Imagine if a major automobile manufacturer came up with a way to use an onboard computer to require that you buy gasoline from a particular company. It's the same gas you can buy anywhere, but unless the pump includes special circuitry only available to a single company that paid a bunch of money to the car's manufacturer for the privilege, the gas tank can't be filled. Now let's say that an enterprising individual wants to choose his own gas station, so he comes up with a way to reprogram the car's computer, allowing the owner to fill the gas tank from any pump at any gas station. Let's finally suppose that there's a recall on the car, requiring owners to bring them into a dealership for free repairs, but while the car is being fixed, every dealer is required to check the fuel tank computer to make sure it hasn't been tampered with to allow gas from non-approved sources, and disable the car's engine if evidence of tampering is found. When irate owners complain to dealership management they're simply told that a license agreement they agreed to by driving off the lot voids the car's warranty, and another on a piece of paper they signed to get the recall work done allows the dealership to modify the car in whatever way the manufacturer wants, so basically there's nothing they can do.
It sounds like a ludicrous situation, but it's not as far fetched as it may seem at first. Replace the word car with mobile phone, and choosing your own gas station with choosing your own wireless provider, and you've got something that looks a lot like Apple's apparent plan for the iPhone. Earlier this week Apple announced a major update to the iPhone. Unfortunately for iPhone owners who have unlocked their phones to use them on networks other than AT&T, the update will also cause their phones to cease working at all. The phones appear to be in the same pre-activation state as when they're new, but they can't be actived with a non-AT&T SIM (which requires the phone to be unlocked) or the original AT&T SIM that came with the phone.
Additionally, iPhones that have been hacked to allow unauthorized third party software to be installed will be modified, although they won't stop working. Instead, all software not specifically allowed by Apple simply disappears.
An announcement from Apple did make it clear that software for unlocking the phones "will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed." When asked for clarification, an Apple representative stated that the company is not "proactively trying to disable any iPhone that has been hacked or unlocked by software," However, this seems to contradict a statement made by CEO Steve Jobs last week. At a London press conference officially announcing the iPhone's availability in the UK he said “It’s a cat and mouse game. We play it on iPods with DRM. We try to stay ahead. I’m not sure if we are the cat or the mouse. People will try to break in, and it’s our job to stop them breaking in.”
Despite the contradictory company statements, one major clue seems to stand out. Although the unlocked phones become inactive after the update, and can't even be used on AT&T's network, they can still make emergency (911) calls, as mandated by the FCC. In other words, the one thing that would have ensured a government investigation if it didn't work is the only thing that does. Though this certainly doesn't prove anything conclusively, it does raise legitimate questions that someone in the government should be asking.
Unless it can be proven that Apple is intentionally targeting unlocked iPhones with their updates, consumers have little or no recourse. If, however, a government investigation were to find that this is exactly what Apple is doing, it would drag the practices of tech companies like Apple (and many others) into the light for the kind of public scrutiny most other industries face.
If the scenario were truly one of an automobile manufacturer getting paid to ensure their cars only accepted gas from a single company there would be hearings in Congress starting next week. If it was determined to be legal, you can be sure a law would quickly be passed to outlaw it. Instead, since it's computer technology, which to paraphrase author Arthur C. Clarke seems indistinguishable from magic to lawmakers, the public appears to be left to their own devices for solving the problem.
A warranty that's void because of tampering with a device is fairly standard and certainly legal, although perhaps morally questionable when it comes to simple software modifications. Taking advantage of that to break legally purchased devices because their use runs counter to the manufacturer's business model isn't standard. If this is, in fact, Apple's strategy it also removes any questions about the plans immorality. If they want to keep their grip on the mobile device market apparently considered key to the company's future plans, they'd be well advised to consider all their customers, including the ones who think their $400 phone should work on any compatible network they choose.
Sources:
MacWorld
Digital Daily
Wired
Gizmodo
Additionally, iPhones that have been hacked to allow unauthorized third party software to be installed will be modified, although they won't stop working. Instead, all software not specifically allowed by Apple simply disappears.
An announcement from Apple did make it clear that software for unlocking the phones "will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed." When asked for clarification, an Apple representative stated that the company is not "proactively trying to disable any iPhone that has been hacked or unlocked by software," However, this seems to contradict a statement made by CEO Steve Jobs last week. At a London press conference officially announcing the iPhone's availability in the UK he said “It’s a cat and mouse game. We play it on iPods with DRM. We try to stay ahead. I’m not sure if we are the cat or the mouse. People will try to break in, and it’s our job to stop them breaking in.”
Despite the contradictory company statements, one major clue seems to stand out. Although the unlocked phones become inactive after the update, and can't even be used on AT&T's network, they can still make emergency (911) calls, as mandated by the FCC. In other words, the one thing that would have ensured a government investigation if it didn't work is the only thing that does. Though this certainly doesn't prove anything conclusively, it does raise legitimate questions that someone in the government should be asking.
Unless it can be proven that Apple is intentionally targeting unlocked iPhones with their updates, consumers have little or no recourse. If, however, a government investigation were to find that this is exactly what Apple is doing, it would drag the practices of tech companies like Apple (and many others) into the light for the kind of public scrutiny most other industries face.
If the scenario were truly one of an automobile manufacturer getting paid to ensure their cars only accepted gas from a single company there would be hearings in Congress starting next week. If it was determined to be legal, you can be sure a law would quickly be passed to outlaw it. Instead, since it's computer technology, which to paraphrase author Arthur C. Clarke seems indistinguishable from magic to lawmakers, the public appears to be left to their own devices for solving the problem.
A warranty that's void because of tampering with a device is fairly standard and certainly legal, although perhaps morally questionable when it comes to simple software modifications. Taking advantage of that to break legally purchased devices because their use runs counter to the manufacturer's business model isn't standard. If this is, in fact, Apple's strategy it also removes any questions about the plans immorality. If they want to keep their grip on the mobile device market apparently considered key to the company's future plans, they'd be well advised to consider all their customers, including the ones who think their $400 phone should work on any compatible network they choose.
Sources:
MacWorld
Digital Daily
Wired
Gizmodo
