Unlocking Cellphones Becomes Illegal Saturday in the U.S.

[Car Ramrod]

I need to knock on wood after typing this, but I've been really good about not breaking phones, so I've never needed a phone unlocked. I always figured you'd need an unlocked phone if you had a new iPhone (for example), broke early in your contract extension and needed a new phone.

I thought that's why they are so damn expensive on ebay.

It doesn't really have anything to do with replacing your phone because it's broken. It has to do with using a T-Mobile phone on the AT&T network, for example. Some phones are network/carrier specific and unlocking them allows you to put them on other networks/carriers.

 

[steveh_131]

If this upsets you for any reason other than the fact that the time and money spent passing this legislation was wasted money, you are likely upset because you want a contract price without signing a contract. Lets hope we don't end up having all the carriers deciding to stop offering contracts thus forcing us to pay the retail cost of the devices.

Well, not really.

You still sign the contract. You still pay whatever penalties are required of you if you cancel before that contract expires.

The difference, now, is that it is illegal to unlock your phone once the contract expires or you cancel it or whatever (unless the provider unlocks it for you). The idea is that the phone is not your property, even though you paid for it in your monthly fees and usually with money up front.

Or if someone sells their locked phone to me on ebay and I want to unlock it to put it on my carrier, I no longer have any legal way to do so. Even though I am under absolutely no contractual obligation with the original carrier.

If the carriers want to put some fine print in their contracts and sue the folks who break them, then so be it. Let the civil courts sort it out. See what a jury has to say about this perpetual ownership by the carriers.

This should not be a law.

ETA: The reality is that cellular carriers want to prevent competition by locking people in to their networks. AT&T can change their service, their bandwidth caps, basically anything they want. What are you going to do about it? Switch carriers? Well now, thanks to this idiocy, you don't just pay an early termination fee of several hundred dollars (a fee designed to compensate the carrier for the subsidized price of this phone). Now you have to purchase a new phone as well.

 

[Benny]

It doesn't really have anything to do with replacing your phone because it's broken. It has to do with using a T-Mobile phone on the AT&T network, for example. Some phones are network/carrier specific and unlocking them allows you to put them on other networks/carriers.

Oh.

Does every carrier have the same sim card slot/sim card size now?

I have had the same service provider since I was 15 and only get new phones when my contract is up, so I am just about as ignorant on this subject as one can be.

 

[Car Ramrod]

Oh.

Does every carrier have the same sim card slot/sim card size now?

I have had the same service provider since I was 15 and only get new phones when my contract is up, so I am just about as ignorant on this subject as one can be.

I honestly don't know, but I do believe SIM cards are standardized now.

I've never had the need to unlock a phone, so I probably know just about as little as you, haha.

 

[steveh_131]

Oh.

Does every carrier have the same sim card slot/sim card size now?

I have had the same service provider since I was 15 and only get new phones when my contract is up, so I am just about as ignorant on this subject as one can be.

No, not really. Many GSM providers are compaible with each other. T-mobile and AT&T for example. Verizon and Sprint use a different network technology (CDMA), so it is fairly rare that an AT&T phone for example could be unlocked to work on Verizon (although I think some iPhones may have this capability).

So you can go from AT&T to t-mobile, but not from AT&T to Verizon (for example).

 

[Bunnykid68]

Well, not really.

You still sign the contract. You still pay whatever penalties are required of you if you cancel before that contract expires.

The difference, now, is that it is illegal to unlock your phone once the contract expires or you cancel it or whatever (unless the provider unlocks it for you). The idea is that the phone is not your property, even though you paid for it in your monthly fees and usually with money up front.

Or if someone sells their locked phone to me on ebay and I want to unlock it to put it on my carrier, I no longer have any legal way to do so. Even though I am under absolutely no contractual obligation with the original carrier.

If the carriers want to put some fine print in their contracts and sue the folks who break them, then so be it. Let the civil courts sort it out. See what a jury has to say about this perpetual ownership by the carriers.

This should not be a law.

ETA: The reality is that cellular carriers want to prevent competition by locking people in to their networks. AT&T can change their service, their bandwidth caps, basically anything they want. What are you going to do about it? Switch carriers? Well now, thanks to this idiocy, you don't just pay an early termination fee of several hundred dollars (a fee designed to compensate the carrier for the subsidized price of this phone). Now you have to purchase a new phone as well.

If you bought one off of Ebay would there be anyway for a carrier to know if it was unlocked/locked when you got it?

 

[steveh_131]

If you bought one off of Ebay would there be anyway for a carrier to know if it was unlocked/locked when you got it?

No, not really. Depends how much digging they are willing to do.

 

[Benny]

No, not really. Depends how much digging they are willing to do.

Why would any provider "dig" to deny money from you?

 

[CBR1000rr]

The wealth of mis information is astounding.

 

[steveh_131]

Why would any provider "dig" to deny money from you?

It's the previous carrier, the one who sold the phone originally. They're the ones motivated to dig.

Regardless of whether or not it can/will be enforced, it's a stupid law, and one that can be built on in the future to further trample on consumers.

 

[ryknoll3]

To correct a few bits of misinformation that I've seen on this thread, here is the following summary:

1. This ruling does NOT effect rooting/unlocking/jailbreaking the phone to run custom software. This ruling limits unlocking the phone to work on a different carrier than from whom you purchased the phone.

2. This does not effect a phone you go out and pay full price for. If you buy a smartphone unsubsidized for the full price $300-700, it can be used on any carrier with which it's radios are compatible. This effects phones that you buy at a subsidized contract price, which comes with a contract.

The only thing I haven't been able to figure out is if this prohibits you from unlocking the phone AFTER the contract period is up.

 

[mrjarrell]

Colour me surprised! The Obama White House actually came down on the right side of an issue, for once. They favour consumers being able to unlock their phones without fear of draconian fines and years in jail. Hopefully, they'll make the right moves to get rid of this onerous new regulation and let people use their property the way they want.

White House responds to cell phone unlocking petition | Electronista

 

[steveh_131]

His administration has done a few notable things in this arena.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-access-results-scientific-research

 

[mrjarrell]

Looks like a California representative is introducing legislation to overrule the librarian of congress. Good on her. Now we'll get to see who's in bed with whom. Let's see how the freedom loving "conservatives" come down on her bill.

Congresswoman To Introduce Bill To Make Cellphone Unlocking Legal Again