Until this week, hacking an iPhone was like jaywalking for techies: easy, common and illegal.

But the Library of Congress has legalized this hacking -- known as "jailbreaking" -- and given amnesty to the millions of users who have already done it.

Jailbreaking allows savvy iPhone users to hack into their devices and run applications that weren't approved by the official Apple app store.

It's a popular process that's been an open secret since the smart phone premiered. Apple, known for its tight control on all products, has responded by refusing to honor warranties for jailbroken devices.

The Library of Congress decision has been interpreted as a victory for the amateur who wants some say -- and maybe some pay -- for altering a device's capabilities and vulnerabilities. Companies already shell out cash to "bug hunters" who alert them to security gaps.

It's also a victory for open-source software, which emphasizes the community in improving software rather than one-size-fits-all corporate management.

Every three years, the Library of Congress reviews copyright cases brought forward by the U.S. Copyright Office. As the largest library in the world, the multifaceted organization has ruled on recommendations from the register of copyrights since 2000. This week's ruling also allows the inclusion of movie clips into educational content or documentary films.

Monday's rulings automatically expire in three years, when the librarian examines another set of cases. Anyone who seeks to renew a ruling must start the process all over again.

That the library ruled against Apple -- long seen as Silicon Valley's sternest warden -- makes the decision more significant, experts say.

The ruling "reflects a growing understanding that customers can be experts," said Brian Butler, a University of Pittsburgh business professor who studies online community interaction. "This is moving toward the idea of a partnership between a company and its customers, or at least an arms-length partnership."

The fact that about 10 percent of iPhone users already had a jailbroken device was "relevant in the overall analysis but not determinative," said Rob Kasunic, assistant general counsel in the U.S. copyright office.

The library has no say in whether Apple can continue to void warranties for jailbroken products.

Jailbroken phones have often outpaced the Apple engineering department, allowing users' phones to run tasks that weren't available on company-kosher devices. The hacked phones could log on to Twitter and Facebook at the same time or handle customized backgrounds before Apple unveiled phones that could do those things.

"The big joke among jailbreakers is this: Every time we come out with an update, so does Apple," said ace jailbreaker Paul Swiech of McDonald.

Even as he called news of the Library of Congress's decision "fantastic," Mr. Swiech said the ruling would not change his life much.

He's been jailbreaking Apple products for about two years, ever since he watched a how-to video on YouTube and practiced a few times.

Now, "It's literally clicking a few buttons," he said.

The story of Monday's ruling began in October 2008, when a nonprofit digital rights group called the Electronic Frontier Foundation sought to end a copyright provision that banned the jailbreaking of iPhones and other devices.

Hearings followed in May 2009 in Washington, D.C., and near Apple headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif., with the tech company arguing that jailbreaking exposed users to security risks. Before the ruling, jailbroken phones could be refused service at an Apple store.

Apple has had an up-and-down year, with major sales and hoopla for the iPad tablet device followed by criticism and apologies over faulty reception and workmanship on its new iPhone 4.

It recently saw major information on its iPad customers breached through a gap in the website of its partner, AT&T. The breach was first reported by Gawker, a gossip and news blog.

Those kind of revelations are just what other companies seek to avoid when they encourage consumers to go ahead with software experimentation like jailbreaking -- and even pay customers for information on security vulnerabilities or "bugs."

Though not a "bug hunter" himself, Rahul Telang said the tech community is often abuzz with news of major money exchanged for information on a vulnerability.

"There are many cases when the firms have been holding these contests to find the bugs, and sometimes they explicitly pay people," said Dr. Telang, an associate professor of information systems and management at Carnegie Mellon University. "Some serious bug hunters can make six figures."

Google, which recently blushed over breaches in its China operation, now pays up to $3,133.70 to ordinary users who identify bugs in its open-source Chromium browser.

The seemingly random amount is an homage to a popular shorthand phrase of the hacker world. "31337" translates to "ELEET" because of the numbers' resemblance to the letters, and its meaning is a phonetic take on "elite."

Less serious bugs are rewarded with $500.

In addition to the monetary award, hackers are identified by name on the Google website with links to their bug explanation. Another open-source browser, Mozilla Firefox, doles out $500 per bug.

And some charge extra for pre-hacked goods.

Mr. Swiech is selling his old iPhone and some tech accessories on Craigslist for $200. He added $50 to the price because the phone comes jailbroken.

Looking for more from the Post-Gazette? Join PG+, our members-only web site. You'll get exclusive sports content, opinion, financial information, discounts from retailers and restaurants, and more. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.