Main > Everything Else

Just installed XBMC on my iPad

<< < (5/15) > >>

ark_ader:

--- Quote from: shmokes on February 11, 2011, 12:49:21 am ---
--- Quote from: ark_ader on February 10, 2011, 06:07:36 pm ---
I suggest you do some research that you lawyer types like to do in your *cough* billable time.


--- End quote ---

Even if I'm wrong, do you honestly think I care?  What . . . once you become a lawyer you can never say anything unless you first research it to make sure you understand it fully and haven't misunderstood anything?

For that matter, before I went to law school I was a network administrator for a government agency, but I also freelanced on the side.  Guess what, I charged my clients by the hour.  You know how I am charged by my mechanic whenever I need work done on my car?  That's right!  By the hour.  You know how people charge for labor even when they charge you a flat rate for something?  They estimate how long it will take them to complete.  Like . . . in what field are clients not charged for labor?

--- End quote ---

I think if you take the oath, you should abide by it.  Respecting the law as prescribed would be a good starting point.   ::)

shmokes:
What, I took an oath to never be wrong?  For that matter, the lawyer's oath doesn't demand that I don't jailbreak iPads (even before jailbreaking was made officially legal).  Have you even read a lawyer's oath?

Anyway, jailbreaking iPod touches and iPads is legal.  I wasn't even wrong to begin with.  Apple would never file a suit against someone who created a jailbreak on the grounds that it'll jailbreak devices that are not telephone handsets, because there's nothing significant in it being a telephone.  The first question any court would ask Apple is, "Why should we rule that the DCMA prohibits jailbreaking an iPad when it would not prohibit the same on an iPhone."  The only thing Apple could say is, "Because it's a phone."  The judge would tell them to get the hell out of his court room.  Courts do not just close their eyes and play make believe based on the grammar used in various laws and regs.  They look at the purpose of the law.  Obviously the part about unlocking to enable connecting to a different wireless carrier than was originally intended applies only to phones or other devices that connect to a cell phone network.  The part about jailbreaking to allow unauthorized, but legally obtained software to run on the device applies to the other devices that are logically the same thing.  The law is not an ass.

pointdablame:

--- Quote from: ark_ader on February 12, 2011, 07:03:07 am ---I think if you take the oath, you should abide by it.  Respecting the law as prescribed would be a good starting point.   ::)

--- End quote ---

Yeesh.  I hope your cowboy skills are up to par, because that's a mighty high horse you're on.  :cheers:

SavannahLion:

--- Quote from: pointdablame on February 12, 2011, 02:49:25 pm ---
--- Quote from: ark_ader on February 12, 2011, 07:03:07 am ---I think if you take the oath, you should abide by it.  Respecting the law as prescribed would be a good starting point.   ::)

--- End quote ---

Yeesh.  I hope your cowboy skills are up to par, because that's a mighty high horse you're on.  :cheers:

--- End quote ---

And on a forum that is dominated by MAME cabinets?

ark_ader:

--- Quote from: shmokes on February 12, 2011, 01:08:47 pm ---What, I took an oath to never be wrong?  For that matter, the lawyer's oath doesn't demand that I don't jailbreak iPads (even before jailbreaking was made officially legal).  Have you even read a lawyer's oath?

Anyway, jailbreaking iPod touches and iPads is legal.  I wasn't even wrong to begin with.  Apple would never file a suit against someone who created a jailbreak on the grounds that it'll jailbreak devices that are not telephone handsets, because there's nothing significant in it being a telephone.  The first question any court would ask Apple is, "Why should we rule that the DCMA prohibits jailbreaking an iPad when it would not prohibit the same on an iPhone."  The only thing Apple could say is, "Because it's a phone."  The judge would tell them to get the hell out of his court room.  Courts do not just close their eyes and play make believe based on the grammar used in various laws and regs.  They look at the purpose of the law.  Obviously the part about unlocking to enable connecting to a different wireless carrier than was originally intended applies only to phones or other devices that connect to a cell phone network.  The part about jailbreaking to allow unauthorized, but legally obtained software to run on the device applies to the other devices that are logically the same thing.  The law is not an ass.

--- End quote ---

Did you even read that link I posted?  Tell me where it says you can legally jailbreak or circumvent an iPad?  Just show me where it says that.  An iPhone, yes as it is a wireless device, but an iPad (except maybe the 3G version) isn't classified as the same under that ruling, neither is the Apple TV.  Just because Apple hasn't sued anyone yet, it does not give you license to circumvent that device's operating system.  To boast of it on this messageboard considering that you have passed the Bar and you are an officer of the courts, is a failure of ethics.
Lawyers Oath:
I solemnly swear (or affirm) I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of <Insert State Here>;

I will maintain the respect due to courts of justice and judicial officers;

I will not counsel or maintain any suit or proceeding which shall appear to me to be unjust, nor any defense except such as I believe to be honestly debatable under the law of the land;

I will employ for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to me such means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and will never seek to mislead the judge or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law;

I will maintain the confidence and preserve inviolate the secrets of my client, and will accept no compensation in connection with a client's business except from the client or with the client's knowledge and approval;

I will abstain from all offensive personality, and advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which I am charged;

I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed, or delay any person's cause for lucre or malice.

So help me God.

The Constitution of the United States....That should ring some alarm bells in your head.

--- Quote from: pointdablame on February 12, 2011, 02:49:25 pm ---
--- Quote from: ark_ader on February 12, 2011, 07:03:07 am ---I think if you take the oath, you should abide by it.  Respecting the law as prescribed would be a good starting point.   ::)

--- End quote ---

Yeesh.  I hope your cowboy skills are up to par, because that's a mighty high horse you're on.  :cheers:

--- End quote ---

I am not a lawyer but I can ride a horse as well as any cowboy as my brother has a ranch out in Nevada.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version