[PLUG-TALK] Freedom in common infrastructure

[Paul Heinlein]

I'm reading an EFF article about iPhone jailbreaking:

   http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/apple-says-jailbreaking-illegal

Personally, I think iPhone users ought to be able to gain control of 
their hardware. Period.

There's a legitimate question of public interest here, however, if you 
change the metaphor a bit. The EFF says that Apple's argument can be 
translated into automotive terms:

     One need only transpose Apple's arguments to the world of
     automobiles to recognize their absurdity. Sure, GM might tell us
     that, for our own safety, all servicing should be done by an
     authorized GM dealer using only genuine GM parts. Toyota might say
     that swapping your engine could reduce the reliability of your
     car. And Mazda could say that those who throw a supercharger on
     their Miatas frequently exceed the legal speed limit.

There's only a partial truth here. No one should be legally prevented 
from modifying his own vehicle -- BUT that doesn't mean that everyone 
who modifies a vehicle should be allowed to operate it on public 
roads.

iPhones are not simply private computing devices. They also operate on 
a shared, crucial telephony infrastructure. It's legitimate to ask 
how "street legal" translates into telephony.

Apple's problem is that it thinks it should be the arbiter here, hence 
the appeal to the DMCA. No private entity should have that right.

So who should? What entity defines and enforces the public good in 
telephony infrastructure?

-- 
Paul Heinlein <> heinlein at madboa.com <> http://www.madboa.com/