Late last year, a bill passed that effectively banned the aftermarket unlocking of cell phones if they were not done by the original carrier. This went into law earlier this year and mobile enthusiasts were none too happy about it. After all, I paid for this phone, I signed a lengthy contract, I should be able to do with this phone whatever I want. If I want to pay an early cancellation fee and move to another carrier, I should have that freedom. And at least 100,000 people agree.

The petition reached the minimum threshold just in time and now the White House must offer an official response regarding making the unlocking of cell phones legal again. The unlocking cell phone petition page seems to be down at the moment and we’re not really sure why, but it did reach the necessary minimum. The White House is going to keep its word, isn’t it?

Remember that this doesn’t mean the Obama administration is compelled to lift the unlocking ban; it just means they have to give us a thoughtful response. That’s something, I guess.

[Source]

The post Petition to Lift Ban on Cell Phone Unlocking Heads to White House appeared first on Mobile Magazine.

According to the US Copyright Office, the act of jailbreaking a mobile phone does not violate any copyright laws. If you happen to use a jailbroken iPhone to side-load some illegally-acquired applications, that’s still illegal, but the actual jailbreaking itself is fine. However, the US Copyright Office does say that this ruling does not apply to tablets, including the iPad. They say that the “category of tablets is difficult to define,” so they haven’t made any sort of over-arching statement about that product category yet.

The issue at hand was described as thus:

“Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute lawfully obtained software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications with computer programs on the telephone handset.”

The idea is that smartphones could get tied down the manufacturer or carrier to block the installation of certain “software applications,” so the act of jailbreaking to allow this installation becomes fair game under the DMCA. Realistically, given that tablets can be subsidized by carriers and such, I don’t see how they’re legally all that different from their smartphone counterparts. Your thoughts?

[Source]

The post US Govt: Legal to Jailbreak iPhone, Still Illegal to Jailbreak iPad? appeared first on Mobile Magazine.

The allegation is that Apple colluded with several book publishers to keep the prices of e-books higher in an effort to limit competition. More specifically, it says that this collusion was in direct response to the lower prices being offered by Amazon, which is known to sell best-seller e-books at $9.99. The publishers still wanted their books sold, but at $9.99, they weren’t making enough money.

And thus, the publishers had the same goal as Apple: keep the prices higher. It is “hard to settle a lawsuit when you know you have done no wrong,” said Macmillan (Holtzbrinck Publishers) CEO John Sargent. “Macmillan did not collude.”

The iBookstore from Apple is estimated to have about a 10-15% market share among e-books, compared to the around 60% that the Amazon enjoys, though that figure is down from the 90% it had some time back.

[Source]

The post Apple and Publishers Sued Over Price Fixing of E-Books appeared first on Mobile Magazine.

An official document from the Department of Homeland Security has explicitly stated that just about anyone is allowed to take as many photos as they’d like of government buildings. From your iPhone to your Digital Rebel, your shots are fair game.

There have been plenty of stories about photographers having their equipment seized or being told to erase their memory cards by security personnel around the White House and other government buildings. This memo is saying that such “orders” are no longer okay.

It’s saying that “officers should not seize the camera or its contents, and must be cautious not to give ‘orders’ to a photographer to erase the contents of a camera, as this constitutes a seizure or detention.” Score one for the paparazzi photogs.

[Lens]

The post Homeland Security says you can shoot the White House with impunity appeared first on Mobile Magazine.

President Obama is giving the U.S. Commerce Department the responsibility of heading an internet ID program for Americans. The U.S. government wants the public to be able to have a single digital identity that can be used for multiple websites. According to the U.S. government, it will eliminate the need for multiple different passwords. 
The Obama administration is drafting a program called the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace that includes details on the internet ID, which should be released by Obama in the next few months.

An earlier version of the draft was released in July 2010, and the 39 page strategy (PDF link) tells us to envision a future where “an individual voluntarily requests a smart identity card from her home state” and uses the card for credit card purchases, online banking, secure laptop use, and even accessing electronic health care records.

The ID would be in the form of a smart card or could be loaded onto a USB and would be used to prove someone’s identity for internet transactions and even accessing personal medical information. The U.S. government was quick to mention that there will be no centralized database of everyone’s information, and that there will be no national identity card.
The internet ID is an attempt to reduce identity theft, which the government claims affects over 10 million Americans each year.

But what if someone steals your ID? Can someone else use it access your online accounts?  Sounds like it would make it pretty damn easy for someone to steal my identity, when all of my email and bank accounts are accessed with one little smart card. How handy! 

The draft of the program is pretty vague on exactly how it all works, but stresses that there will be “credentials” that the user of the ID will have to authenticate. This includes an attribute for the user. The example they gave was, “Jane is older than 21.” I hope the questions would be a little harder to guess than that. It all seems pretty theoretical at this point. 

The U.S. Commerce Department stressed that the internet ID is completely voluntary. But of course! In the words of The Party in Orwell’s 1984, when finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.

The post Obama wants internet IDs for all Americans appeared first on Mobile Magazine.