View Single Post
Old 10-28-2012, 04:01 PM   #95
bhartman36
Wizard
bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bhartman36 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
bhartman36's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,315
Karma: 1515835
Join Date: Mar 2009
Device: Kindle 3 Wi-Fi, Craig CMP738a Android Tablet
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizwor View Post
Unless it's a tablet -- whatever that is. I think this could go either way. A could could say the LoC did not define a tablet, there no laws apply, or the court could apply its own definition -- which could be very broad -- and prosecute jailbreaking.
Reading the document, one of the things that struck me is that the people who didn't want the exception (the rights holders, I assume) argued that an exception wasn't needed because it was already covered under the previous exception. Do you think that argument has legs?
bhartman36 is offline   Reply With Quote