to gain.
- young users who have no clue about security or the cyber war that is happening support it.
- smart and mature users who understand security and are reading every day about the cyber war and scams don’t want side loading
- there is an obvious troll campaign being run by cyber criminals to brainwash people to support side loading.
- only the most corrupt and ignorant politicians support side loading and these are the same politicians who have spoken about legalizing back doors and ending encryption.
- fascist dictators want access to all the insides of our devices.
These are facts.
We will not have side loading because of these threats.
If side loading comes it will be an option when you set up your phone and that option will come with a warning ‘We will not allow side loading apps to have any access to personal information/camera/mic/filesystem and if you get hacked or scammed you are on your own, we will not give you tech support, we will reduce your warranty and you can go cry in the corner on your own.’
- pirates want side loading, so developers have nothing to gain.
- young users who have no clue about security or the cyber war that is happening support it.
- smart and mature users who understand security and are reading every day about the cyber war and scams don’t want side loading
- there is an obvious troll campaign being run by cyber criminals to brainwash people to support side loading.
- only the most corrupt and ignorant politicians support side loading and these are the same politicians who have spoken about legalizing back doors and ending encryption.
- fascist dictators want access to all the insides of our devices.
These are facts.
We will not have side loading because of these threats.
If side loading comes it will be an option when you set up your phone and that option will come with a warning ‘We will not allow side loading apps to have any access to personal information/camera/mic/filesystem and if you get hacked or scammed you are on your own, we will not give you tech support, we will reduce your warranty and you can go cry in the corner on your own.’
Last edited:
DRM exist
Any evidence they are have room temperature IQ? You make quite the claim
Stares at Steve Wozniak. Okey-dokey mom adult are children
It’s not brainwashing if it’s actually something people want
With side loading people might install banned apps such as VPNs. We wouldn’t want to go against the government
They tend take your freedoms away just like you described
Made up fact of some who loves authoritarian rule
😂😂😂😂
Don’t fail with your replies the way Domino’s Pizza failed in Italy.
Smart people don’t buy your excuses.
You are quite literally fear mongering. Some people want freedom and act independently. Other like you wants to be controlled and told what to do, but wants everyone to be equally controlled
The EULA is unenforceable in the EU.The fact that you live in an unspecified EU jurisdiction and make unsupported claims about EU law doesn't make me wrong.
Copyright law in the US (which is what I was discussing) is governed by US Code Title 17. The owner of the copyright has the following exclusive rights subject to specific limitations.
17 U.S. Code § 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
You are correct that you have the right to use software that you purchased. However, you don't have the right to modify it.
Once you purchase software it is yours to do with as you wish.
My expert statement versus your non opinion and non-expertise.
I think my one is more dependable. I have a 30 year unbroken perfect track record of knowing future trends and every multi million and multi billion dollar company who has taken my advice has done better business and improved their operational efficiency and security.
You utterly rejected the world of cyber crime, malware, spyware, murdered journalists, scams that have looted billions of dollars, ransomware that has looted billions of dollars, and the cyber attacks between super powers.
When someone reject these realities, and just call it ‘fear mongering’, one can confidentially state that:
- either they are unqualified and ignorant.
- or they are professional trolls who are paid to spread misinformation and help open the doors for more cyber attacks.
These are undeniable facts.
As an expert you should surely be able to provide citations for your statements?
You want how many citations for ransomware, malware, side channel attacks, impersonated apps, cyber attacks?
I can provide 100,000.
But if you haven’t noticed 100,000 items in the news in recent times then there is something deeply wrong with you.
And Tim Cook certainly has noticed these 100,000 items in the news.
Steve Jobs himself said in 2008 that unscrupulous developers were trying to hide malicious activity inside their binaries.
If you don’t know that, you need to sit back, observe, learn and be a good student of life.
So you can’t provide any citations to expert sources other than what you have seen in the news?
Yeah.
This game is ‘I want you to spend the next 15 minutes of your life to post dozens of articles and after you post the articles I will still tell you they are irrelevant.’
Don’t play this game with me.
I’ve been online since the internet began and seen it all, blin.
Nope.
You made the claim to be an expert. You have provided no citations to your claims.
Your opinion is just as reliable as any other random person. On the internet.