Is it possible to disallow a usage of a device in a certain way?
<p>I have bought a <a href="https://timeular.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Timeular</a> bluetooth time tracker device, the only application supporting the tracker is a paid subscription.</p>
<p>I do not want to use that application, I think it's ridiculous that I have to pay a subscription on top of the already expensive device.</p>
<p>Instead I want to make my own application that connects to the tracker, reads it state and possibly connects to another open source time tracker. I have not found anything that forbids the use of the tracker in the terms or anything like that.</p>
<p>It made me wonder - can a device manufacturer for you to use a device in a certain way? Like only with an official app or something like that.</p>

<p>At least under US law, if you purchase an object (and assuming there are no independent statutory restrictions on its use), you can usually do with you want with it. However, it is illegal to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201" rel="nofollow noreferrer">circumvent copy protection schemes</a>, but your plan does not obviously run afoul of that requirement. However, the law is often not obvious. The Copyright Office has a list of exemptions at <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-37/chapter-II/subchapter-A/part-201/section-201.40" rel="nofollow noreferrer">37 CFR 201.40</a> where</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that
control access to copyrighted works set forth in 17 U.S.C.
1201(a)(1)(A) shall not apply to such users of the prescribed classes
of copyrighted works</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As it turns out, jailbreaking cell phones is allowed but jailbreaking tablet is not (see p. 12 <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2012-26308.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>) –</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Register determined that the statutory factors weighed in favor of
a renewed exemption for smartphones, as nothing in the record
suggested that the market for mobile phones had been negatively
impacted by the designation of such a class and, in fact, such a class
might make smartphones more attractive to consumers....</p>
<p>On the other hand, the Register concluded that the record did not
support an extension of the exemption to “tablet” devices.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The manufacturer cannot tell you how to use your device, but you may be forbidden from changing the device software.</p>

software licensing hardware