AT&T Taking Action Against iPhone Unlocks?

[bjanz]

Again, that's the exemption, not the DMCA. The exemption invokes the "other circumstances" clause. Also, the phrase "quite clear" is never appropriate for use in determining the ramifications of legislation.

Ok, my use of "quite clear" isn't legal, but IANAL. right back at ya!

This part I think is part of the issue...


In the case of many (although not all) of the iPhone hacks existing so far, there's actually a mixture of these two purposes invoked. The hacks both SIM unlock the phone and are designed to allow access to the software innards, which could potentially be construed to interfere with the copyrights discussed above. Not saying I believe that. I'm saying it's probably enough for someone to make a prima facie valid argument....

Here's how I read it (IANAL): If the *ONLY* purpose of the software is to unlock the phone to allow consumer choice of service provider, the DMCA exemption (ok, it's an exemption) allows that use. That's pretty clear from the Copyright Office link in my original response.

If the unlock software also defeats DRM, then it would infringe on DMCA provisions that specifically *don't* allow such use. I have no interest in unlocking DRM protections: if I want an un-DRM'd song, the iTunes Store already sells 'em. I also have no interest in reverse engineering the rest of the iPhone, and have little interest in the rest of the hacks wandering around the 'net. Apple will release games and other apps for the iPhone eventually: market pressure will push them into it.

Give me the unlock tools so I can use an iPhone on TMO, my current and preferred service provider. Give me consumer choice. That's all I ask.

\burt

IANAL, I just try to reason things out

 

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by peharri So far as I can determine, the only feature the iPhone has that relies upon network upgrades is "Visual Voicemail", something of dubious usefulness that, in any case, could be implemented by any operator that wants to in a backward compatible way simply by using MMS the way it was intended.​

This feature is important to me! I don't have to wait ten minutes for the robot voicemail lady to tell me the date and time before finally getting to the message. I hate that VM lady..

With my Windows phone, 99% of the time I can look at the call history and figure out who the voicemail is from - just by looking at the missed calls.

Seeing the voicemail in a list like the call history would be nice, but it's not a big item.

 

[thomasfxlt]

It's my feeling that Apple and ATT had the right to collaborate and create a cellular experience that is unique and proprietary to them. You purchase the device with this knowledge and that's that. To say that Apple needs to support or defend the use of the hardware in another providers network during their agreement with their partner is unfounded.

I think Apple will continue to build the iPhone experience with ATT for the the length of their agreement (to the extent that ATT meets it's contractual commitments). Apple will NOT vigorously pursue unlocking hackers (ATT might). Apple will continue to update the iPhone causing continued problems for the unlocking solutions making the process and benefit of keeping the phone unlocked prohibitive.

JMO

 

[Gurutech]

and Apple has the right to RELOCK your phone with an update

no they don't

 

[mainstreetmark]

We obviously use different voicemail systems. It rarely takes more than a few seconds before I hear the voicemails I've received.

To use your exaggerated "steps":

1. Call the VM number
2. Wait for it to answer
3. Wait for it to tell you how many VMs you have
4. Wait for it to tell you it's gonna play the first VM
5. Wait for it to tell you when the person called
6. Finally get there.

iPhone:

1. Click on the person's name

Yes, running iTunes is a step. As is installing it. As is ensuring you have a computer that's running the right operating system, that's connected to the Internet, etc.

My point with that is if you're going to include "Run iTunes" as a step, you need to be equally granular in the replacing of the SIM card, which would include the steps to remove the SIM card. Can your mom do that?


Some Apple apologetic reading Macrumors probably wouldn't think about the complications in all of that.

But are you saying that using the existing web browser to navigate to an obvious website is harder than installing a custom multipurpose application and plugging a phone into the computer?)

Your negativity is clearly clouding the fact that the iPhone is managed via iTunes, just as all the iPods are. The iPhone has a iPod function in it, and if you're not using that, you may not need a iPhone in the first place.

Outside of IS-95/CDMA2000 bizarro world, it's hard for me to see how anyone can think that the Apple procedures are easier or more flexible than the standard GSM "swap over the SIM" operation.

The very fact that I can buy a phone and set it up at home is the big advantage here. Of course, that assumes AT&T which is being vigorously discussed in this thread already, but not having to sit in the shop to activate it is a big plus. During my Sprint days, every new phone I got required me to blow an entire lunch hour on it. During my Nextel days, new phones were a similar pain in the butt, but lessened via SIM card mangling. I walked into the Apple store, the kid threw me a iPhone, and I was out in 5 minutes. The iPhone was activated at home in my leisure and the whole process was much more efficient than any of the other nine cellphones I've had the displeasure to use.

 

[Consultant]

www.iphoneunlocking.com

Monday 27th August 2007 @ 2:15pm
August 27th, 2007
Due to overwhelming response and comments, we have decided to suspend additions to our email mailing list for the moment.

The past few hours have presented incredible changes which we are addressing.

Over the next few days, you can expect a clear response, and you will get what you are looking for too.

Also, would the OMM lawyer who phoned us, please call back today. We have a few questions now that we’re awake.

Its hilarious that it actually says that on their web page. Oh please call us back, we don't know who you are nor how to contact you.

Sounds suspicious. What lawyer does not leave contact info?

 

[4iedBandit]

The real steps.

Every other GSM phone in existence:

a) Get in car.
b) Remember you forgot to lock the front door, leave car and go lock door.
c) Insert key in ignition.
d) Turn key clockwise.
e-y) Insert turn-by-turn driving directions here.
z) Get ignored by sales clerk to busy chatting to his buddy on his phone.
aa) Convince sales clerk you need an unlocked version of the phone you want.
bb) Find out "they don't do that."
cc-...) Insert steps for finding and buying an unlocked phone here.
1. Remove SIM card from old phone.
2. Plug SIM card into new phone
3. You're done.

Okay, I'm parodying your post but honestly this is what you've done. You broke out the steps for the iPhone and condensed the steps for other phones to make a disparity.

I've been a GSM phone users for a long time. I've done the sim swapping trick with new unlocked phones. However most people in the US don't know where to get an unlocked phone. When they think of buying a mobile phone they go to a carrier store/kiosk. The stores sell locked, subsidized phones.

You also left out the step where your new phone, if you bought a smart phone, has to be configured to access the data network of your carrier. This information has to be entered in manually. It doesn't transfer from the sim. Oh you can go to the manufacturers web site and have the setup text messaged to the phone, but you neglected to put those steps in. Most people won't think of doing that. They'll call their carrier when their new phone doesn't work like they thought. There's also the problem that US carriers generally will not support phones they don't sell.

As I've already said I've done the sim swapping thing with a variety of phones. It works. I never had a problem with it, but then again I knew where to get unlocked phones and how to make them work with my American service provider.

The iPhone setup is still easier.

Here are the steps I actually followed.

1. Plug phone in to my mac. (already on-line, already have iTunes)
2. Follow the wizard steps to activate account, including transferring my number from previous carrier.
3. Surf the web for 5 minutes while waiting for the phone to go active. (If I remember correctly it actually took 3 minutes to activate with my number.)

My previous carrier automatically canceled my account with the number transfer. I didn't even have to call them.

The iPhone isn't for everyone, but trying to make it look like it's worse than everything else is just silly.

 

[Rooskibar03]

Locking a phone that is unsubsidized is unconscionable.

Fair enough a subsidized phone may be locked for a set period of time.

Again, how do you figure? Apple and ATT put the work into the phone and network, why should they not have the right to sell it?

The time they put into making it work was your subsidy.

 

[koobcamuk]

That's only a problem in America. Everywhere else in the world, people buy a phone, throw their SIM in it and move on with life. It's only in this country that we've been conditioned to believe that exclusivity on a particular phone to a particular carrier is okay in any way.

Well said. Apple could take the market by storm in selling it like an iPod... but you put your SIM in it and away you go. You now have an iPod and a Phone... an iPhone.

Walking into an apple shop, buying the iPhone, walking out of the store, getting it unlocked and popping in your current SIM are going to be very, very popular practices here in the UK. Just you watch.

 

[mccldwll]

no they don't

Yes. they do.

 

[Stella]

Yes, its that simple.

I went to the UK for vacation, took my phone with me. I bought a pay-as-you-go SIM card from the Vodaphone shop, replaced that with my Fido Sim card, and off I went...

Done in less than 10 minutes, including buying the Sim card... no waiting for 'next day' and needing to use the internet, like you suggest!

your kidding right???

other providers unplug sim, insert new sim???

first you have to go to the freakin store, wait 1 hour for a service representive to wait on you program a sim card. then make sure it works.
if not repeat above steps.

or go on apple.com and order phone, get it next day,activat online at home in your leisure, never leaving the house. unlock online with program if it comes available. done

oh yeah don't forget to smile too with the last step.

 

[Unspeaked]

I hope that at&t or Apple's legal teams can block these unlockers. If people don't want at&t don't buy the iPhone. at&t paid big buck to be the exclusive carrier and there is no reason why some geek hackers should be allowed to bypass this.

Or I hope Apple can relock with each and every sofware update, and possibly a FORCED update!!

If you want an iPhone sign the at&t contract and shut up. If its not available in your country sit there and wait.

So very true.

These people wanting to use an iPhone outside of the US or with a carrier other than AT&T are almost as annoying as those idiots that want to run Windows on their Macs.

I mean, really - if you want to expand the functionality of a tool you've paid good money for by using it to run programs it's fully capable of doing, you're a greedy fool. What you should really do is plunk down the bucks for a PC that was meant to run Windows. I hope Microsoft can break BootCamp and Parallels with each and every software update, and possibly a FORCED update.

The world needs more people with minds like ours, kvanwagoner!

 

[nxent]

hmm, been keeping my mouth shut so far on this issue, but if i were the software company, i'd just go ahead and release the program to the general public for free, just out of spite.

 

[iLeoMarc]

I am sorry but I don't understand your logic. You are saying it is OK to switch so as to avoid international roaming fees. But it is not OK to choose your carrier. Why the distinction?

Who says that international fees are wrong. If you are so keen on ATT, why not just pay their massive roaming fees.

You seem to have said one thing is OK, while something similar is not. Either unlocking is OK or it isn't. Don't twist logic.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I am for the unlocking of the phone; but not against the exclusive carrier. Main difference is that for the mainstream, average consumer ATT (here is the US) would get the exclusive rights, meaning they would be the only one to sell the phone and to and provide exclusive services to the phone (like visual voicemail). It would be ATT's SIM that will also be sold with the phone.

As far as third party selling software or other unlocking methods, let them. As well as ATT should also unlock phones (like they did for my other phone for overseas usage).

But at the same time because there are iPhones not in the exclusive carriers (meaning they do not have a current plan), they are also not entitled to the software updates Apple provides, with maybe the exemption of security flaws.

To conclude all I am saying is that Apple and ATT should just let unlocking occur, because if they take it further you know the US Congress will get involved. Instead they should provide the superior support to those individuals who went with the exclusive carriers and no one else!

 

[Mydel]

So very true.

These people wanting to use an iPhone outside of the US or with a carrier other than AT&T are almost as annoying as those idiots that want to run Windows on their Macs.

I mean, really - if you want to expand the functionality of a tool you've paid good money for by using it to run programs it's fully capable of doing, you're a greedy fool. What you should really do is plunk down the bucks for a PC that was meant to run Windows can break BootCamp and Parallels with each and every software update, and possibly a FORCED update.

The world needs more people with minds like ours, kvanwagoner!

Really??! If you wanna be told whats good for you I strongly suggest to move to Iran or one of those countries. They will force you to do many things which Im sure are great for you.

 

[mccldwll]

That's only a problem in America. Everywhere else in the world, people buy a phone, throw their SIM in it and move on with life. It's only in this country that we've been conditioned to believe that exclusivity on a particular phone to a particular carrier is okay in any way.

Actually, I disagree on exclusivity of phones to carriers, and hope that we eventually get to a countrywide wifi system, or well integrated cell carrier system, where phones just work, anywhere, anytime, with complete portability. And it would be nice if the same were true for wireless broadband. The problem I have in the iPhone area is that it's really not a phone, but a handheld computer. And it's set up as not just a handset sale, but a 2 year commitment with subscription updates. As such, it can't be taken off the at&t network and function properly, and certainly can't be supported. And everyone bought with full knowledge of those limitations.

And to address another argument that there is no difference between unlocking to switch carriers and unlocking to switch SIMs while in Europe, that's ridiculous. In the former, one is leaving before the end on 2 year commitment, while in the latter, honoring 2 year commitment and paying monthly, while just being able to use another SIM IN ADDITION while in Europe. That I support, and AT&T will, I imagine, offer something along those lines in the future (possibly receprocity so Euro iPhones can also get SIMs to use while in US).

 

[macses]

So very true.

These people wanting to use an iPhone outside of the US or with a carrier other than AT&T are almost as annoying as those idiots that want to run Windows on their Macs.

I mean, really - if you want to expand the functionality of a tool you've paid good money for by using it to run programs it's fully capable of doing, you're a greedy fool. What you should really do is plunk down the bucks for a PC that was meant to run Windows. I have Microsoft can break BootCamp and Parallels with each and every software update, and possibly a FORCED update.

The world needs more people with minds like ours, kvanwagoner!

well, since it's forbidden in Belgium that providers sell locked phones, I have no choice. I'll have to unlock that beautiful phone, I'm so sorry boys

 

[Unspeaked]

Someone educate me on this: am I correct in thinking that ANY phone ones buys in the UK has the capability to work with ANY carrier?

From my experience, this seems correct, but I was looking for a more definitive answer.

If true, that certainly seems like an ideal environment, unlike the US where almost half of cell phone users don't even *HAVE* SIM cards because they're on Verizon or Sprint/Nextel...

 

[EagerDragon]

Hacking your phone is never a good idea. This was bound to happen.

 

[jarednt1]

Apple is ALSO getting paid X amount from At&T per subscriber, so its in Apple's vested intrest to make sure the phone remains locked.

 

[twoodcc]

I'm surprised its not apple going after them

 

[Snowy_River]

You bought the UNSUBSIDIZED phone knowing full well in order to use it you had to enter into a contract.

I'm baffled by the folks who assume that just because you enter into a two year contract you are entitled to something fee or discounted.

When you signed your first least, did you do so expecting cheaper rent or a fee month now and then? When you signed up for a 3 year car lease, did you get a lower price on the car?

NO, a contract and a subsidy do know go hand in hand, get over it.

Well, because that's generally how business is done. In the cell phone industry, you buy an expensive phone for a discount but you're required to sign a two year contract.

In most instances when you're looking at apartments, if you're given the option of a lease vs. month-to-month, the monthly cost is less if you sign the lease. Otherwise, you'd be a fool not to go to month-to-month. The lease provides the landlord a degree of guaranty that they'll have the income for a certain length of time, and in return, they lower the month price.

With cars, there are plenty of analyses out there that show that your net monthly cost over the term of a lease is less than it would be if you bought the car on a loan and sold it again after 3-years (vs. a 36 month lease). Plus, you don't have the hassle of needing to deal with selling the car.

So, simply put, the reason why people are upset about this is because AT&T is changing the rules, based on how these things are handled in most cases, including just about everywhere else in the cell phone industry, even AT&T's other cell phones.

 

[jdechko]

Something that's interesting that keeps coming up is that it's an Apple/AT&T partnership through thick and thin. But in reality, Cingular was Apple's second choice for carriers behind Verizon. Apple could have tried to launch this thing on its own, but what it really needed was a carrier, because without a carrier, they've just got a nice iPod with a touch screen that can surf via wi-fi (which many people would buy anyway). Aside from the traditional way of doing things, Apple could have become an MVNO, but they probably realized that it was way too much work, and easier to get someone else to support the network.

If I had to take a guess, I'd say that Steve partnered with Cingular out of necessity, but the relationship is strained at best. Apple probably signed a multi-year exclusive because the had to do some giving (after asking for Visual Voicemail, a cut of the service that they don't even earn, and presumably getting the network upgraded at the last second - remember the magical speed bump on EDGE?) Knowing that the (arguably) hottest phone ever would eventually be unlocked, Apple agreed. They still can sell them through the Apple store, and, as noted, the end user doesn't even have to deal with AT&T.

Additionally, people are asking about the loss of revenue from AT&T, to which I say, big deal. I'd generously estimate that 5% of current iPhone users/AT&T subscribers will actually unlock their phones and switch to another network. However, with the unlocking (which is both domestic and international) Apple has just potentially sold millions more iPhones to customers who previously didn't have access whether it's because the don't like the providers (domestic & international) or didn't get service from the providers or got the short end of the stick (such as the rest of Europe, Japan and basically anywhere there is GSM service).

Basically this is means to an end for Apple, enabling them to sell more iPhones which is what they want to do anyway. I'd not be surprised if the guys who did the unlocking got a little "anonymous tip" from someone who may or may not work for Apple who may or may not know a thing or two about the iPhone .

 

[MacAerfen]

one word for you. EULA

Thats End User License Agreement for those that are unfamiliar with it. Like most products, the iPhone carries one of these. The box specifically says, opening this box and using this product requires accepting the EULA. Part of the EULA indicates that you will not modify the software or hardware of the product. So, that means that if you purchase one of these nifty little products and use it you will agree to the EULA.

And no, Apple does not have to change their product to allow it to be used on any network. When you bought the iPhone and chose to use it, you agreed to the fact that you would have to sign up with AT&T. Buying something and then saying, but I want it to now do this, is not something reasonable. It would be like buying an PS3 game and complaining it does not run on your Xbox 360, and try forcing Sony into giving you a new copy that will run on the Xbox. I mean you bought the game, you should have the right to run it on whichever platform you prefer right?

Apple is not forcing you to use their product. It is also not a "new" device. It may function a bit more smooth and offer a few more bells and whistles, but it is in the end a cell phone. If it was a unique new device, you may have some grounds to complain, but since there are many alternate devices you can buy to have similar function, they are not required to modify how they want their device to function.

 

[sanford]

If AT&T is so good, then they should NOT be afraid to have competition. Apple needs to unlock this phone and allow EVERYONE who wants it to use it on the provider of their choice.

I think phones should be carrier portable to the extent the network technology allows. But in the case of the iPhone, I don't like the locked arrangement, yet when faced with the choice of buying and going with AT&T or trying an unlock deal, if I'm paying $600 for the phone and about the same across the board for the service -- the iPhone data plan is actually half as much as my old carrier's EDGE data plan -- I'm going to want the features the exclusive carrier provides -- so I went with AT&T. Visual Voicemail is useful to me, for one. YouTube, it's cute, but I hardly need it. But it opens the question of future useful software and service updates to the iPhone that will depend on the carrier's support; and I wouldn't want to be shut out of those because I hacked my phone to work on a non-supporting network.