Will Apple make “bricks” out of unlocked iPhones?!

Published on September 20th, 2007

Posted by SN in General

Ars Technica – 9/19/2007:

consumers in the US are legally allowed to unlock their mobile handsets after the US Register of Copyrights approved an exemption to the DMCA late last year, noting that “The underlying activity sought to be performed by the owner of the handset is to allow the handset to do what it was manufactured to do—lawfully connect to any carrier.” But don’t tell that to Apple and AT&T—unless the government bars them from locking out the unlocks, there’s virtually nothing stopping them from making sure that the unlocks mysteriously stop working.

But we have reason to believe that Apple may go much further than just “breaking” the SIM unlocks that have been released so far. One move that the cat (or is Apple the mouse?) could make in this game would be to permanently and irreparably brick unlocked iPhones when they run this month’s pending software update. It would serve as a warning shot to potential unlockers in the future—even if crafty hackers manage to rewrite their unlock apps to get around the changes made in the update, they could always be at risk of suddenly owning a shiny $400 chunk of metal and plastic.

40 users responded in " Will Apple make “bricks” out of unlocked iPhones?! "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 KagatoAMV said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:27 am

Thats something I’ve been curious about. Is it illegal for Apple to brick an unlocked iPhone? Is Apple under any obligation whatsoever to make sure its future updates don’t “brick” a hacked phone?

I suppose if you hack your iphone, you’d better be pretty damn careful about making software updates.

# 2 lakelady said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:34 am

Why would apple want to do that? Once they’ve sold the phone they’ve made their money. Why should they care if they’re unlocked or not. Turning them into bricks will only hurt their sales, not help them.

# 3 Adrian said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:38 am

That would be a very bad move if Apple goes that far.

Fans unlocking the iPhone hurts AT&T more than it hurts Apple. The ability to unlock the iphone will increase iPhone sales and reflect positively to Apple’s bottom line.

Don’t do it Apple.. if you know whats good for you.

# 4 ethanol said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:47 am

lakelady (#2),
Why would apple want to do that? Once they’ve sold the phone they’ve made their money. Why should they care if they’re unlocked or not.
Because they receive $15/month from AT&T for each iPhone user with an AT&T contract.

# 5 shih tzu paradise said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:54 am

I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple pushes a software update that disabled unlocked iphones but still allows them to work as ipods.

Don’t forget, Apple loses $$$ for every one that’s unlocked through loss of shared revenue from AT&T.

That’s why they chose to lock customers to one provider…a share of the data revenue.

What a great way to treat loyal customers!

# 6 JJ said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:57 am

Come on. I call BS. This is Apple, not Sony.

# 7 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 20th, 2007 at 10:59 am

#5 – Don’t forget, Apple loses $$$ for every one that’s unlocked through loss of shared revenue from AT&T.

They don’t “lose” money… They just don’t make more than they already have. To “lose” money, money would actually have to leave Apple.

I hate it when a company earns 8 million in profit be projected 10 million in profit and portray it as a 2 million dollar loss.

# 8 Froggmann said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:02 am

Simply put if apple moves to brick iPhones they stand to lose potential millions of potential iPod, Mac and iVaporware customers. Who are the primary customers here? Kids and the younger generation, if this happens how many will become jaded agaist Apple, for life?

# 9 your-name-here said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:17 am

Correct me if I’m wrong, but does not the current set of DMCA exemptions allow for the unlocking of phones? If Apple bricks an iPhone, could they not possibly be running afoul the DMCA?

# 10 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:26 am

#9 – Apple is a corporation. The only ones who can break laws in the United States are citizens. Corporations are immune to law.

# 11 BlackCat40 said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:28 am

This makes no sense to me. Once you buy hardware isn’t it yours? I know the RIAA has that thing about you don’t really own the music just because you bought the CD but this is different. How would Apple bricking the phone be different then me taking your phone and breaking it. Wouldn’t I owe you a new phone? I’m not trying to be stupid I just don’t see how legally they could make a piece of hardware that you wholly own not work.

# 12 pedro said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:48 am

But..but…mac is a good company. They don’t want to gouge their customers. Never!

#8 No, they count on iSheeps, The were already burned with the price cut and they’re still there. Guess what they’ll do if mac bricks the oy!Phone.

#11 it maybe yours, but if you want a software update…

# 13 Mike Strong said, on September 20th, 2007 at 12:03 pm

Add to that the raft of charges for software/hardware services. This guy got charged nearly $4,800 in data charges during a trip. The darn thing updates your emails (so friendly) so they will be there when you wake up, and more. But then they charge through the nose.
http://www.blah3.com/article.php?story=200709080000479

The following is copied from the page:
Jay Levy and his family took their iPhones on a Mediterranean cruise. Now the Hewlett Harbor entrepreneur feels as if he got taken for a ride, receiving a 54-page monthly bill of nearly $4,800 from AT&T Wireless.

While Levy, his wife and his daughter were enjoying the trip, and even while they were sleeping, their three iPhones were racking up a bill for data charges. The iPhone regularly updates e-mail, even while it’s off, so that all the messages will be available when the user turns it on.

“They have periodic updates on their data files, and they translate into megabucks,” Levy said. “This is akin to your bank having automatic access to your ATM machine and is siphoning money out during all times of the day and night without your knowledge.”

# 14 HighQHam said, on September 20th, 2007 at 12:08 pm

This is Apple, not Microsoft.

While they might upload firmware that will break some of the current hacks, they wouldn’t do anything that would destroy the iPhone. You might have to reset your firmware and go back to an ATT account, but they are smarter than to turn the iPhone into a brick – I think, I hope?

Apple is not going to destroy its customer base over a few million dollars. Look at their iPhone rebate.

# 15 Colonel Panic said, on September 20th, 2007 at 12:20 pm

Bwahahahahahahahahahah! Suckers, didnt you have to sign a contract? And now your crying because they wont let you break it? My heart bleeds.

# 16 gquaglia said, on September 20th, 2007 at 12:41 pm

The only ones who can break laws in the United States are citizens. Corporations are immune to law

Sad but true.

# 17 JoaoPT said, on September 20th, 2007 at 1:03 pm

I don’t think Apple would do such a blunder. Two reasons:
1 – Very bad publicity. Even though fanboys would say “I deserved it”…
2 – Bricking a phone would keep them from cashing in those $15 monthly AT&T gives them, and worse, keep AT&T from cashing from your two year contract with them where they expect to charge you a lot more than the cost of the iPhone.

# 18 Lavi said, on September 20th, 2007 at 1:38 pm

That would be sooo funny!!! A shiny Apple Brick.

You can always trust Apple Design to make a brick look good!!!!!

# 19 Angel H. Wong said, on September 20th, 2007 at 2:00 pm

#17

They can and they WILL brick the iPhones, then they will charge you a $200 fee to unbrick them.

# 20 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 20th, 2007 at 2:15 pm

You guys talking about how Apple won’t do this because of publicity are forgetting that we are talking about American consumers here. They bought these dumb ass phones to watch Britney Spears videos and update their myspace accounts with drunken party photos. Do you really think anyone pays attention to nerd news other than nerds?

We gave up. The US is run by a shadow government, the Corporate States of America, and the population is placated my Lindsey Lohan gossip and other celebrity news.

We are all just slaves to the American Entertainial/Military Complex. The sheeple will never resist.

This and other whacky paranoid loonbat rants will appear on my soon to be launched website: http://www.paranoid-loonbats.com

# 21 JoaoPT said, on September 20th, 2007 at 2:18 pm

#19 only as a deterrent…
and, of course, if a fanboy’s get’s iBricked, he will dutyfully go to an AppleStore and buy another one…

# 22 jpt1 said, on September 20th, 2007 at 2:19 pm

We need to be clear that there are two “unlocks”, one merely allows you to add 3rd party applications to the OSX iPhone operating system, the other allows different mobile carriers access to the phone hardware and software to make and receive calls.

If you purchased and iPhone and never activated via AT&T then you should be able under the DMCA to choose your carrier. If you chose AT&T and signed a contract with them then that is your obligation to live with the contract or pay the termination clause fee.

Adding 3rd party apps to the iPhone (which is a miniature OSX powered computer) should be no different than adding 3rd party programs to a Powerbook etc. Apple should treat the iPhone as a computer not as just a phone.

# 23 pedro said, on September 20th, 2007 at 2:38 pm

#14 You ope? think different! And the rebate was not in cash and for half the price cut, not a full compensation.

#17 the bricked phone will not be using AT&T. That’s why they’ll be bricked.

#22 but it is different (they thought so) to add third party apps to the oy!Phone. That’s why they blocked that. I wouldn’t be surprised if they slam the door on the app hack too.

# 24 JoaoPT said, on September 20th, 2007 at 2:58 pm

#23 you got a point there…

“#17 the bricked phone will not be using AT&T. That’s why they’ll be bricked.”

# 25 Mr. Fusion said, on September 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pm

Apple won’t “brick” the phones. First it would be illegal to purposely render useless someone else’s property. Second, Apple knows they and AT&T would have a huge class action lawsuit on their hands if they did anything like this. If you don’t think there would be a line of lawyers to the courthouse filing claims think again. Not to mention several States Attorneys General asking embarrassing questions.

This brings up a point I came across a short while back. Most of these companies require arbitration to settle disputes. Only these “arbitrators” rule for the telecoms something like 95% of the time. If you have a dispute, before agreeing to a specific arbitrator, ask to see his last ten or twenty disputes. Ask to see the briefs and all evidential material submitted. If more than half are unfavorable to the consumer or if he refuses to release the information then refuse his services as biased. You may also contact the consumers and ask their opinion of the arbitrator.

Remember, you are not obligated to accept any arbitrator that you reasonably believe to be biased, even if you have agreed to accept arbitration. If there is no mutually acceptable arbitrator then you may resort to Small Claims Court which has a far better climate for consumers.

# 26 OvenMaster said, on September 20th, 2007 at 4:53 pm

Why, oh why, do the people that hack things or find workarounds always blare their triumphs from the highest mountaintop? To share their success with others, yes, but doing so also attracts unwanted attention. In this case, Apple’s. I’ve hacked a few items, found workarounds, etc, but I keep my mouth shut. Call me selfish, but at least what I’ve done to some of my possessions doesn’t attract the attention of The Powers That Be. I check on the internets to see if what I’ve done has been done by someone else already, but if there’s no mention of it, well then, I guess I’ve found buried treasure..

# 27 TIHZ_HO said, on September 20th, 2007 at 6:36 pm

Why is Microsoft called the evil empire?

Apple is a hardware company whose intention is to lock the user into everything Apple.

Read John’s article on the future of Apple as is quite interesting.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1923151,00.asp

Cheers

# 28 GregA said, on September 20th, 2007 at 7:08 pm

Wow… I bricked my second phone this year last week. I am having a bad year for phones. Even at $400 this phone is simply too expensive for my blood. Once they get down to the $150 dollar range I am there, but for now, for an actual cell phone user… simply too much money.

# 29 lakelady said, on September 20th, 2007 at 7:30 pm

#27 that article is one of the more absurd ones I’ve ever read. No one switched? Wrong – maybe not large corporations but lots of individuals have. I’m always running into folks that have Windows at work, because they have to, and a Mac at home – when they make the choice. Plenty of others are choosing Macs instead of Windows machines. Small gains in market share but certainly not none. Peripherials not working? What a joke. I’ve never purchased a peripheral that didn’t work EASILY on a Mac. Everyone I know who uses Windows is always moaning about having to install this or that driver etc. What’s John been smoking?

# 30 Axtell said, on September 20th, 2007 at 8:19 pm

I love it…apple is simply protecting their hardware.

Don’t want to be locked into their hardware or AT&T’s network, don’t buy the iPhone.

It’s pretty easy, really.

# 31 Mike Voice said, on September 20th, 2007 at 8:44 pm

Funny how the FUD in the linked-article only points to how popular the iPhone is… and that the only two things holding-back sales are the price, and the 2-year AT&T lock-in.

They’ve already lowered the price – not enough, but its a good start – and only have to pay just-enough lip-service to blocking hacks, to keep AT&T execs from blowing a gasket.

Kick-backs from AT&T is chump-change compared to what Apple could get if a significant number of people feel it is safe to buy an iPhone – with the express intention of using it on networks other than AT&T’s.

And its not like 100% of iPhone buyers will hack their phone, so AT&T will still be signing-up a steady flow of new iPhone users – and Apple will still get a ton-o-cash from AT&T.

…there’s virtually nothing stopping them from making sure that the unlocks mysteriously stop working.

What a crock of cripes.
“virtually nothing”???
“mysteriously”???
How about class-action lawsuits out the ying-yang after they flagrantly ignore a recent legal exemption to the DCMA?

The Copyright Office’s exemption to the DMCA means Apple can screw with the people providing/selling the unlocking software – which is still a violation of the DMCA – but they can’t screw with consumers who unlock their phones for the purpose of using them on another network.

# 32 NappyHeadedHo said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:15 pm

#27 – Microsoft is called the “evil empire” basically because they suck. They suck because of that screaming bald moron that proves the rate of the pack is determined by the speed of the leader.

# 33 TIHZ_HO said, on September 20th, 2007 at 11:59 pm

#29 “I’m always running into folks that have Windows at work, because they have to, and a Mac at home – when they make the choice. ”

Funny from my experience it was the other way around with so many people I know in advertising. Two very good friends of mine who are very good graphic designers both use Macs at work but have PCs at home. So WTF?

#32 “…screaming bald moron…” Steve Jobs? WTF?

Cheers

# 34 pedro said, on September 21st, 2007 at 4:03 am

#29 mac may have risen its marketshare a bit. But that’s explainable with just one word: bootcamp. And if something you bought on a mac store doesn’t work with a mac, let me know.

# 35 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 21st, 2007 at 7:06 am

#32 – I always enjoy reading an unbiased, objective opinion.

# 36 Gregory said, on September 21st, 2007 at 8:31 am

1 – The article is a big pile of FUD
2 – see above.

As soon as I saw the amount of weasel words in the extract I knew it to be bullshit.

Yes Apple MIGHT brick phones, just as we MIGHT get unlimited amounts of sunshine from an orange. Are either of these likely, or do they have any evidence of happening? No.

Poor choice for posting SN, this is an Uncle Dave post at best.

# 37 Mr. Fusion said, on September 21st, 2007 at 10:01 am

#36, Gregory,

Poor choice for posting SN, this is an Uncle Dave post at best.

Phukhat. There is nothing wrong about this topic. Several people found it interesting enough to post something. Remember, if you don’t have anything to say, don’t say it.

# 38 Frank IBC said, on September 21st, 2007 at 10:11 am

Apple is a corporation. The only ones who can break laws in the United States are citizens. Corporations are immune to law.

So I guess in your opinion, the pilot of the Exxon Valdez should have been forced to pay the cost of cleanup of the Alaskan coast, out of his own pocket?

# 39 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 21st, 2007 at 10:21 am

#38 – I think you know what I mean and your “question” is at best, disingenuous.

# 40 pedro said, on September 21st, 2007 at 12:39 pm

Who’s pointing at disingenious questions?

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!