Spread the love! TechSpot Tech Gift Shortlist 2017

FCC will investigate phone unlocking ban, cites innovation, competition concerns

By Rick ยท 16 replies
Mar 1, 2013
Post New Reply
  1. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski says the FCC will be investigating whether or not a ban on cellphone unlocking is a sensible demand. The government communications body will also be exploring its options to address the ban, assuming it determines the...

    Read more
  2. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 10,856   +901

    Domestically we get acclimated to the monopolistic practices of existing carriers.

    While traveling in Europe, it was a joy to take a World Phone (ie GSM, 4-band) with me and see the Welcome to XZY Service every time we crossed a country border on the trains.

    Adding insult to injury, domestic carriers use different technologies (aka CDMA vs GSM) forcing a purchase of a new device to enable changing service providers - - IMO - - BOY are we suckers!
    khha4113 likes this.
  3. Littleczr

    Littleczr TS Addict Posts: 439   +85

    I think the phone companies have a right to make jail braking for the purpose of switching carriers illegal. How ever once the contract is over, you should have a right to do what ever you want with the phone.
  4. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 10,856   +901

    • jailbreak -> ability do download and install from anywhere
    • unlock -> ability to get service from any carrier with the similar technology
    m4a4, khha4113 and josuam like this.
  5. treeski

    treeski TS Evangelist Posts: 989   +231

    After the contract is over or you pay the exuberant cancellation fees...
  6. What is wrong with the citizens of Earth? It is like I'm living in the twilight zone.

    FACT: People who sign a contract and pay $200 up front for a phone do not OWN the phone. They are RENTING to own the phone. The phone company still owns the phone and they have every right within the realm of common and business sense to disallow unlocking the phone for use on other networks.

    FACT: When people pay the actual price for a phone up front (ie $650 for an iPhone), a ban DOES NOT EXIST because they own the phone. The user has every legal right to use the phone on the network of their choosing.

    FACT: When a user's contract has run out, or the user has paid the fee to cancel the contract, they OWN the phone. And as my 2nd fact states, there is no law banning the unlocking of a phone that you own.

    FACT: If you do not like the way that a cell phone company, or any other business, conducts their business practices, do not buy their products. Human beings do not have a RIGHT to a cell phone. Please attempt to use some common sense.
    m4a4 likes this.
  7. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 10,856   +901

    hmm; that has not been my experience. Your logic is pristine re ownership, but the carriers don't like unlocking :(
  8. TS-56336

    TS-56336 TS Addict Posts: 609   +109

    I hope that they strike it down. It's ridiculous that in this day and age we're as beholden to AT&T and Verizon as we are. There's no doubt as to who wrote this law, nor is there any doubt as to which pre-paid politicians put it into effect.
  9. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,760   +2,431

    When A, T, & T was broken up decades ago, it also provided that people could now buy their own phones, instead of being forced to pay the telephone "utility /monopoly", endless "rental" fees.
    So, by those standards, the "anti-jailbreaking" law, is illegal, in and of it's own right. All this s*** of tethering a phone to a specific carrier, is basically an end around play to bypass Sherman Anti-Trust statutes.

    You should have to finance your phone separately from your usage charges, even if Verizon and the other carriers have to issue their own credit card to accomplish that.

    So, get rid of all the "free phone", rebates, and BS associated with choosing a carrier, and force them to tell you, how much you're paying for your calling. The law used to provide for fully itemized charges, and still does, with respect to a land line service. You people are so hooked on running your mouths non-stop on a cell phone, you pretty much accept whatever nonsense wireless carriers want to inflict on you.

    As far as "competition and innovation concerns", if you mean the people will have the advantage, they will, and the carriers will have to provide more of it, as well as sensible pricing to keep their customers.:mad:
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  10. killeriii

    killeriii TS Enthusiast Posts: 213   +14

    They are not "renting to own". The carrier will not repossess the phone if you don't pay. They want their money, not a used phone. It's yours from day one. You're just under contract to pay them back.

    If you want to take it a little further:
    In your line of thinking, credit card companies could also lay down restrictions with your purchases after you've made them. After all, you haven't paid for them yet. But that's not how credit works. Once you agree to pay a specific amount in contract, The credit company has no claim of ownership on your purchases. Even while you still owe money to them. That includes phone subsidies from carriers.

    You'd have to be blind not to see that this is a scam, created by the phone companies to stifle competition.
  11. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,760   +2,431

    You're of course correct. But, you're also bogged down in a bunch of semantic crap brought on by fine print, ad hype, ad naseum..

    You are "de facto" renting the phone. An iPhone costs $500.00. So, when your phone company tells you they're giving it to you for $200.00, you can expect that the rest of the principle is costed back into your phone bill. If it's illegal to unlock that self same and use it on another network, it follows in a a sequitur fashion that, "a rose is a rose, is a phone, that's being rented.

    And guess what, your bill will never go down, even after the phone company recoups its investment. So, let's have a spelling bee, shall we? Own, R-E-N-T, own.

    Well, phone companies don't fish with a catch and release policy. If you want to define that as "stifling competition, go right ahead. I in the meantime, will continue to call a phone contract, "the yank that sets the hook".:eek:
  12. learninmypc

    learninmypc TS Evangelist Posts: 7,494   +376

    Gosh, I am soooo glad I don't have a cell phone :)
  13. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,760   +2,431

    Yeah, me too! I get pissed off just thinking about them.
  14. learninmypc

    learninmypc TS Evangelist Posts: 7,494   +376

    Well, ya know what they say, better to be pi$$ed off, than be pi$$ed on. Sorry censors,I used $ on purpose. No money pun intended.:D
  15. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,760   +2,431

    There, there now, at ease, no cause for alarm or hysterics. The "golden shower" option probably won't be fully implemented until the iPhone8.

    Just text, "Siri the Dominatrix"....
    learninmypc likes this.
  16. learninmypc

    learninmypc TS Evangelist Posts: 7,494   +376

    Nice attitude captaincranky :)(y)
  17. adamsmith0123

    adamsmith0123 Banned

    Hopefully phone unlocks will be legalized again before the iphone 5s or 6 arrives.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...