Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yeah, pretty much everyone has said. AT&T will not unlock your phone. Since, to them it is still their phone and can be or will be re-used in their network. And you've fulfilled you're 2 year contract, so they don't really have any control over you.

Lawyers, filing suits are would be so much money. Too much money for it's worth.
 
If a lawyer can do anything, they'd probably have to emphasize the point that by not unlocking the device, AT&T is forcing the user to keep their service beyond the agreed-upon length in the contract
The response to that statement would likely be to point out this fact:

The customer would likely be presented with multiple options to take ownership of brand new hardware (with little or zero upfront cost) when they start a new service agreement with any one of several different service providers.

So the customer can just throw away existing iPhone (or resell it to somebody else who is willing to do business with AT&T), start up service with a new service provider on a brand new piece of equipment, terminate their service with AT&T, and continue on with the new service provider. All without incurring any undue upfront expenses, and possibly with the opportunity to make a little money on the resale of the existing hardware.

AT&T isn't forcing you to remain their customer by any stretch of the imagination.
 
Yeah, although AT&T doesn't have as much pressure, since Verizon and Sprint won't activate the unlocked one, so if they wouldn't unlock the SIM, it's global roaming would be almost worthless.

True, but the way I see it, they're risking losing the customers to whom the ability to use their phone abroad is important. In the past, almost all travelers would've chosen AT&T simply because GSM is much better for travel. But now that VZW and Sprint have GSM compatible phones *AND* are willing to unlock them, AT&T no longer has a competitive advantage there. In fact, they're at a slight disadvantage.

----------

Well said.
But the whole system is screwed up, instead of the people politicians care about their pockets and donations they receive from big corporations.

Truly is a sad state of affairs. And it's a shame that the best protesting we can muster these days is the "occupy" movement. Had they been better organized and been able to move past lesser issues, they could've given the "people" a real voice.
 
True, but the way I see it, they're risking losing the customers to whom the ability to use their phone abroad is important. In the past, almost all travelers would've chosen AT&T simply because GSM is much better for travel. But now that VZW and Sprint have GSM compatible phones *AND* are willing to unlock them, AT&T no longer has a competitive advantage there. In fact, they're at a slight disadvantage.

I still think they're at an advantage, as everything other than the iPhone on AT&T can be unlocked, and you can just buy an unlocked iPhone from the get-go if that's important. I think AT&T should unlock, but it's not that huge of a deal. Verizon also doesn't have anything on LTE right now that will work internationally (i.e. LTE phone in the US, GSM/EDGE/HSPA+ abroad).
 
Well said.
But the whole system is screwed up, instead of the people politicians care about their pockets and donations they receive from big corporations.

Absolutely right! It takes a LOT of money to get elected to higher offices, and unless you are rich to start out with, it's hard to raise the money without accepting gifts from dubious sources.

I met a man once who spoke very well at our church; he was an elected official at the town level and I said to him "If you ever want to run for something higher let me know and I'll contribute." He said "Thanks, but when you go up higher the politics just get so dirty that I don't want to get involved."
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.