It's kind of amazing that a recurring exemption is required in order to give people the legal cover they need to modify devices they have purchased in order to put legal software on them. This time around, the EFF is seeking to broaden the exemption to tablets and consoles.
It's worth mentioning that the absence of this protection creates legal uncertainty rather than an explicit case of illegality for jailbroken devices, but some manufacturers hold the position that jailbreaking violates the DCMA law, which carries stiff penalties, and they have the motivation and the means to go on the legal attack against developers that facilitate and work in the jailbreaking community.
In a way, basic rights to ownership are under assault from companies and their quest to protect their walled-garden profit models. With something like a cell phone (computer) its completely insane to me that a company would come after you for doing anything you wish with it once you exchange money for the device. If I want to hack it, pai t it orange, then throw it in the corner and urinate on it, well then that's my right damn it. I get that modifying devices creates all sorts of uncertainty in behavior for software installed in 'walled garden' ecosystems, but if I want to leave it and wander I to the jungle then that's my choice. Besides, I don't think it's really about protecting the user experience and safety (viruses etc). I think this is mostly about the manufacturers protecting their ability to enforce DRM on a range of offerings from their partners. You see this with Apple and Google refusal to allow tethering software in their app store so carriers can charge you over $30 a month to use data you have already paid for. The jailbreak community buys a tethering app one time and does this for free. Sorry carriers.