I suppose it would look a little funny to read my article and see that post on Twitter at the same time. I can certainly appreciate your question for how I see that one is justified and the other is not. I hope my answer is satisfactory for you.

First and foremost, in a matter of days, my two-year contract with AT&T is up. Once I am no longer under contract with them, the phone is officially mine and I am free to do with it as I please. By the letter of the law, I am not breaking the rules of a contract when I am not under said contract.

Secondly, as of July 26, 2010, it is actually no longer illegal to jailbreak or unlock your phone. The U.S. government ruled that customers should be free to make those choices themselves. (Now, none of this keeps Apple from voiding your warranty when you mess with their product, but that’s something else entirely: If I choose to use my product in a way the manufacture advised me not to, then of course they will not cover any damages I caused to the device.)

And since we’re talking about it, let me just throw in the why I’m wanting to unlock my phone. My wife and I are leaving to live and work in Ukraine in just nine days, and we want to be able to use our phones when we are there. Since they are locked to AT&T, they must be unlocked so we can use them with a carrier overseas. Though this would be no excuse if the law said otherwise, but I just thought I’d let you know.

So, to recap, unlocking my phone is not illegal because I am under no contract which says otherwise and, even if I were, the U.S. government has determined such contracts are not binding.

Hope that helped.

Ironically, my eyes caught a twitter feed on the right side of the article: “@TobyRyan Hey man, I’m needing to jailbreak my 3G so I can unlock it to use in Ukraine. Have any helpful tips or sites to use? I’m lost. 1 day ago”

Do you think that the same responsibilities that you wrote about regarding copyright stewardship for printed materials, cd’s, dvd’s and internet material do not apply to intellectual work of others – like cell phone carriers and manufacturers? Jailbreaking’s main purpose is to do exactly what you have been preaching about – stealing the property of others. It allows features to be opened up or exploited that are not otherwise paid for.

Be careful – our actions speak so much louder than words on a page, and it is really unfortunate that many persons half my age will see your wonderful article on copyright stewardship on one hand, but see that you are trying to break someone else’s trademarked, patented, copyrighted ir otherwise protected intellectual work by jailbreaking a phone.

I think you’ve put your finger on a very serious issue: the commoditization of the gospel. (I hold a degree English-I’m allowed to make up new words. :) ) Christian artists need to think about this and the rest of us need to accept that ultimately it’s a matter of the artist’s conscience and we can’t bind our views on them.

Brandon’s point still stands: the issue at hand is not the morality of copyright law, but whether or not Christians must obey the law. Since copyright law doesn’t violate God’s law, copyright ought to be obeyed by Christians.

The question, “Must Christians obey a law that is immoral?” is a wider question worthy of discussion.

It’s a different matter when the copyright holder has a “share” feature.

How do you know if someone has the copyright on specific content on YouTube? Generally speaking, those with the copyright declare it in some manner. Those without the copyright don’t usually declare that they don’t have it. If in doubt, move on.

Here’s a somewhat related topic. I suspect that Brandon and his team will come up against this once they move to Ukraine…provided that they’ve got an internet connection.