(MintPress) – Only Americans living under a social media rock have avoided news that, starting Saturday, it will become illegal — without your providers’ permission — to unlock a smartphone, a move that would allow its owner to switch from one carrier to another.

Jailbreaking your phone, on the other hand, will remain legal. Don’t try it with a tablet though — that’s illegal, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

So, what’s the difference between jailbreaking and unlocking your phone?

Sebastien Page of iDownloadblog explains it like this: “Jailbreaking is the process by which an iPhone firmware is modified to allow unsigned code to be run to gain access to files that Apple wouldn’t normally let you access.”

Unlocking a smartphone would allow use with multiple carriers through the compromise of the SIM restrictions.

As blogs and social media outlets light up with news that Americans’ technology freedoms are being taken away under the helm of new copyright provisions, many are asking what led to the criminalization of phone unlocking.

The DMCA, passed in 2000, is given a facelift every three years. This is done to keep up with the times, so to speak. The intent of the DMCA is to prohibit consumers from “trying to break security controls to thwart piracy and copyright violations,” according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). In 2000, the U.S. Librarian of Congress, acting on recommendations from the U.S. Copyright Office, issued an exemption for smart phones. It did not, however, extend that exemption this year. Therefore, smart phones are now included in mediums held to the DMCA’s standards.

It should be noted that The International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry opposed the extension of the exemption.

Mainstream and social media outlets blew up with news of the story. The Atlantic referred to it as “the most ridiculous law of 2013 (so far),” Reddit users attacked the ridiculousness of the situation and technology gurus attempted to explain (in sarcastic terms) how it is Americans can now be subject to such a law.

Within the complaints and cracks against the government, there’s a bigger issue surfacing from the phone unlocking drama — and it has to do with government accountability and involvement in technological commerce and privacy.

“… There is another matter of critical importance: Laws that can place people in jail should be passed by Congress, not by the decree of the Librarian of Congress. We have no way to hold the Librarian of Congress accountable for wildly unfair laws. There are still plenty of crazy laws passed by elected officials, but at least we can then vote them out of office,” Derek Khanna of the Atlantic writes.

Technology writer Andrew Couts was ahead of the game. Writing for Digital Trends in October 2012, he called out the new law, pointing out the controversy that would arise and explaining how — and why — phone unlockers would become the newest American criminals.

“Now, you’re probably asking ‘Why in tarnation did they change this?’ Because, according to the Register (of the Library of Congress), the firmware on your phone — the software that, among other things, locks you into a specific carrier is copyrighted, and therefore cannot be changed without violating the law,” he wrote. “And since there are many more unlocked handsets on the market nowadays, and wireless carriers often provide ways for customers to unlock their phones, there’s really no reason for you to do what you want with your device. Makes sense, right?! Sigh ….”

Of course, there are those arguing that, while including smart phones in the DMCA is a bit much, it’s likely not to be enforced.

Khanna puts his argument against that mentality like this: “If people see this and respond, well no one is really going to get those types of penalties, my response is: Why is that acceptable? While people’s worst fears may be a bit unfounded, why do we accept a system where we allow such discretionary authority?”

According to the social media world, he’s got a point.