[guardian-dev] [liberationtech] Let's make rooting phones a crime

[Mark Belinsky]

Good news everyone! It *looks like we made it*. I'd like to share this
victory video with you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SEwQRPtUz4&feature=youtu.be&t=2m13s

The White House
petition<https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7>to
make unlocking phones legal has
surpassed the 100,000 signatures
necessary<http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/02/21/petition-to-make-unlocking-phones-legal-again-passes-100000-signatures-white-house-is-required-to-respond/>for
them to issue a statement. It took 26 days to get the first 80,000
signatures and only 2 days to get the last 20,000 we needed. What a great
couple days!

Thanks to everyone who signed the petition and to those who pointed out
that unlocking phones is indeed different than rooting phones. This is one
step in the ongoing battle to maintain ownership over the devices we have
in our loved ones pockets. Congrats Guardians and libtechers!

Best,
Mark


--*
@mbelinsky <https://twitter.com/mbelinsky> |
markbelinsky.com<https://markbelinsky.com>| phone:
+1-347-466-9327 | skype: markontheline
*


On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Seth David Schoen <schoen at eff.org> wrote:

> hwamyeon writes:
>
> > While I agree that the anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA should
> > be revoked, I don't think we should be tasking the Librarian of Congress
> > to do this for us. The Librarian of Congress's power of exemption is
> > supposed to be specifically in the interest of supporting the mission of
> > the library. Fundamental changes to the DMCA is a political issue that
> > we should be tasking Congress with.
>
> I agree that it would be preferable to have a comprehensive fix, like
> repealing the entirety of §1201.
>
> The current law calls for the Librarian of Congress to decide "whether
> persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be
> in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition
> under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under
> this title of a particular class of copyrighted works". 17 USC
> §1201(a)(1)(C).
> So that determination isn't limited to "the interest of supporting the
> mission of the library".
>
> --
> Seth Schoen  <schoen at eff.org>
> Senior Staff Technologist                       https://www.eff.org/
> Electronic Frontier Foundation                  https://www.eff.org/join
> 454 Shotwell Street, San Francisco, CA  94110   +1 415 436 9333 x107
> --
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/guardian-dev/attachments/20130221/cb255568/attachment.html>