The most ridiculous law of 2013 (so far)
Until recently it was illegal to jailbreak your own iPhone, and after Saturday it will be illegal to unlock a new smartphone, thereby allowing it to switch carriers. This is a result of the exception to the DMCA lapsing. It was not a mistake, but rather an intentional choice by the Librarian of Congress, that this was no longer fair use and acceptable. The Electronic Frontier Foundation among other groups has detailed the many failings of the DMCA Triennial Rulemaking process, which in this case led to this exception lapsing.
Conservatives should be leading the discussion on fixing this problem. Conservatives are understandably skeptical of agencies and unelected bureaucrats wielding a large amount of power to regulate, and are proponents of solutions like the REINS Act (which has over 121 co-sponsors). However, if Congress truly wants to rein in the power of unelected bureaucrats, then they must first write laws in a narrow manner and avoid the need for intervention by the Librarian of Congress to avoid draconian consequences, such as making iPhone jail-breakers and smartphone un-lockers criminals, or taking away readable books for the blind.
If conservatives are concerned of unelected bureaucrats deciding upon regulations which could have financial consequences for businesses, then they should be more worried about unelected bureaucrats deciding upon what is or isn’t a felony punishable by large fines and jail time for our citizens. And really, why should unelected bureaucrats decide what technological choices you can make with your smartphone? These laws serve to protect the interests of a few companies and create and maintain barriers to entry.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Early days, early days.
Cindy Munford on January 28, 2013 at 3:32 PM
This kind of overreach is what conservatives can use to take the limited government, free market message to a new generation. Will they? Hells, no. They’re way too stupid and incompetent.
besser tot als rot on January 28, 2013 at 3:34 PM
but but but … ObamaPhones!
apostic on January 28, 2013 at 3:37 PM
Only in a country far down the path of totalitarianism can the position of Librarian of Congress become a position in which you can wield power on every day citizens. In a free society the Librarian’s power over citizens would be limited to telling them “Shhhh” if they make too much noise, with their jurisdiction limited to the Library of Congress.
Flange on January 28, 2013 at 3:39 PM
The fact that Republicans in Congress will just look at this and shrug their shoulders tells you just how empty and meaningless the GOP has become.
Mark1971 on January 28, 2013 at 3:42 PM
I disagree to this extent… when cell carriers sell the phone cheap or give them for free as part of a cell package, then the new owner should not be allowed to unlock it. After all, he just got a subsidized phone. If you want a phone that you can use with any carrier, then man up and pay the full price for the phone and stop buying subsidized hardware. It seems reasonable to me for a cell service provider to expect that when it gives away a phone or sells it at half price because it is tied to its own service that the company has a right to expect it to stay tied to its service.
Warner Todd Huston on January 28, 2013 at 3:48 PM
But you’re still under contract to pay that carrier for the next two years whether you have a phone or not. A person should be allowed to throw their phone off a cliff or use it to control a new robot. They should also be allowed to use it with a different carrier. It’s their choice to pay two carriers simultaneously.
What if they decide to give their iPhone to their wife and get another phone to use with their existing carrier? They should be allowed to convert the iPhone to their wife’s carrier.
blink on January 28, 2013 at 4:00 PM
Fair enough argument, but the flip side to that is if the carriers don’t want people to do it on their subsidized phones, don’t subsidize those phones. Once they sell the phone to me it’s MINE, whether it was subsidized or not. I think your argument makes more sense if the phone was being leased.
Flange on January 28, 2013 at 4:08 PM
This is a specious argument. In getting the low priced phone you have to sign a contract which states you will pay them a certain amount for 2 years. If you decide to stop using their service and not pay you are hit with an Early Termination Fee whose intended purpose is to cover the unpaid cost of the hardware the provider will not now receive because you are terminating. The hardware is not subsidized, you are paying off a loan for the cost over 2 years. Fail to due that and you owe the total cost as a Termination Fee immediately.
Once you have paid for the phone you should be able to do anything you wish with it the same as any other appliance you purchase.
Rocks on January 28, 2013 at 4:22 PM