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 Mar 1, 2013, 01:21 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
FCC Will Investigate U.S. Mobile Phone Unlocking Ban




Cell phone unlocking in the United States became illegal in late January for new devices, prompting a White House petition urging the government to look into the issue.

The petition on the WeThePeople platform successfully garnered the 100,000 signatures necessary for an official White House response, and the backlash over the ban also caught the attention of the Federal Communications Commission.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told TechCrunch that the FCC will investigate to determine whether or not the ban results in harmful effects for consumers. The "ban raises competition concerns; it raises innovation concerns," he said.
Quote:
Genachowski isn't sure what authority he has, but if he finds any, given the tone of the conversation, it's likely he will exert his influence to reverse the decision. "It's something that we will look at at the FCC to see if we can and should enable consumers to use unlocked phones."
At this time it is illegal to unlock newly purchased cellular phones in the United States without express carrier permission. Devices purchased prior to January 26, 2013 may be unlocked and unlocked devices can be purchased at unsubsidized prices from cell phone carriers.

Article Link: FCC Will Investigate U.S. Mobile Phone Unlocking Ban
MacRumors is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:22 PM   #2
Joe-Diver
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Investigate away! I'm glad the petition got the sigs it needed.
__________________
24" iMac Aluminum; 17" uMBP (mid 09); 32Gb iPhone4;16Gb iPod Nano 6g Green; 32Gb iPad Air; ATv2
Joe-Diver is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:25 PM   #3
Diode
macrumors 68020
 
Diode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Washington DC
Send a message via AIM to Diode
Of course it harms competition. That's exactly why carriers do it.
__________________
16GB iPhone 4; 2.4 GHZ C2D iMac 4GB Ram; 32GB iPad2; AppleTV2
Diode is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:28 PM   #4
nepalisherpa
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: USA
And some said that online petitions do not work!
__________________
Macbook Air 11" 2013/i7/8GB RAM/250GB SSD
iPhone 5 32GB Black
nepalisherpa is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:30 PM   #5
lotzosushi
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Good, and after they unban this focus on more important issues. Priorities, government. Learn them.
__________________
2.3GHz i7 MacBook Pro Retina (Mid-2012)
64GB Goldpagne 5S, 32GB Nexus 5, Sony Xperia Z1 Ultra
128GB retina iPad mini
Google Glass
lotzosushi is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:30 PM   #6
goobot
macrumors 68040
 
goobot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: long island NY
How would they exactly know if the phone is new or not? Who's to say the iPhone 5 or any other phone being unlocked was older than it was? So when you really think about it, any phones already released aren't affect, tho new phones are.
__________________
Black ipod classic|Black iPhone 3g|itouch 2g|Unibody Macbook |White iPhone 3g S⃣ |iPad|Black iPhone 4|Apple TV 2|White iPhone 4 S⃣ |Black iPhone 5|Black iPhone 5 S⃣
goobot is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:31 PM   #7
All Taken
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
You can't unlock a device you own now? Crazy!
All Taken is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:35 PM   #8
iphone495
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Perfect example of when too much government regulations can hurt the people they're there to serve.
iphone495 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:36 PM   #9
crackintosh
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Send a message via AIM to crackintosh
Somebody's gunna get an intense finger wavin!
crackintosh is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:43 PM   #10
aristotle
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Guys, this is partly how Canadians got unlocking over a year ago. We petitioned the CRTC (canada's equivalent for the FCC) and the carriers themselves as well as Apple until someone started to finally listen.

I personally got a call back from the president of the carrier I was with at the time.

People power does work. You just have to be persistent but polite and concise. It does not hurt of offer them the ability for them to charge a small fee for the unlocking when petitioning.
__________________
15" Retina MBP, 2.7 Ghz Quad Core i7, 16 GB RAM, 768 GB SSD (10.9)
24" iMac, 2.8 GHz, 4GB RAM, 320 GB HD; 128 GB iPad Air LTE (iOS 7.0.4); 64 GB iPhone 5S (iOS 7.0.4)
aristotle is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:45 PM   #11
tigres
macrumors 68040
 
tigres's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Land of the Free-Waiting for Term Limits
So glad they were so quick to investigate.
Where were they last year while it was being discussed and implemented?

Too little too late.
FCC makes press statement, big deal.
__________________
Quicker than two shakes of a lambs tail
tigres is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:52 PM   #12
MultiMediaWill
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Illinois
Competition is better for the consumer.
__________________
Click here for the iPhone 5 iOS 6.0 Jailbreak!
MacBook Pro 15" 2011 , 2.2 GHz Quad i7, 750GB HDD, 8GB RAM, Anti-Glare
iPhone 5 32gb
iPad 3 16gb
MultiMediaWill is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 01:58 PM   #13
eawmp1
macrumors 601
 
eawmp1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FL
You mean there is a chance I will have full control of a device I've paid off on full?
eawmp1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:00 PM   #14
cere
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
The "ban raises competition concerns; it raises innovation concerns"

In that cases, don't locks in general raise concerns about competition?

Exactly what purpose does a lock serve? It prevents you from using your phone as you choose and nothing else. It doesn't lock you into your contract. Your contract does that.

I see locks as this:
1) Restraint of trade. A lock is explicitly intended to prevent you from using your phone with another carrier. But why is this allowed? The phone is your property. You received a discount for which you agreed to enter into a lucrative, expensive contract. The lock goes above and beyond that and says ANY usage on the phone must go through your carrier. That is restraint of trade and interference
2) Racketeering. A racket is creating a problem and then charging money to solve that problem (I'll break you legs but won't if you pay me). A locked phone means you have no choice but to roam when traveling if you want to use your own phone. That's a problem. Solution: pay your carrier their prepaid roaming packages rates.

So what new competitive problems come up by banning unlocks that don't already exist simply by allowing locks?
__________________
Unlocked iPhone5 32GB; Unlocked iPhone4 16GBx2; 15" MPB, 2.16Ghz;iPhone3G 8GB; AEBS N,8GB Nano Gen3, 4GB Nano Gen2; 20GB iPod Gen4; PMG4; PB1400c; PM6110, MacClassic, AppleIIe; Personal LaserWriterNT
cere is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:01 PM   #15
TMar
macrumors 68000
 
TMar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ky
Send a message via Yahoo to TMar Send a message via Skype™ to TMar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nepalisherpa View Post
And some said that online petitions do not work!
Online petitions that can be completely ignored do not generally work. Online petitions that have to be view and addressed work. The two are not even remotely the same.
__________________
I wish more wireless service provider owners posted here so talk about tethering would be taboo too.
.....Theft is Theft....
TMar is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:02 PM   #16
cere
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by aristotle View Post
Guys, this is partly how Canadians got unlocking over a year ago. We petitioned the CRTC (canada's equivalent for the FCC) and the carriers themselves as well as Apple until someone started to finally listen.

I personally got a call back from the president of the carrier I was with at the time.

People power does work. You just have to be persistent but polite and concise. It does not hurt of offer them the ability for them to charge a small fee for the unlocking when petitioning.
Unlocks have been available for years in Canada. Even iPhones unlocks have been available from Rogers and Fido for over 2 years. And that was more in response to various provinces considering or passing consumer protection legislation forcing them to do unlocks for a 'reasonable' fee at the end of term (3 year wait). CRTC was completely ineffective during the whole thing.

Charging a fee to perform the unlock is just another racket. Problem: we locked your phone. Solution: give us another $50 and we'll unlock it for you. Racket.
__________________
Unlocked iPhone5 32GB; Unlocked iPhone4 16GBx2; 15" MPB, 2.16Ghz;iPhone3G 8GB; AEBS N,8GB Nano Gen3, 4GB Nano Gen2; 20GB iPod Gen4; PMG4; PB1400c; PM6110, MacClassic, AppleIIe; Personal LaserWriterNT
cere is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:04 PM   #17
WordMasterRice
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Upstate NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by lotzosushi View Post
Good, and after they unban this focus on more important issues. Priorities, government. Learn them.
Like what? This is what the FCC is for. Believe it or not, not everyone in government all works on everything. This guy doesn't discuss cell phone plans 1 week and go fight in Afghanistan the next.
WordMasterRice is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:12 PM   #18
phillipduran
macrumors 6502a
 
phillipduran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Iowa
Quote:
Originally Posted by nepalisherpa View Post
And some said that online petitions do not work!
After throwing cold water on the Death Star project, I think a few people were a bit put off.

Good to see this one is making it though.
__________________
That's "Geniuses," not Genii, genius.
To err, is PC.
phillipduran is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:14 PM   #19
WannaGoMac
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
We all know why cell phones are locked even when person is under a contract with early termination fees. Not much to investigate.
__________________
Is your AT&T carrier reliability improved with the 4s on AT&T? Please respond here:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1258982
WannaGoMac is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:14 PM   #20
rdlink
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by lotzosushi View Post
Good, and after they unban this focus on more important issues. Priorities, government. Learn them.
What, exactly are the priorities you would have your government focus on? In fact, this is exactly the type of thing the FCC should be looking into: Undoing the harm created by a stupid decision on the part of another government agency, and anti-competitive actions on the part of carriers.
__________________
Desktop, Desktop, Laptop, Phone, Tablet
rdlink is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 02:15 PM   #21
aristotle
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by cere View Post
Unlocks have been available for years in Canada. Even iPhones unlocks have been available from Rogers and Fido for over 2 years. And that was more in response to various provinces considering or passing consumer protection legislation forcing them to do unlocks for a 'reasonable' fee at the end of term (3 year wait). CRTC was completely ineffective during the whole thing.

Charging a fee to perform the unlock is just another racket. Problem: we locked your phone. Solution: give us another $50 and we'll unlock it for you. Racket.
Unlocks of the iPhone was not available until people started to complain about it. I started complaining about it in the fall of 2009 to the CRTC and my carrier. Your bitching and complaining on here does diddly squat.

I was on fido at the time I started to complain. Prior to 2009, there was no point for unlocks because Bell and Telus were on CDMA whereas Rogers/Fido were on GSM/HSPA. It was not until the winter Olympics in Vancouver that the other two carrier switched to HSPA to get the iPhone.

Racket or not, we got the ability to unlock for 50 bucks or less and some carriers allowed unlocks after 3 months into your contract. You were still in the contract but you could put in another sim once you landed in Japan or the US instead of paying high roaming fees.

We also got the ability to buy factory unlocked phones directly from Apple over a year before it was offered in the US.

But you go ahead and continue to focus on the negative and not bother getting involved to change things for the better. Are you sure that you are not an agent prevaricator working for the carriers to discourage consumers from feeling empowered?
__________________
15" Retina MBP, 2.7 Ghz Quad Core i7, 16 GB RAM, 768 GB SSD (10.9)
24" iMac, 2.8 GHz, 4GB RAM, 320 GB HD; 128 GB iPad Air LTE (iOS 7.0.4); 64 GB iPhone 5S (iOS 7.0.4)

Last edited by aristotle; Mar 1, 2013 at 02:22 PM.
aristotle is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 03:03 PM   #22
cere
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by aristotle View Post
Unlocks of the iPhone was not available until people started to complain about it. I started complaining about it in the fall of 2009 to the CRTC and my carrier. Your bitching and complaining on here does diddly squat.

I was on fido at the time I started to complain. Prior to 2009, there was no point for unlocks because Bell and Telus were on CDMA whereas Rogers/Fido were on GSM/HSPA. It was not until the winter Olympics in Vancouver that the other two carrier switched to HSPA to get the iPhone.

Racket or not, we got the ability to unlock for 50 bucks or less and some carriers allowed unlocks after 3 months into your contract. You were still in the contract but you could put in another sim once you landed in Japan or the US instead of paying high roaming fees.

We also got the ability to buy factory unlocked phones directly from Apple over a year before it was offered in the US.

But you go ahead and continue to focus on the negative and not bother getting involved to change things for the better. Are you sure that you are not an agent prevaricator working for the carriers to discourage consumers from feeling empowered?
Like I said, and nothing in your statement refutes, unlocks have been available in Canada for years and for iPhones for over 2 years. You may think your complaints to the CRTC did something, yet the fact is that Bell didn't start doing unlocks for iPhones until this year. Doesn't seem like your complaints to the CRTC had much effect for some years.

Complaining to the CRTC does nothing because the CRTC is very protectionist of the carriers. It is staffed and managed by former industry people. It has almost always ruled in favour of the carriers and providers over the consumers. It has NEVER implemented any policy that regulates the carriers actions with regard to locking or unlocking. In short, your fantasy that your complaints made a difference is nice, but it is factually a fantasy. It's cute.

What made a difference was pressure on the companies from their customers and provincial legislation that was and is being pushed in multiple provinces that provides some level of protection for consumers where the CRTC has continually failed to act.

As far as what steps I have taken, I've corresponded with my MPP and MP and the minister of industry. I've written the CEO's office of my carrier to let them know where I stand. And I actively participate in online discussions to ensure that people are aware of just how bogus the scheme of locking is.

But you filed an ineffective complaint with an ineffective regulator that has historically failed to regulated. Congratulations. Very industrious.

(also, the availability of unlocked iPhones was pretty much standard in all countries where more than one carrier sold the iPhone...nothing to do with the CRTC fantasy)
__________________
Unlocked iPhone5 32GB; Unlocked iPhone4 16GBx2; 15" MPB, 2.16Ghz;iPhone3G 8GB; AEBS N,8GB Nano Gen3, 4GB Nano Gen2; 20GB iPod Gen4; PMG4; PB1400c; PM6110, MacClassic, AppleIIe; Personal LaserWriterNT
cere is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 03:10 PM   #23
MagnusVonMagnum
macrumors 68040
 
MagnusVonMagnum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by iphone495 View Post
Perfect example of when too much government regulations can hurt the people they're there to serve.
Given it's the DMCA that causes the issue, it's the DMCA that should be repealed. Good luck with that, though. Corporations lobbied HARD for it and as we all well know, the rights of the corporations outweigh the needs of the many.
__________________
Mac Mini Server 2012 (2.3GHz Quad i7, 8GB, 2x1TB RAID 0) ; External 12x Memorex Blu-Ray USB3, External WD 3x3TB,1x2TB HD USB3)
15" Matte MBP 2.4GHz, 4GB/500GB, NVidia 8600M GT; 3 ATV; 2 iPod Touch
MagnusVonMagnum is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 03:14 PM   #24
larrylaffer
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by nepalisherpa View Post
And some said that online petitions do not work!
Seriously. This whole White House petition thing is giving me this strange feeling I've never had before. One where people may actually have a little bit of say nowadays.
larrylaffer is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2013, 03:22 PM   #25
PDXoPDX
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
I do a fair amount of work in this area of the tech industry and a lot of people aren't aware of what exactly led to this "new" ban. Here's what happened:

The unlocking provision in place until January was an exemption to the DMCA that wasn't renewed. The FCC has no authority to change this.

Congress enacted the DMCA, a copyright law, administered by the Commissioner of Copyrights at the Library of Congress. The DMCA requires the Commissioner to hold hearings on a list of approved exemptions to DMCA 1201's anti circumvention rules (think anti DRM removal) every three years.

This last round the exemption was narrowed to apply to legacy (pre-Januray 31, 2013) phones only. There were good arguments for both sides, but since the standard is harm to users/consumers the cell phone industry group won out by saying that people can buy a wide variety of unlocked phones or ask for an unlock if their phone was subsidized and is now out of contract. You can read the whole thing for yourselves here: http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77fr65260.pdf

An interesting end run tactic for the FCC would be to make a new rule saying that carriers would have to provide unlock codes as soon as a subsidy is paid back instead of at the end of the contract. I won't hold my breath.
PDXoPDX is offline   3 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:25 PM.

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

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