U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Cell Phones and Smartphones
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-04-2013, 02:33 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,955,968 times
Reputation: 12847

Advertisements

The approach of this law was unrealistic. People should be allowed to unlock their phones if they wish. Carriers already have fees in place for leaving earlier than the end of the contract.

A better approach to this is for the FCC to block carriers from activating phones that were not intended for that carrier. Carriers should not be allowed to activate phones on their radio frequencies that were not intended for use with that carrier. Basically, phones will have to be FCC certified for the carriers they are allowed to be activated on. If a manufacturer wishes, they can have the phone certified for multiple carriers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-04-2013, 03:19 PM
 
Location: 92037
4,631 posts, read 9,003,577 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
The approach of this law was unrealistic. People should be allowed to unlock their phones if they wish. Carriers already have fees in place for leaving earlier than the end of the contract.

A better approach to this is for the FCC to block carriers from activating phones that were not intended for that carrier. Carriers should not be allowed to activate phones on their radio frequencies that were not intended for use with that carrier. Basically, phones will have to be FCC certified for the carriers they are allowed to be activated on. If a manufacturer wishes, they can have the phone certified for multiple carriers.
NJBest,

I totally agree that this was unrealistic. Interesting idea, but are you saying that carriers are unlocking devices from other carriers? I have never heard of this being done.
One of the reasons, being, once orders have been placed for xyz cell phone from an operator, mathematically, that unlocking algorithm to unlock the phone are now with the carrier.
So, for example a Samsung S3 from T-Mobile, should not be able to be unlocked by an AT&T rep. They would not have the code, simply because that IMEI was never assigned to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2013, 04:16 PM
 
1,521 posts, read 1,636,078 times
Reputation: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittenSparkles View Post
What about buying used unlocked/ jailbroken phones on Craigslist/ebay? Will that also be illegal after tomorrow?
No. Only phones under contract sold at a discount from what I understand. Once your contract ends, you can do as you please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2013, 04:19 PM
 
1,521 posts, read 1,636,078 times
Reputation: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
The approach of this law was unrealistic. People should be allowed to unlock their phones if they wish. Carriers already have fees in place for leaving earlier than the end of the contract.

A better approach to this is for the FCC to block carriers from activating phones that were not intended for that carrier. Carriers should not be allowed to activate phones on their radio frequencies that were not intended for use with that carrier. Basically, phones will have to be FCC certified for the carriers they are allowed to be activated on. If a manufacturer wishes, they can have the phone certified for multiple carriers.
Many people don't pay the fees. This has been a big problem for AT&T because they use a worldwide system called GSM that is also used in places like China where Iphones are not sold. Chinese nationals often scoop up dozens of Iphones from AT&T with contracts and then unlock them and sell them to people in China for $1000 and more. And often they don't pay AT&T the early termination fee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 02:28 AM
 
4,399 posts, read 9,210,272 times
Reputation: 2353
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
The approach of this law was unrealistic. People should be allowed to unlock their phones if they wish. Carriers already have fees in place for leaving earlier than the end of the contract.

A better approach to this is for the FCC to block carriers from activating phones that were not intended for that carrier. Carriers should not be allowed to activate phones on their radio frequencies that were not intended for use with that carrier. Basically, phones will have to be FCC certified for the carriers they are allowed to be activated on. If a manufacturer wishes, they can have the phone certified for multiple carriers.
There should be no such law in place. The protections of the carrier for their subsidy(early termination fees) should be spelled out in their agreement with the user and they should not entitled to any other protections, just as any other business must operate in relation to their consumers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 02:45 AM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,955,968 times
Reputation: 12847
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2008 View Post
There should be no such law in place. The protections of the carrier for their subsidy(early termination fees) should be spelled out in their agreement with the user and they should not entitled to any other protections, just as any other business must operate in relation to their consumers.
I agree. I'm not concerned with protecting the business.

However, the FCC should only license carriers to service phones that carry ESNs/IMEIs associated with that specific carrier. The FCC needs to retain more control over the spectrum. This limits the usefulness of phone theft while allowing the FCC and carrier to maintain control of how many devices are used on a given spectrum.

The side effect is that there is less reason to unlock a phone in this case since an unlocked phone cannot be activated on another carrier anyways. However, the owners of the phone still retain the legal right to unlock their phone as they wish (which can be good for using it outside of the US).

It's a win/win. People retain control of their devices and the carriers/FCC don't have to worry about people moving devices around to other carriers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Cell Phones and Smartphones
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:43 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top