backtop


Print 75 comment(s) - last by Wightout.. on Oct 2 at 4:55 PM

Apple's latest iPhone moves may have earned it a new class-action law suit--Apple's answer: purchase a new iPhone.

As reported on DailyTech, Apple Inc. disabled unlocked iPhones with its Firmware 1.1.1 update by putting them into activation limbo.  The unlocked phones could not make any calls until activated with a valid AT&T card and iTunes.  Even then, the phones would sometimes still be locked, according to preliminary reports.  Apple covered its bases, by providing a "slide for emergency" option which allows users to make 911 calls on their newly-bricked iPhone.

While many users simply are not going to install the update or are hoping for a cracked version of the patch to be released, some are seeking legal avenues to fight Apple's strike on the modding/hacking/homebrew community.

On Saturday, posts by user myndex appeared in Apple's iPhone Forums, proposing three groupings of users who could seek legal action and calling for users whose iPhones were rendered inoperable to contact the poster with answers to a list of questions detailing their iPhone situation.

The posts were taken down relatively quickly, but screenshots were posted here [1][2].  Additionally, a quick search reveals that Myndex is a tech and research group that appears to use Macintosh computers.  Whether the owner of the Apple forums handle is associated with this group is unknown.

Apple has protected itself by including a large amount of legal phrasing in its packaging, instruction manuals, and online materials, warning users against unlocking their iPhones, which they say violates their contract.

Noah Funderburg, an assistant dean at the University of Alabama School of Law, was quoted as saying. "Anyone who hacks must know that they are taking certain risks," Funderburg told the paper. "If they aren’t willing to assume the risks upfront--like a brick iPhone--then maybe they should not hack the device."

Jennifer Bowcock, an Apple spokeswoman indicated that Apple was unapologetic about the situation. "The inability to use your phone after making unauthorized modifications isn’t covered under the iPhone warranty. If the damage was due to use of an unauthorized software application, voiding their warranty, they should purchase a new iPhone,” said Bowcock

In some cases Apple appears to have not only killed unlockers, but those who simply were participating in the homebrew/3rd-party applications community.  Ross Good, a student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign had not expected to be affected as he had only installed a couple of seemingly harmless third party applications, including one for instant messaging.  After updating, he found his phone returned to the activation screen and would not activate, though he had a valid AT&T contract.  His phone is now among the growing number of phones "bricked" by the update.

No word was received from Apple on what its stance was on the damage done by its updates to non-unlocked users.

Apple is likely to face increased scrutinity, as well as possible legal assaults following its attack on unlockers.  It appears that many, including even non-unlockers were affected by the update.  Apple's is entirely unapologetic to those affected.  Their answer--get a new iPhone.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Apple bapple crapple
By jetdoc on 10/1/2007 5:36:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How many more iPhones would have been sold in the US if the iPhone was available for use with any provider? So someone in Apple made the decision not to sell as many iPhones as they could and force people into two year contracts with a single provider. Why? Does this seem like a good marketing decision? Are the kick backs from ATT that freaking good? And that is exactly what that is, a kick back.


What people fail to realize is that had there been no exclusive contract, there would be no iPhone. The cell carriers have a modicum of control over what phone manufacturers can and can't do with their phones, and no other cell carrier was willing to give Apple Cart Blanche when developing the iPhone. Seriously, do you think Apple gives a rats ass about AT&T.

The mobile carriers are trying to expand into other markets like entertainment ie. music, video, and game downloads. I'm sure Verizon has spent a lot of money developing and promoting Vcast. The iPhone/iTunes combo is a threat to their aspirations. That's why when Apple approached Verizon, Verizon told them to take a hike. AT&T probably had the least to lose and the most to gain from the iPhone. Let's face it, if the iPhone gains the same success and popularity as the iPod (over 100 million sold), AT&T stands to profit handsomely at the expense of it's rivals. What benefit is there to Apple of an exclusive contract with AT&T? There isn't any. So Apple has supposedly negotiated a deal where they get some benefit from AT&T whether it be a percentage of profits or fixed amount for each new iPhone/contract. I would suppose that as part of the agreement Apple had to assure AT&T that the phone could be locked and kept locked.


"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?... So why the f*** doesn't it do that?" -- Steve Jobs

Related Articles
Apple Strikes Back With Update
September 28, 2007, 1:22 PM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki