Nonsense - Reader comments at The New York Sun

Submitted by Daniel Knight, Aug 27, 2007 13:06

Mr. Furchtgott-Roth's argument falls down on several fronts.

1. The iPhone is not available exclusively through AT&T. Apple sells iPhones in its online Apple Store and in its retail stores. While AT&T may be able to require a purchaser to sign up for its service, Apple can't and doesn't put any such restriction on its hardware.

Yes, the iPhone is programmed in such a way that it will only work with AT&T without modification, but such modifications are taking place.

2. Apple has no right to require that its customers only run Mac OS X on its computers, only put iTunes Store music on its iPods, or only use AT&T service with its iPhone. There's an ancient principle here in the United States that once you own something, you can do as you choose with it - rip a CD to your computer, run Windows on a Mac, not run Windows on a computer that shipped with Windows, hack your iPhone to work with other services.

Apple has every right to make this difficult - even impossible if they so desire - but the public has a right to put any brand of tires on its care, any music label CD in a Sony Discman, and try to modify the iPhone (or any other computer) as they see fit.

The concept of property is being looted when Apple and/or AT&T says that the iPhone you bought can only be used with AT&T service. Or do corporations in modern America indeed have more rights than individuals?

It is not theft to pay for something and treat it as your own.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.

Other reader comments on this article

Comment	By	Date
You would think a former FCC Commissioner would be familiar with the ruling of the Librarian of Congress nine months... [MORE]	Jason	Sep 11, 2007 11:20
A simple question, If I buy the iPhone and then the software to open it up. I then pay another... [MORE]	Dan	Aug 28, 2007 05:45
I have to say that i totally disagree, and in my case I can't have an IPhone, even though I'd... [MORE]	Massiel	Sep 3, 2007 13:19
For Apple it's important to prove to the world of telcom and phone makers that there is a new paradigm... [MORE]	ken	Aug 27, 2007 21:34
Hi all I've been watching the developments with the iPhone with interest. I'm in Australia and having been tortured by WM... [MORE]	Adam	Aug 27, 2007 19:47
Mr. Furchtgott-Roth, I respectfully disagree with your supposition that use of the iPhone on other networks represents a theft of intellectual... [MORE]	Steven Sokol	Aug 27, 2007 17:11
I take exception to the part: "Instead, it chose an exclusive contract with AT&T, self-evidently because it was in Apple's... [MORE]	brett	Aug 27, 2007 14:52
Mr. Furchtgott-Roth's argument falls down on several fronts. 1. The iPhone is not available exclusively through AT&T. Apple sells iPhones in...	Daniel Knight	Aug 27, 2007 13:06
Nobody is talking about stealing Apple's intellectual property -- nobody is copying the iPhone and selling it as their own,... [MORE]	Ted T.	Aug 27, 2007 11:41
Apple and AT&T may have entered into a contract for exclusive SALES of the iPhone, but they don't have a... [MORE]	Mike Babulic	Aug 27, 2007 11:05
Even in the wireless world, exclusives regularly exist, albeit typically on technology boundaries. However, many are also carrier exclusives, at... [MORE]	Kirk	Aug 27, 2007 09:21
Jobs and Wozniak started their careers as ... phone hackers!It's only appropriate that someone has hacked Jobs' new phone, especially... [MORE]	Spam Loather	Aug 27, 2007 06:27
Amid all the dross written about the iPhone, there's the occasional piece that stands out for its intelligence and even-handedness.... [MORE]	Trevor	Aug 27, 2007 05:58