U.S. Department of Justice Reviewing Wireless Carrier Exclusivity Agreements

[charlituna]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)

Now this comes out. Phone companies and wireless providers have been doing this for years.

i suspect part of the reason why is because majors bought out some of the failing smaller companies and snagged more market share in the process. so now they are at a level where they could be deemed 'abusive'

it's a parallel to what has come up with the Psystar thing. Right now, Apple has like 6% of the market share, so tying software and hardware is deemed okay. they lack market share. but if they got up to like 50-60% the judgment would be different. they would have to decide if they want to be hardware or software and stick with that one. such as how Microsoft must. Apple doesn't want this so they aren't fighting to gain more share with cut prices etc. smart move really.

 

[CaryMacGuy]

I think that exclusivity agreements are bad for consumers. Take me for example, I had Verizon and quite frankly was very happy with Verizon's network (plus had quite a few people on it). However, I wanted the iPhone so I left all of that for my preferred device. Having a lack of exclusivity would make better sense for consumers.

Also, the idea of locked devices needs to be rethought. Carriers already impose hefty termination fees. The idea being that if I want to sell a device, it should work with any carrier...

Finally on a slightly related note (carrier oppression)...I am writing this during a power outage with a tethered iPhone..Suck it AT&T

 

[chaosconan]

Because there are four real players involved, only two that are truly omnipresent nationally--and those two, coincidentally, are the halves of a former single company. So all of them offer the same contracts and no other choice. It's implicit collusion because they all understand that locking in a captive audience is cheaper than truly competing. It happens in every oligopoly in the history of mankind--it is, in fact, a necessary ingredient to the formation of an oligopoly--which is why they need to be regulated. Particularly when they use a scarce public resource (spectrum) at the good grace of the public themselves.

Now I understand what your talking about. oligopoly
But wouldn't it be better to break these companies apart to allow for more competition versus regulating them or your argument is that because of the scarcity of the resource that regulation is necessary.

 

[charlituna]

Exclusive handsets have been a staple of wireless providers for pretty much as long as they've been around.

as a tool to attract folks. nothing more. if the carriers can't use the device as the lure they will be forced to use things like lower rates. which isn't a bad thing

Hopefully something good comes from it. Like Verizon getting the iPhone.

Verizon can't get the iphone at this point. they are CDMA and the phone is GSM. it is highly unlikely that Apple would spend the time and money to make a CDMA phone. Now if it is true that there is a move towards one system and Verizon and Apple both embrace that standard, no worries. of course by the time that happens, ATT may be at the end of their contract and Apple might decide to just unlock the phone and sell it full price only,take it where you wish.

 

[MizzouCowboy]

At least they found something they're both good at.

Good for them, but bad for my children and one day my grandchildren.

 

[NinjaHERO]

Normally I am against pretty much everything the government does to try and 'help' us, but competition is good for everyone. I can't wait to see where this goes.

 

[Billy Boo Bob]

Government intrusion only makes things worse.
.....
What industry will the government find next to be of "vital importance" and take over or regulate it to death?

Television. Once there's only "state run television" then they're socialist utopia will be near complete. At minimum, by the time His Holiness is out of his first (and God help us, his only) term, they'll be talking about a TV tax.

Just listen to The Beatles' Taxman again... That's going to be us if this madness continues.

 

[Avarix]

People are missing the point. It mainly has to do with carriers refusing to unlock phones after your contract is canceled or runs out. The early termination fee is supposed to be recovery for the price of the phone.

You own the phone, but its useless if you want to go to another carrier that also supports that same protocol if you can't use it with there service.

 

[xIGmanIx]

AT&T, nor Apple have anywhere close to a monopoly on the market. You want to FORCE two private companies to do something that is not in their best interests.

If you want Sync by Microsoft in your car, you have to buy a Ford. Are you going to force Microsoft to sell the technology to every car company, just because you want a Chevy? Or you could create your own company and equivalent software to compete with Microsoft, then license it to Chevy.

If you want an iPhone on another carrier, just create a competing phone without infringing on any patents and then you can sell it to whoever you want.

1. Both Apple and AT&T are PUBLIC companies
2. cell phone service is not proprietary, meaning i can get cell phone service from other companies. They have voice and data on other providers, not exclusive to AT&T. Plus its been proven that other carriers besides AT&T can deliver "iPhone service"

 

[Jawsome]

Senators want iPhones.

I bet 'several US senators' just want iPhones on their Verizon account and this has little to do with lack of competition lol...

 

[Digiimorgan]

Wtf

are you serious this is a waste of money this has gone on for how many years 10 and now they want to look into this as if it was a real issue. OMG i cant have an iPhone my life is over how about you get a life!! so im guessing there are a few people in the government that there bank accounts where getting alittle low so they needed a way to fatten them up so they decided to pull this BS.

So next lets say that Microsoft and OSX are cornering the market and we need to put a stop to it and give Fadora , RedHat , KIWI and other linux OSs a chance.

This pisses me OFF

 

[Thunder82]

I think exclusivity agreements are crap as well, but I find it funny how everyone instantly thinks that there would be a Verizon iPhone if there wasn't an exclusivity agreement. I'm not saying a CDMA/LTE iPhone is out of the question, but Apple never would have gone out of their way to make a CDMA/EVDO phone, unless they wanted to throw worldwide sales out the window.

 

[danpass]

I bet 'several US senators' just want iPhones on their Verizon account and this has little to do with lack of competition lol...

I wouldn't put it past their personal agendas, dem, ind, repub, libert, etc


Here is an outright attack on patent law. This is AFTER the patent had passed a second review and was reaffrimed as valid.

http://www.techlawforum.net/patent-...ator-takes-interest-patent-law-bank-immunity/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021303731.html

If they don't like something they just write a new law and we can only hope that the Judicial branch rectifies it before any long term damage is done.

 

[stelriah]

if i want my company to have an exclusive deal with another company that's my right. the government needs to stay out. what private citizens do are of no concern to the government as long as they're not infringing on the rights of others.

Please. You think that just because companies spend millions of dollars and time on developing products of they're own free will they can just continue that free will once they become successful?

 

[chaosconan]

If the exclusive agreement between Apple and AT&T does not provide fair competition what about Dominick's and Chase. If you go inside the food store you'll notice that Chase has setup a shop. But you cannot find any other companies like Citicard, Discovercard or Bank of America. If you go inside walgreen's you'll notice that their ATM machines are the same. Only one Financial company that provides the ATM machines.

So, from inside shops to ATM machines all these stores, dominicks, walgreens, target, and on and on are all aligning with one financial institutions. I don't see them giving you options.

It's the same at my company. The ATM machines are only CHASE. We don't have Citicard or Bank Of America.

I've never seen this pattern before couple of years ago. Now everyone is taking sides.

 

[windywoo]

Now you're making a big assumption that I am in favor of corporate welfare. I'm not. I was ranting all day long at the GM/Chrysler bailout, should have let them fail. There should be no taxpayer dollars spent to rescue bad business decisions.

And I'm sorry that my "flag waving" is bothering you. Don't like it? Tough. And you don't like my description as "whining"? Well then, what would you call it? A temper tantrum? A rational dialogue?

I call a spade a spade...whining plain and simple.

Rationalise it anyway you want, but once you describe your opponent's arguments as "whining" you aren't debating any more. You have ceased to come up with answers of your own and are now at the level of a playground squabble. Your nationalistic bluster is around that level too.

I wasn't specifically referring to you when I made my capitalist comment, but that attitude exists and is the dominant viewpoint in large companies.

 

[Shrapnel]

Sure they do, they can choose not to get one. Wanting something does not mean you are entitled to it.

Not in my case or many other rural areas which is one of the big points of this investigation. I want an iPhone, fine only AT&T has it. Guess what AT&T is not available in my state. Service (GSM) works because of roaming agreements, but they (AT&T) are not here yet. Therefore, people that want the product regardless of the carrier are not allowed by AT&T or Apple to purchase one.

Making you have AT&T in order to buy an iPhone is akin to Ford saying you can only use their gasoline, windshield washer fluid, roads, etc if you want to buy their car.

 

[coolwater]

1. Prohibit exclusivity.

2. Make it customer's option to unlock iPhone after fulfilling the 2-year contract

3. While at it, prohibit EA Sports' NFL exclusivity as well. Let 2K series compete with Madden which sucks.

 

[MacGeek7]

I'm torn on this issue because I'd like to have an iPhone that isn't unlocked/jailbroken to run on a different carrier with cheaper plans. But at the same time I really don't like the fact that the government is getting more involved with business. I think Skyblue and rdowns hit the nail on the head.

The government shouldn't be meddling with businesses. Cell phone companies are free to do what they want.

The govt. has no business meddling here. Simply a way for them to bring up something everyone complains about and make it look like they're doing something. I doubt much, if anything, comes out of it.

 

[dontwalkhand]

I laugh at all of the stupid AT&T fanboys here, pulling words like communism, and socialism just because your AT&T won't get exclusivity anymore over the iPhone.

AT&T refusing to unlock the phone even after your contract is up? Etc...

 

[aristotle]

Maybe we can get the CRTC in here to actually have SOME competition here in Canada.

Maybe you should read the news once in a while. This September, Telus will be rolling out a UTMS (3G GSM) networks nation-wide followed by Bell. The two largest CDMA carriers in Canada are switching over to 3G GSM in preparation for the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver.

 

[aristotle]

CDMA is dead?
Verizon has over 75 million customers.
So Apple throw together a CDMA phone sells it for 2 years then switches but continues CDMA 2 until 2013. But then the old CDMA iphones should either be low in numbers or Verizon offers a decent upgrade for phones under contract.

Imagine even at 5% of their customer base upgrading to the iphone that is 3.5 million units sold. If my calculator isn't broken that is about $2 billion in sales.

I am sure CDMA is dead, in some eyes, but there still seems to be plenty of opportunity for someone to make money off of it.

Yes, CDMA is dead. There is no CDMA 2 but there was a standard called UMB that was supposed to be an upgrade path for CDMA but it died before it could get off the ground.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution#Carrier_adoption

The following CDMA carriers will be migrating to LTE which is the 4G GSM standard.
Verizon Wireless - by end of 2009 they will be offering LTE handsets with SIM cards.
Bell Mobility (Canada) - 2009-2010
Telus (Canada) 2009 for 3G UTMS, 2010-2011 LTE
MetroPCS
China Telecom/China Unicom
KDDI (Japan)

 

[michelepri]

I am glad to see there are still american institutions capable of defending consumer interests against corporate giants. Let's hope they force companies to more honest practices. Apple should be fines as well for initiating this whole thing.

 

[apsterling]

What is left to give a company a competitive advantage in the marketplace other than price?

The better product?

 

[chrono1081]

Oh I hope something good comes of this. Its ******** how consumers in the states have to choose between carriers just to get the phone they want. Europe doesn't have this problem. My European friends were amazed when I told them that I had to switch phone companies just to get the iPhone.