Phone unlocking ban could hit you in the wallet

[Tinman57]

Phones bought after January 25 can no longer lawfully be decoupled from a carrier by the owner of the device. How did this decision come to rest with a single non-elected, non-technical, elderly librarian in Washington?

http://www.pcworld.c...u-in-the-wallet.html

[Renegade]

Ummm... Speechless.

Nah! Just kidding! I've always got a smart-alec answer for everything~!

He's an idiot and doesn't understand the first thing about technology. He would do well to learn a bit from some engineers, developers, and perhaps Richard Stallman.

[Tinman57]

Ummm... Speechless.

Nah! Just kidding! I've always got a smart-alec answer for everything~!

He's an idiot and doesn't understand the first thing about technology. He would do well to learn a bit from some engineers, developers, and perhaps Richard Stallman.

-Renegade (January 26, 2013, 10:21 PM)

  He's not just an idiot, he's an 83 year old idiot. The guy is so old he farts dust, and yet they leave a major decision that he isn't even qualified up to him!!!  Only in America......

[barney]

Maybe so, but it's still illegal for me to separate my phone from the carrier whence I purchased it.  It's not just phones obtained after 2013-01-25.  The act of unlocking has become illegal - by fiat   .  Mind you, I've no intention of unlocking my phone, never had such, but it seems damned impertinent at the very least for someone not even in the legal chain to tell me I cannot  !

[SeraphimLabs]

And who are they to tell me what I can and cannot do with my property?

Mind you most phones the terms of service clearly states that they at all times own the phone and all associated hardware and are just letting you use it, so it isn't really ever your phone.

But for my next phone I'm looking at outright buying my own hardware, because then they cannot stick their little worms into my stuff legally.

Of course a lot of carriers will say they don't allow that, they require you to use their provided hardware models.

My response will be to go find a lawyer for some antitrust action, because this is getting seriously out of hand.

[Deozaan]

Sounds like making it illegal to put Linux on a new computer you bought simply because it came with Windows pre-installed. 

[40hz]

I actually welcome fools like him and decisions like his for two reasons:

First - it's so totally and obviously removed from reality (and the technology underneath) that it brings into question the entire role of government in regulating things like this. Making a 'decision' like this is the perfect "Now I've got you, ya sonavabitch!" opportunity to start people yelling and pushing for change. Once that starts it's only a matter of time before a few elected types read the writing on the wall and break rank with the "paid-for" politicos. Most politicians, being constitutionally gutless and blatantly self-serving, soon cave - and then - the ball starts rolling.

Second: Sweetheart deals need darkness. Once you turn the lights on cockroaches they tend to scurry. So too with legislation and 'executive directives' that depend on public ignorance or indifference to be allowed to continue. So the more ridiculous, unfair and stupid a decision is, the more likely it is to engender public outrage and bring about its reversal.


Yup! I looooove it when those in power start to think they can do whatever they want and then make the mistake of pushing it too far...

What I hate is when they do something less ridiculous or craven - but it's not enough to make people notice or care.

[Tinman57]

Phone unlocking ban sparks consumer ire; White House petition
After unlocking your phone became a crime on Saturday, a petition at the White House website is gaining steam to reverse the decision.

http://www.pcworld.c...-and-a-petition.html

[Renegade]

The Congressional Librarian (agreeing with the CTIA, the wireless industry association) felt that phone unlocking should not be legal because the wireless carriers already have very liberal unlocking policies, and that unlocked phones can be bought directly from phone manufacturers.

 Under the law, the penalties for unlocking a subsidized wireless phone without carrier consent can be severe. If convicted, an offender can be fined up to $500,000 or imprisoned up to five years for the first offense. An offender can be fined up to a million dollars and/or go to prison for up to ten years for each subsequent offense.

If you BUY it, it's YOURS. Use it as a butt-plug if you like. But making it illegal to use something that you bought however you want to use it? Really, really bad precedent.

Just because the carriers are being somewhat nice today is no reason to assume that they'll be nice tomorrow. If they don't want to allow unlocked phones on their networks, then they can go ahead and watch how consumer backlash works.

But $500k and 5 years? HOLY MOTHER!

Any thoughts about the punishment being commensurate with the "crime"? (Not that it is a crime, but that it is treated as a crime - same goes for several other "crimes".)

Why is it that The Onion is less of a news parody than a predictive news program?

[PhilB66]

"subsidized wireless phone" is the key here.

[barney]

"subsidized wireless phone" is the key here.

-PhilB66 (January 29, 2013, 08:06 PM)

That's not exactly the way it is phrased  .  That may be your key, as 'twould be mine own.  But.  If you unlock - with the concomitant if you get caught, of course - you are liable for fine, imprisonment, or both - the old geezer didn't include any fine print escapism.  The subsidized bit is so easy to beat it ain't even funny.

Friend of mine went to Verizon with an unlocked phone he'd bought on the Web.  They gave him a service contract - and locked his phone into the bargain:  no lock, no service.  Oh, yeah ... his contract (he discovered later) was ~twenty (20) percent higher than the norm.   I dunno, maybe he just looked like an easy mark - actually, he is  - but that's what happened.  So, now, even though he bought an unlocked phone, if he unlocks it from Verizon, he's guilty by the Librarian's fiat.  Ya can't win, ya can't draw even.  Popular opinion overturn?  Mebbe ... 

[TaoPhoenix]

I actually welcome fools like him and decisions like his for two reasons:

First - it's so totally and obviously removed from reality (and the technology underneath) that it brings into question the entire role of government in regulating things like this. Making a 'decision' like this is the perfect "Now I've got you, ya sonavabitch!" opportunity to start people yelling and pushing for change. Once that starts it's only a matter of time before a few elected types read the writing on the wall and break rank with the "paid-for" politicos. Most politicians, being constitutionally gutless and blatantly self-serving, soon cave - and then - the ball starts rolling.

Second: Sweetheart deals need darkness. Once you turn the lights on cockroaches they tend to scurry. So too with legislation and 'executive directives' that depend on public ignorance or indifference to be allowed to continue. So the more ridiculous, unfair and stupid a decision is, the more likely it is to engender public outrage and bring about its reversal.

...
Yup! I looooove it when those in power start to think they can do whatever they want and then make the mistake of pushing it too far...

-40hz (January 28, 2013, 01:09 PM)

Be careful, they are really really close to us approving all kinds of things we never would have in the 1990's back when we sorta-cared. In this crazed environment the Pol's are pushing absolutely everything because we *might once again care* but we're so close to not-caring right now. And it's WAY harder to *reverse* a law than prevent it from forming, so that's what they're trying now. See what was supposed to be Fun "we don't need to read you Miranda Rights on Misdemeanors".   

[kyrathaba]

Created a whitehouse.gov acct, signed the petition...

[Tinman57]

Created a whitehouse.gov acct, signed the petition...

-kyrathaba (February 02, 2013, 06:33 PM)

  Cool beans!     Perhaps if they get enough people to sign, this crap will be resolved.  It's already getting to be a big thing in the news now.