Phone Unlocking Illegal in the U.S.

  • Thread starter Thread starter LightyKD
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 6,915
  • Replies Replies 83
My phone is unlocked, I'm not about to re-lock it just to make some incompetent money grubbing assholes happy.
I don't see this law getting enforced, specially not with android being as easy to unlock as it is.

Also how can they do this, they previously ruled banning unlocking unconstitutional, I was under the impression some law prevented them from going back and changing that.
Did you even read the article?
Maybe you're confusing unlocking with rooting/jailbreaking.
 
last I checked, flashing your CDMA phone to another carrier was illegal, but unlocking a GSM phone to use on another GSM carrier wasn't. So what's changing, exactly?
 
In Brazil, companies are obligated by law to unlock our phones if we request them to.



This is easily solved by making a contract with the phone provider when buying a subsidized phone. This contracts gives the user the obligation to use the phone provider services for at least 6 months for example. You can then unlock your phone later

EDIT:



If you for some reason need or want to change the phone supplier you would have to buy a different phone just because of that? This doesn't sound reasonable to me at all, it seems like the company owns the phone not you

That is true, I had a crapload of trouble with Verizon. The point is, why would you use a locked contract with your cellphone when you could just use a prepaid phone? I only have a 3G iPad because I need it for work. An unlocked phone is, however, a greater choice. You could use T-Mobile prepaid on an unlocked iPhone rather than pay $1,200 a year with Verizon. Overall = much cheaper.

iPhone ($199.99 w/ 2 yr contract) + Plan ($1,200 / yr) = $1,400 first year
Unlocked iPhone ($649.99) + T-Mobile Prepaid Card ($50/mo, $600/yr) = $1249.99 first year
 
  • Like
Reactions: RodrigoDavy
Politicians being prostitutes for corporations what else is new. Unlocking phone illegal and abortion legal. lol. Glad to to see these whores have their priorities straight. How is this law going to create jobs?
 
Even stranger is that if you buy a AT&T locked phone, you can call AT&T Customer Support and get the unlock code free. I did that with my Xperia Play 4G, no hassle at all.
 
Y-yeah, that's silly. You own your phone. The carrier doesn't, you do. Unlocking it should be your right.
But Foxi, you're just technically licensing the software on the phone, so what if they want to remotely brick you for modifying it! :P
 
Touche. *shakes... paws, I guess?*

In any case, I think that the moment you buy a given product, regardless of whether or not you're signing a contract, it's your personal posession and you can smash it 5 minutes later if you so see fit - it's yours. It doesn't matter if you unlock or not, you're bound by the contract so what gives? It's same difference, really.

The only thing this does is limit your options for when the contract is over - you can't change the carrier even if you tried.
 
I honestly don't understand why carriers even bother to lock (contract) phones. Surely once a person has entered into a contract, they have to pay off said contract, regardless of whether they actually use phone on that specific carrier. So for example, if someone gets an iPhone 5, on a $40 a month contract (no idea if that's the right ball park, don't live in the US) for 2 years. They will pay $40 a month for 2 years. It makes no real difference to the carrier if they actually use the phone on their network at any point during that 2 years. They'll get the same amount of money (less any out-of-contract spending, but I imagine that is zero/minimal for the majority of users, who will have chosen a suitable plan). In fact, it'll presumably be cheaper for the carrier if they don't use the phone on that network.

So allowing unlocking would not be harmful to the carrier's revenue stream from that customer.

Now of course this only applies to contract phones, in the case of pay-as-you-go (or "prepaid") the cost of the phone itself is subsidised by the carrier on the understanding they will earn revenue from you making calls, sending texts and using data etc. But I am given to believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that the "prepaid" market in the US is quite small, and most phone users are on contracts.

So quite simply, it is hard for me to understand the justification for locking a handset.
 
What.

This news is fake. It makes no sense.

I can see why people might want to make jailbreaking and modding illegal. Jailbreaks and mods tend to lead to piracy, and a lot of people are convinced piracy is literally tearing every media industry apart.

But unlocking phones?

What is someone going to do? Pirate a carrier? What are they afraid of?`
 
What.

This news is fake. It makes no sense.

I can see why people might want to make jailbreaking and modding illegal. Jailbreaks and mods tend to lead to piracy, and a lot of people are convinced piracy is literally tearing every media industry apart.

But unlocking phones?

What is someone going to do? Pirate a carrier? What are they afraid of?`
You switching to another carrier, and not shelling out your hard-earned bucks to them for their shitty reception perhaps?
 
You switching to another carrier, and not shelling out your hard-earned bucks to them for their shitty reception perhaps
Is there someone out there who thinks that if you have terrible service, you should be forced to stick with that terrible service even if you could get a different one? That's like if the FedEx guy threw a package through your window, then when you tried to call FedEx and complain about how you'd never use them again, they say "WELL HAH HAH. YOU DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. USING UPS IS ILLEGAL FOR YOU NOW."
 
  • Like
Reactions: JulietStMoon

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum