Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:37 PM   #76
i.mac
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanmugam View Post
Govt cares about the Corporation. they do not care about people!. what is new?
I disagree.

Politics out of this forum?

I could, for example, presume you to be a tea party zealot, but I could be wrong...
__________________
mac classic, quadra, etc...
i.mac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:38 PM   #77
kalsta
macrumors 65816
 
kalsta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancer View Post
On top of that we get to keep our phone number even at the new provider, I've had mine for about 15 years with a number of phone and 2 providers.
Indeed—it's been at least 5 providers for me over that time (some of them just resellers). Does it not work that way in the US?
kalsta is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:39 PM   #78
Bubba Satori
macrumors 68040
 
Bubba Satori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B'ham
Steve wouldn't sign it.
Think of your Karma and Steve's ashes when you do sign it.
Bubba Satori is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:47 PM   #79
likemyorbs
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Send a message via AIM to likemyorbs
Getting close. Over 90,000 now!
likemyorbs is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:53 PM   #80
inlinevolvo
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
I signed it!
inlinevolvo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:56 PM   #81
TallManNY
macrumors 68000
 
TallManNY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilboa View Post
The thing is that the contract and phone locking are two separate things. I think it's completely reasonable for companies to offer subsidized phones in exchange for a contract which binds you to 2 years of service or a large early termination fee. However, I don't think they should be allowed to lock the phones to a particular carrier and legally prevent users from unlocking their phones.
Fair enough, they are two different things. But they also go to the same point, the force the owner of the phone to use their service. AT&T is not likely to sue you if you break the $100 per month contract. Are they going to hire a lawyer and bring you to court because you owe them $2,000? But the locking of the phone means you can't easily use the phone elsewhere, so that pushes you to remain their customer. If the phone is lost or stolen, it also is more likely to remain a revenue source. And it is less likely that you will take the subsidized phone overseas as well. They certainly aren't pursuing you to another country with a contract breach claim.

The contract is basically a loan from the carrier to you which you payoff with the contract. The locking of the phone is a form security or impediment to fraud for the carrier. It also becomes a revenue source if they don't allow you to unlock even if your contract is up. I unlocked my AT&T iPhone 4 at the end of my contract, and now it is used by my Mom on T-Mobile for a $50 voice and data plan. AT&T would have made more money if they hadn't allowed the unlock.

Just to clarify, I'm not supporting this lock feature. I think it is bad for consumers. But as consumers we are struggling to make this go away. I think it would be better if Congress prohibited the sale of locked cell phones. All phones would have to be sold unlocked. Sure some prices might go up, but it would give the consumer more ultimate power. Or Congress could just get out of this area entirely and allow the market to do its thing.
__________________
Mid-2011 3.1GHz i5 iMac (6970m); Late-2007 Macbook; HP Spectre (Win 8.1)
BBRY Q10; iPhone 5; iPad Mini-R
Apple Stockholder (a nice dividend, stock buybacks and cutting edge innovation? yes please!)
TallManNY is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:56 PM   #82
tongxinshe
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusk007 View Post
I don't get why need it to be illegal. They could just make the contract exit so expensive that it isn't worth it. You gradually pay off the phone and if you exit in the first few month you pay extra or hand the hardware back.

It is done already they don't need to criminalize anything. In any case I doubt the ban would deter anyone anyway. In some european contracts it is said to be illegal and nobody cares. If it is possible, people end up doing it.
You are still sounding that unlocking is for the convenience of ending the contract. No, it’s NOT! It’s for using other services on specific occasions, without stopping the long term contract.
tongxinshe is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 06:58 PM   #83
TallManNY
macrumors 68000
 
TallManNY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daalseth View Post
At least up here when I checked into it phones were locked whether they were subsidized or not. Before I gave up getting one I talked to the carriers up here. They would sell me a phone outright and then go pay as you go without a subsidy, but the phone would still be locked to their service. The example I gave before was if I bought an unlocked phone from Apple and brought it in. They would let me go month to month but insisted on locking my own personal phone to their network. YMMV in other countries.
Hmmm, I am not familiar with that. T-Mobile did not lock my unlocked AT&T iPhone 4 when I gave it to my Mom to use. I'm in the US.
__________________
Mid-2011 3.1GHz i5 iMac (6970m); Late-2007 Macbook; HP Spectre (Win 8.1)
BBRY Q10; iPhone 5; iPad Mini-R
Apple Stockholder (a nice dividend, stock buybacks and cutting edge innovation? yes please!)
TallManNY is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:11 PM   #84
leon44
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleMark View Post
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” ― Benjamin Franklin.

This was a quote that interested me when the Patriot act was passed. However it works with all aspects of pseudo freedom.
Wow, I'm really glad I'm not American otherwise I fear I would've been taught this philosophy at school and started to actually believe that its a moral or good way to live as a society
leon44 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:11 PM   #85
damir00
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
I don't really have a problem with this restriction...if you want an unlocked phone, buy an unlocked phone, there are plenty available.
damir00 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:18 PM   #86
tongxinshe
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by TallManNY View Post
No. A locked phone is like buying a car from a dealer for 1/3 of the cost you expected, with a requirement that you buy their tire and gas. You got the upfront savings by buying the subsidized phone. The long term contract and locked up feature of the phone you bought is part of the deal.

The problem is that is basically a pretty bad deal for consumers. So Congress really shouldn't be making things easier for cell phone companies and they shouldn't be making a law making unlocking illegal. However, you have to acknowledge that at least initially when you get that cheap subsidized phone, that you owe something to cell phone company for that.
Unlocking doesn’t mean to not pay the service fee, but to allow me use other services when the first service is virtually unavailable.
tongxinshe is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:19 PM   #87
BenderRodriguez
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Texas
so currently if you buy this can the government come after you?

this URL is in the Original Post
http://www.cell-unlock.com
BenderRodriguez is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:22 PM   #88
leon44
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubele View Post
Well, there's the ideal, and then there's the imperfect reality. There's also the fact that people have differing notions as to what constitutes "freedom" – i.e., when my freedom to do one thing interferes with another person's freedom to do something else, whose freedom takes priority? Is the UK not full of complexities and contradictions, too?

As for the issue at hand, I think I should have the freedom to unlock a phone I've paid for, as long as I pay for my two-year contract with the carrier.
There's not like a biblical style quotable constitution so theres not really the same level of fundamental contradiction no.
I think to be able to trust your government to do what's best and safest for you is actually really important.
leon44 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:24 PM   #89
winston1236
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: ><
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon44 View Post
I'll never understand America and its 'freedom'
You're free to never get away from your private student loans, your phone carrier, and to do as you're told.
winston1236 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:24 PM   #90
mytakeontech
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon44 View Post
I'll never understand America and its 'freedom'
Tell me about it! I never understood why that ruling was supported in first place? I can't believe such things happens in US where it is common sense to not to do so. I am sure telecom lobby has paid hefty amount to get this passed and they thought no one will know.

This is beyond belief and scary trend.
mytakeontech is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:29 PM   #91
tongxinshe
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamo12 View Post
Lol I totally agree that their business models suck. That's why I said petition the businesses to go and fix it. It's not the governments job to run other people's businesses. Let the market sort it out
That’s why the government should have not said “it’s illegal to unlock the phone” at the first place. If that is meant by the 2-year contract, the carrier could clearly list it in the contract terms, instead of trying to trap the customers like how it happened now.

Last edited by tongxinshe; Feb 20, 2013 at 07:35 PM.
tongxinshe is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:48 PM   #92
cclloyd
macrumors 68000
 
cclloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Alpha Centauri A
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon44 View Post
I'll never understand America and its 'freedom'
That's why I want something like what happened in V for Vendetta to happen to this country.
__________________
iPhone 5 Sprint w/ iOS 7.0.4 Jailbroken
iPad mini Retina w/ iOS 7.0.4 Jailbroken
MacBook Pro Retina Early 2013
cclloyd is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:50 PM   #93
iEvolution
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesser Evets View Post
Aw. So cute... does anyone believe these "petitions" are going anywhere aside from in the trash?
Yeah heaven forbid someone takes a stand even if it likely won't be successful. Its people like you that just sit there and accept it why the government is able to slowly strip rights away.
iEvolution is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:57 PM   #94
SgtPepper12
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Do people in America actually believe that carriers selling a subsidized phone are giving their customers something for free? Like they are saving money by buying a subsidized phone?
Seriously, I don't understand this.
SgtPepper12 is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 08:05 PM   #95
lk400
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by baryon View Post
This is exactly why I don't have a smartphone and won't have one anytime soon. I spend half of my year in one country and the other half in another. Am I meant to buy two phones, and pay for two contracts simultaneously? Something is seriously wrong with how this works.

If you have to force people to use your carrier by making it illegal to use other carriers, you are clearly a bad carrier to begin with.
Buy an unlocked one in the other country?

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by sza View Post
If is petition gets approved, cell phone price will surge even with 2-year contract.
In other countries you can get a 64gb iphone 5 for free on a 2 year contract, with reasonable and affordable monthly rates. You pay a lot if you exit early, but you can unlock the phone at any time with a simple phone call. You are contractually bound to make the monthly payments, even if you lose the phone, sell it, use it on a different carrier etc. The telco gets their revenue stream (or a lump sum if you break contract), and your liberties aren't squashed. I don't see how simply unlocking the phone can (justifiably) affect cost.

Im not a US resident, so it doesnt affect me, but it is an interesting case study of how powerful the big US companies are.
lk400 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 08:05 PM   #96
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesser Evets View Post
Aw. So cute... does anyone believe these "petitions" are going anywhere aside from in the trash?
Some of them get funny responses, like the proposal to build a Death Star.
__________________
Don't tell me Macs don't last: 2007 iMac, 2007 Mac Mini, 2008 MacBook Air, all Vintage.
(iMac obsoletion: April 28, 2015, MBA: October 14, 2015, Mac Mini: March 9, 2016)
ArtOfWarfare is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 08:06 PM   #97
craznar
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon44 View Post
I'll never understand America and its 'freedom'
I'm somewhat confused - what if they make a smart phone that is also a weapon. Would that solve the problem?

After all - vehicles, phones, food are all regulated to hell in the land of the free, but weapons are sacred and untouchable ?
craznar is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 08:14 PM   #98
Fatalbert
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiMediaWill View Post
Seriously it's just a phone. Doesn't the US government have better things to worry about?
Like NOT wasting money trying to outlaw cell phone unlocking? They should at least outlaw it when they aren't taking loans to pay for all this. On top of that, unlocking the phone should not be illegal anyway.
Fatalbert is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 08:16 PM   #99
blackhand1001
macrumors 68030
 
blackhand1001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by sza View Post
If is petition gets approved, cell phone price will surge even with 2-year contract.
No it won't, there is still the contract and the early termination fee.
__________________
Macbook 2008
HP Dv7t - 2.53 ghz, 9600m GT, WSXGA+, 120gb ssd, 250 gb 7200rpm
Core i7 3770k, 8gb ram, 2x 120gb sdd raid0, 500gb hdd, GTX 460
Moto X Dev Edition (VZW) Nexus 7
blackhand1001 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 08:27 PM   #100
Fatalbert
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon44 View Post
Wow, I'm really glad I'm not American otherwise I fear I would've been taught this philosophy at school and started to actually believe that its a moral or good way to live as a society
Haha, so true. American elementary school teaches you to worship the Founding Fathers and protect the right to bear all weapons of any kind. I know because I've been there.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by saud0488 View Post
Seriously it's just two guys wanting the government to recognize their marriage. Doesn't the government have better things to worry about? Like poverty, world hunger, genocides, etc.
Yes they do, but they don't worry about it. Technically, supporting gay marriage would mean that you WANT the government to worry about it instead of ignoring it like they do now in some states.

Of course, this has become one of the biggest issues of any election now up there with more important things like wars and gun control. Who cares; just fix the @#$%ing ridiculous debt!

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by osaga View Post
So many libertarians on MR... that explains a lot actually

Who cares honestly, no one is going to pay attention to the law regardless.
It would make acquiring unlocking tools more difficult because people are afraid to host illegal stuff. Have you ever tried downloading freeware not from the original source (typically an old version)? You have to get a torrent from some fishy site.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by objc View Post
If you've paid it off, it's yours. How is it that a telecom company can tell you what network you can use YOUR device with?
I know, it's like making jailbreaking or modifying your Mac illegal.

"Though cell phone unlocking is now illegal on an individual basis for phones purchased after January 26, 2013, users are still able to have phones unlocked through carriers."

This is what really struck me. I'm not some kind of libertarian or Tea Party nut who says this about most laws, but let's face it; this particular law is just the carriers pushing the government around.

Luckily, it won't affect me. I don't unlock my phone anyway.
Fatalbert is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Petition to White House re Facetime blocking by AT&T aypues Wasteland 2 May 7, 2013 10:59 PM
White House Backs Petition in Support of Mobile Phone Unlocking MacRumors Politics, Religion, Social Issues 76 Mar 6, 2013 02:37 PM
Petition to make unlocking legal again 6mtg37s Wasteland 42 Jan 28, 2013 04:58 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:01 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC