We have only 6 days left to help keep the jailbreaking exemption to the U.S. DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) alive and well, and we need everyone’s help to do it. The jailbreaking exemption was granted by the Library of Congress in 2010 but not codified into the law, meaning it’s set to expire now, unless the copyright office extends it.

If the jailbreak exemption is not extended, then modifying your iPhone or iPad could be considered a violation of the DMCA, and companies could theoretically sue or press charges against jailbreakers. We think the right to modify our phones for personal use, provided we take personal responsibility for the risks involved, is an important one and deserves protection. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Fund) thinks the same, which is why they’re fighting to get the exemption renewed, and are also pushing for tablets and game consoles in general to be included as well. iFixit.org recently spoke to the EFF about where things stand now:

iFixit: Has the Copyright Office made any comments on jailbreaking since the 2010 smartphone exemption? How likely do you think it is that they’ll renew that exemption? Why have exemptions for smartphones but not game consoles and tablets?

EFF: The CO hasn’t made any public comments that we are aware of. We are very hopeful that the smartphone exemption will be renewed, and we think extending it to game consoles and tablets is the logical next step.

bunnie: My understanding is that the CO is fairly conservative about granting such exemptions, so tightly scoping the exemption request increases the chances that the result has real impact. A broad request to exempt large swathes of technology from the DMCA would likely be denied; and such a denial would waste the infrequent window of opportunity to have such requests examined. Therefore, an incremental approach is being taken, allowing the CO to try small changes and become comfortable with them. Note that the request to the CO splits smartphone/tablets and game consoles into separate categories, so that the CO can have the flexibility to reject or accept individual categories.

The interview goes on to discuss the impact the DMCA has had on modifying gaming consoles and the rest of the jailbreak and homebrew communities. Sony, for example, infamously sued well-known iPhone jailbreaker George Hotz, aka Geohot when he jailbroke the Sony Playstation 3.

You can hit the link below to read the whole interview. We also urge you to sign bunnie’s petition and leave your own comments if you’d like to see the exception renewed. He plans to take all the signatures and comments to the Copyright office on February 10th at 5pm.

Remember, there are only 6 days left. Whether you jailbreak or not, if the legal right to jailbreak your iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad is important to you, act now.

Source: ifixit.org; Petition: jailbreakingisnotacrime.org

The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) is asking for your help to tell the U.S. Copyright Office that jailbreaking does not violate the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), and its exemption should be continued and expanded.

In 2010, the Copyright Office said jailbreaking smartphones doesn’t violate the DMCA. This year, we’re asking them to renew that exemption (otherwise it will expire) and expand it to cover tablets. We’re also asking for a new exemption to allow jailbreaking of video game consoles.

The Library of Congress added the exception for jailbreak to the DMCA in July of 2010. Specifically:

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.

However, jailbreak was declared as an exclusion from the DMCA, and protection wasn’t actually hard coded into the act. That means the declaration could ultimately expire and leave jailbreakers subject to legal penalties.

If you’d like to help ensure this never happens, the EFF has advised you submit your opinion in comment form to the Copyright Office, and even offer a submission template with comment suggestions for your convenience. Comments are due by February 10th at 5PM, so make sure you submit your comments soon!

Souce: EFF

Did the Library of Congress just add a DCMA exception for Jailbreaking? Why yes they did:

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.

Engagdet lays out what it means and — more importantly — what it doesn’t:

you should know that this in no way requires Apple to jailbreak your phone for you, or lay down its arms in this ongoing fight. Basically, they just can’t sue you for the specific act of breaking their protections, but there’s nothing stopping from putting those protections in there in the first place, or for suing you for an infringement not covered in this exception — like using Apple code in a non-Apple-approved way, or installing illegal software. Not that any of you jailbreakers would ever do that.

Rooting Android is also covered, and both firmware and software are now in the language.

Head on over to our Jailbreak Forum for more.

[Engagdet]

iTunes can rip a CD and make the tracks rapidly available for you to listen to on your iPhone (or iPod) or stream around your house via other computers, or AppleTV/Airtunes and a variety of third party products.

ZDNet thinks they should do the same with DVDs. Unfortunately, it’s not that easy. Why? While ripping CDs is legal in the US, ripping DVDs is not and Hollywood and Big Media would do their best to sue any product, iTunes included, into oblivion if put that feature in. In fact, that’s what they’re doing with Real’s RealDVD right now. This is based on the claim that it violates the DMCA by breaking copy protection, though Real wraps copy protection of their own around the ripped movies).

Apple, of course, has $30 billion in the bank, which could fund one heckuva legal battle (and maybe even get the EFF on their side?) If anyone is in the position to help consumers retain fair use of their media, and increase the functionality and appeal of their own product at the same time, it’s certainly Apple.

But would they spend their time and money litigating the right to rip content from old, legacy media when they’re busily trying to get people to embrace digital downloads of the same content as the “next big thing”? Should they?

For consumers, it would be the same win as letting iTunes rip CDs even as music downloads were coming online. Apple maintains they run iTunes at low-profit levels simply to fuel hardware sales. The same model holds true for DVDs. Some consumers have huge collections of legacy DVDs and would love nothing more than easily, officially, load them up into iTunes and sync them over to their iPhone, iPod, set top box, computer, etc. alongside new digital downloads.

Of course, savvy consumers are already doing this with free, third party programs, and perhaps Apple is happy enough with the status quo. It’s less expensive for them that way, and doesn’t offend the same media companies Apple has deals with for iTunes rentals and downloads.

So the question is, are you happy with the status quo as well? Or is this a fight Apple should be fighting?

The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)’s latest Quarterly Journal includes an article entitled Apple’s iPhone: The Case For Broadening Exemption Five To 17 Usc 1201 To Ensure Continued Non-Infringing Use Of Wireless Communication Handsets.

The introduction begins provocatively enough by spotlighting an American who, in August 2007, received an AT&T data roaming bill for $4200 after he took his iPhone on a trip to Europe. They do this to point out users who are “angered and frustrated” by carrier lock-ins, and threats that Jailbreaking and unlocking could void their warranties and brick their devices in the future.

The iPhone was chosen to draw a sharp example in support of their arguments in favor of expanding the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act exemption to “better protect non-infringing use” of wireless devices of all types.

We previously heard about the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) asking for a DMCA exemption for Jailbreaking and Apple coming out against that idea. As ubiquitous data access becomes more important to more people, however, the real cross-network costs of roaming and the subsidy-based, handset exclusivity business model of big telcos will have to be carefully weighed against users not having to worry about bankruptcy when crossing a geographic border (or standing too close to a cruise ship).

We mentioned yesterday that the Canadian Government was poised to bring down the DMCA hammer on us humble citizens, handing the reins of power more overtly than ever to Big Media and Big Telco.

Not so, says the Government, listing off ways in which their new bill is mildly less offensive than it’s American progenitor, but I’m struck by what they don’t mention. Will cell phone unlocking, including iPhone 3G unlocking, be made illegal? And what about DVD ripping? Can I not take a movie I pay money for and put it into iTunes so I can watch it on my new iPhone 3G? And why, to balance the rights you’re stripping from Canadians, have you not long ago introduced a bill to prevent GSM monopolies in the telco industry from charging Canadians among the highest prices in the world for data?

How about that?

(Read on for the full text of the Canadian Government’s preemptive email blast)

The Government of Canada has introduced Bill C-61, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act. The proposed legislation is a made-in-Canada approach that balances the needs of Canadian consumers and copyright owners, promoting culture, innovation and competition in the digital age. What does Bill C-61 mean to Canadians? Specifically, it includes measures that would: expressly allow you to record TV shows for later viewing; copy legally purchased music onto other devices, such as MP3 players or cell phones; make back-up copies of legally purchased books, newspapers, videocassettes and photographs onto devices you own; and limit the “statutory damages” a court could award for all private use copyright infringements; implement new rights and protections for copyright holders, tailored to the Internet, to encourage participation in the online economy, as well as stronger legal remedies to address Internet piracy; clarify the roles and responsibilities of Internet Service Providers related to the copyright content flowing over their network facilities; and provide photographers with the same rights as other creators. What Bill C-61 does not do: it would not empower border agents to seize your iPod or laptop at border crossings, contrary to recent public speculation What this Bill is not: it is not a mirror image of U.S. copyright laws. Our Bill is made-in-Canada with different exceptions for educators, consumers and others and brings us into line with more than 60 countries including Japan, France, Germany and Australia Bill C-61 was introduced in the Commons on June 12, 2008 by Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Heritage Minister Josée Verner. For more information, please visit the Copyright Reform Process website at www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/crp-prda.nsf/en/home Thank you for sharing your views on this important matter. The Honourable Jim Prentice, P.C., Q.C., M.P. Minister of Industry The Honourable Josée Verner, P.C., M.P. Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages and Minister for La Francophonie