California Law Now Requires All Smartphones to Have Built-In Kill Switches By July 2015

[C DM]

They can easily sell some of the important parts of the phone. This wont stop any theft at all. They will just need to steal two phones instead of one to make the same profit.

Not stop any theft at all? All thieves would even bother finding somewhere to sell phones for parts?

People will still speed if they want to or need to, so we don't need any speed limit laws, or really any laws at all since people can ignore them if they want to.

 

[apolloa]

Well... this thread pretty much sums up the stero type of Americans then...

 

[Born Again]

Earthquakes up, dude!

Well... this thread pretty much sums up the stero type of Americans then...

what's that ? hah

 

[zin]

IF I was an auto executive I would remove all of my products from California.

I would encourage all other auto manufacturers to do the same.

You would go bankrupt and lose money. California is a huge auto market, particularly for electric and hybrid vehicles. Nobody will take this advice from you, they would slam the door in your face for suggesting something so crazy.

Why do all US customers have to pay for the extra California emission tests and burdensome regulations?

Let them live like Castro's Cuba without new cars.

Have you considered that the reason California is the largest and most successful market for electric and hybrid vehicles is because of the stringent state emission tests imposed on motorists and auto makers?

California wants clean energy - let them create their own energy --- they import 50% from out of state.

California is a disaster of the first degree - sure they have tech companies, but they rely upon the resources of other states.

Nonsense. You don't know what you're talking about. California exports and trades an enormous amount.

I do not travel to California - my money is better spent elsewhere.

I'm sure the people of California will miss your dollars.

Why is the iTunes Store located in Nevada? So California cannot tax it excessively.

Because the tax rate in Nevada is 0%. It is around 8% in California, hardly excessive.

Once California fails from it's idiotic progressive/socialist/communist leaders, perhaps there will be a hope for it's future.

Lots of words you don't really understand, I think.

It will fail, dramatically, first.

California isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[WorldTravelBro]

Not stop any theft at all? All thieves would even bother finding somewhere to sell phones for parts?

People will still speed if they want to or need to, so we don't need any speed limit laws, or really any laws at all since people can ignore them if they want to.

People dont steal new cars anymore because they have an anti theft system.

They can sell the parts and they can jam the anti theft signal like onstar etc.

 

[CelestialToys]

They can easily sell some of the important parts of the phone. This wont stop any theft at all. They will just need to steal two phones instead of one to make the same profit.

Within 5 months of Apple introducing activation lock iphone thefts in Several major cities dropped by more than 20% It's already proven to have a big effect on theft.

Will it stop all theft? of course not.

Also, most phone theft is committed by drug addicts who swap the phones for drugs. These people aren't capable/knowledgable enough to strip them and sell the parts, and even if they were those parts aren't worth as much as you might think ( at least not to the people they will be selling them to)

 

[pdaholic]

It is interesting how whenever there is a California-related article on MR, there are multiple posters bashing the state. I don't see how there can be so much anger towards people who live in another part of our country. I guess I see the other poster's point about CARB laws being annoying, but I'm not opposed to stricter emission regulations if it means protecting our environment. I've lived in several states on the East side of our country, and I have to say it is really nice here in California. Once you get used to not having to defrost your vehicle in the winter and not having to use an air conditioner in your house in the summer, it's hard to go back. There's a reason why this state is overcrowded!

 

[Czicks]

LOL @ all the paranoid right-wingers/trolls

 

[C DM]

People dont steal new cars anymore because they have an anti theft system.

They can sell the parts and they can jam the anti theft signal like onstar etc.

And the number of cars with antitheft systems is the same as the number of those without them--the antitheft systems didn't do anything to deter thieves at all, right?

----------

It is interesting how whenever there is a California-related article on MR, there are multiple posters bashing the state. I don't see how there can be so much anger towards people who live in another part of our country. I guess I see the other poster's point about CARB laws being annoying, but I'm not opposed to stricter emission regulations if it means protecting our environment. I've lived in several states on the East side of our country, and I have to say it is really nice here in California. Once you get used to not having to defrost your vehicle in the winter and not having to use an air conditioner in your house in the summer, it's hard to go back. There's a reason why this state is overcrowded!

The very state that brought and is essentially at the heart of Apple, which is in turn at the heart of this site. Irony.

 

[Derpage]

You know you are in the best place in the country when the hate is so strong. California is and always will be #1. We keep the rest of the country relevant. It's hard carrying such a heavy load. But somebody has to do it.

 

[C DM]

I was thinking of something...like this!!

Image

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Box_(2009_film)

 

[QCassidy352]

People will still steal phones. They will take them apart and sell the screen and battery and any other useful parts.

There are several phone repair stores around here that charge $199-$299 for a screen replacement. They cost almost as much on eBay.

There's still a market for stolen phones.

Yes, but it's more work. The beauty (to a thief) of stealing a smartphone is that people carry them openly, everyone has one, and you can resell em quite easily at a decently good profit.

A thief can still turn a profit now, but it's not as easy or as profitable. So this will probably push some lazier/greedier/less resourceful thieves to look for alternatives to steal.

----------

This is amazing. I moved here about a year ago from a hell hole named Taxachusetts. Would I move back there anytime soon? No, and you can't make me.

I also moved from MA to CA a year ago and cannot wait to go back. CA has many fine qualities but is definitely not for everyone. The "California is paradise" crowd is as funny as the "California is a hell hole" crowd. Everyone appreciates different things in where they live.

 

[jyroflux]

"Kill Switch"? That sounds like hate speech to me.

 

[rodriguise]

I read it...

I read the law this is what I don't like:

(e) Any request by a government agency to interrupt communications service utilizing a technological solution required by this section is subject to Section 7908 of the Public Utilities Code.

7908 of the PUC code essentially give the government carte blanche. They can disable your phone with mere probable cause. At the rate that California Assembly is writing laws concerning every aspect of your daily life, it's frightening to most sane individuals that they will have control over your primary mode of communication.

Some people will never read the text of a bill/law. They simply enjoy their knee-jerk reaction of 'NO, we don't need government regulation'. They have some sort of utopian idea that 'the market will handle it' or 'the government is taking away our freedoms'. They have no knowledge of history where we have already been down that road (see 'robber barons'). They don't realize all the regulations that they actually rely on each and every day and how life would be without them.

I'm not always in favor of more regulations. But at least I read the bills/laws before I pass judgement. There are simply some things that should be regulated. In this case I see no down side other than screwups when selling a phone (which some iPhone users have already encountered).

Sadly this seems to be an outcome from the 'information age'. Some people seem incapable of processing complete information.

 

[C DM]

I read the law this is what I don't like:

(e) Any request by a government agency to interrupt communications service utilizing a technological solution required by this section is subject to Section 7908 of the Public Utilities Code.

7908 of the PUC code essentially give the government carte blanche. They can disable your phone with mere probable cause. At the rate that California Assembly is writing laws concerning every aspect of your daily life, it's frightening to most sane individuals that they will have control over your primary mode of communication.

So if they somehow enable Activation Lock on your iPhone (as that's the iPhone "kill switch" essentially), seems like you could just deactivate it with your Apple ID credentials.

They are better off contacting the carrier and disabling service through them in some fashion, which they already can go about doing without this law as that seems to be unrelated to manufacturers providing a consumer "kill switch" functionality on their devices.

 

[StyxMaker]

so instead of:

*gimme your phone or I'll shoot your face*

it's

*put your finger on the home button, goto settings, turn off find my iPhone then gimme your phone or I'll shoot your face*
*HURRY UP*
*too slow, *BANG**

Most smartphone thefts are the grab and run variety. They risk being caught if they hang around and try to get your password.

 

[CelestialToys]

I read the law this is what I don't like:

(e) Any request by a government agency to interrupt communications service utilizing a technological solution required by this section is subject to Section 7908 of the Public Utilities Code.

7908 of the PUC code essentially give the government carte blanche. They can disable your phone with mere probable cause. At the rate that California Assembly is writing laws concerning every aspect of your daily life, it's frightening to most sane individuals that they will have control over your primary mode of communication.

What that is saying is that if the government want to interrupt the service using this technology that they have to adhere to the same part of the code that they would if they wanted to interrupt it by any other means, getting a court order etc etc

What you have to understand is that they can already interrupt your service without this technology very easily, this new law doesn't make it any easier or more likely that they will.

 

[rodriguise]

I disagree. Every law like this chips away at liberty. The argument that they can already do X so why is Y any different is a fallacy, more laws lead to tyranny. Look at the mess the Patriot Act has created.

What that is saying is that if the government want to interrupt the service using this technology that they have to adhere to the same part of the code that they would if they wanted to interrupt it by any other means, getting a court order etc etc

What you have to understand is that they can already interrupt your service without this technology very easily, this new law doesn't make it any easier or more likely that they will.

 

[StyxMaker]

IF I was an auto executive I would remove all of my products from California.



I would encourage all other auto manufacturers to do the same.



Why do all US customers have to pay for the extra California emission tests and burdensome regulations?



Let them live like Castro's Cuba without new cars.



Toyota is moving it's HQ from California currently.



California wants clean energy - let them create their own energy --- they import 50% from out of state.



California is a disaster of the first degree - sure they have tech companies, but they rely upon the resources of other states.



The State House and Legislature is slipping towards Gomorrah faster than ever could have been imagined a decade ago.



I do not travel to California - my money is better spent elsewhere.



Why is the iTunes Store located in Nevada? So California cannot tax it excessively.



Once California fails from it's idiotic progressive/socialist/communist leaders, perhaps there will be a hope for it's future.



It will fail, dramatically, first.

California, like other 'blue' states pays more money into the federal coffers than we get back. In this way we support the 'red' states since the majority of them get more money from the federal government than they pay to it.

 

[CelestialToys]

I disagree. Every law like this chips away at liberty. The argument that they can already do X so why is Y any different is a fallacy, more laws lead to tyranny. Look at the mess the Patriot Act has created.

You may disagree, but you are wrong.

That PUC already exists. They can already turn your phone service off using it if they want to.

That part of this law is purely referencing what it has to comply with, there is no extra power given in this law.

The law also states that the user must be able to opt out/turn off this technology if they want to, if it's turned off it can't be used.

There is no provision in this new law that gives someone more rights to disable your phone without your consent.

 

[Czicks]

California, like other 'blue' states pays more money into the federal coffers than we get back. In this way we support the 'red' states since the majority of them get more money from the federal government than they pay to it.

Stop applying logic. You'll make the south cry.

 

[rodriguise]

They can disable my phone service, today yes. But they cannot disable my entire smart phone. My phone provide considerably more functionality than that, everything from contacts, to SMS, Skype and other voip features.

Today it may not be the case but, imagine if they extend this to cover tablets and other mobile. Once the law is passed its easy to change. Removing one section (22761.B) changes the game entirely.

So if they somehow enable Activation Lock on your iPhone (as that's the iPhone "kill switch" essentially), seems like you could just deactivate it with your Apple ID credentials.

They are better off contacting the carrier and disabling service through them in some fashion, which they already can go about doing without this law as that seems to be unrelated to manufacturers providing a consumer "kill switch" functionality on their devices.

----------

You may disagree, but you are wrong.

That PUC already exists. They can already turn your phone service off using it if they want to.

That part of this law is purely referencing what it has to comply with, there is no extra power given in this law.

The law also states that the user must be able to opt out/turn off this technology if they want to, if it's turned off it can't be used.

There is no provision in this new law that gives someone more rights to disable your phone without your consent.

As I explained in another response, yes the PUC can disable my phone service today, but this is a kill switch that disabled the entire device. My smart phone is a lot more than a phone. I am not wrong. You merely miss the point.

 

[CelestialToys]

They can disable my phone service, today yes. But they cannot disable my entire smart phone. My phone provide considerably more functionality than that, everything from contacts, to SMS, Skype and other voip features.

Today it may not be the case but, imagine if they extend this to cover tablets and other mobile. Once the law is passed its easy to change. Removing one section (22761.B) changes the game entirely.




----------



As I explained in another response, yes the PUC can disable my phone service today, but this is a kill switch that disabled the entire device. My smart phone is a lot more than a phone. I am not wrong. You merely miss the point.

No you're missing the point, with or without this technology on your phone the same thing can be done remotely today...your smartphone can be rendered useless with or without this technology implemented and under the existing laws that are referenced....

 

[rodriguise]

But not by the government without fully violating my rights as an individual.

No you're missing the point, with or without this technology on your phone the same thing can be done remotely today...your smartphone can be rendered useless with or without this technology implemented and under the existing laws that are referenced....

 

[subjonas]

Isn’t this MacRumors, not CaliforniaDebate? Talking in GENERAL about the role of government in relation to technology is one thing, but a lot of this is just hating on and defending California, which I don’t see as being relevant to this post or website at all.

In Brazil burglars already ask for iCloud password, so they can disable this.

If someone stands there with a gun asking for your password, GIVE IT TO THEM! But a lot of thieves, if not most, want to avoid altercations so this will significantly reduce the overall number of smartphone thefts.

"We can't think or do anything for ourselves or be responsible. We'll have another law that allows us to continue to be idiots." - California

What about getting mugged on a train is irresponsible? That’s a pretty unfair generalization.

I had my iPad stolen several months back now; it took several weeks but the iPad did turn on.... I saw it's location, the police went knocked on the door...no one answered (obviously). The iPad since then hasn't turned back on, so I am left with 2 options really.... either the thief threw it away.... or still has it so I go over and check myself; which could totally be dangerous OR I simply have to accept that it is gone. It's on the lost list for it's cellular carrier so it can't be reactivated... sucks really miss having my iPad but can't afford a new one.

Yes, Activation Lock doesn’t help all that much in getting your iPad back, sadly. But the fact that the thief can’t likely use or sell your iPad will discourage him/her from stealing iPads again in the future. It’s a preventative measure, but it depends on the knowledge being ubiquitous. Unfortunately, until then, thieves that are not “in the know” will still steal iOS devices and realize too late the futility of it, such as in your case. But now he/she knows. In other words, thanks for taking one for the team.

Try this on.

Given what we know about the reach and power of US intelligence agencies, you don't think that mandating the inclusion of a "feature" that is able to remotely shut off citizens' phones is concerning? At all?

Let the market deal with it. If people are fine with kill-switches then they can buy a phone from a manufacturer that includes them. Those that aren't fine with them can buy a different phone with the understanding that they might be at a *slightly* higher risk of being robbed for their phone...

I’m willing to bet they could already do that if they wanted. This just gives us the ability too.

Such smartphones featuring iCloud Activation-type locks will still be sold on eBay for a moderate price or shipped to china for "un-locking" via replacing the key components on a still very capable device to then be resold for a decent price.

That’s a lot more complicated than just going ‘yoink’. As someone else said, it’s meant to significantly reduce thefts. Nothing is completely foolproof.

People dont steal new cars anymore because they have an anti theft system.

They can sell the parts and they can jam the anti theft signal like onstar etc.

I don’t think you’re taking into account that there are a lot of different types of thieves with different levels of commitment and knowledge.