backtop


Print 40 comment(s) - last by tng.. on Mar 4 at 9:40 AM

Genachowski to investigate smartphone unlock ban

Smartphone fans around the country have been in an uproar ever since a ban was placed on a user's ability to unlock their own mobile phone on January 26. Apparently, the ban didn't put limits on carriers being able to unlock their devices, but individuals cracking their phone to operate on other networks was forbidden.

The FCC has now promised to investigate whether the ban is harmful to market competitiveness. The FCC also plans to see if the executive branch has the authority to change the law.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told TechCrunch, "[The] ban raises competition concerns; it raises innovation concerns."

Prior to the ban going into effect, customers were allowed to unlock their smartphones, allowing users to switch carriers and keep the device they had already purchased. Smartphones were exempted from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which has a provision placing a ban on the circumvention of copy protection schemes.
 
Now, smartphone owners who use unauthorized methods to unlock their devices open themselves up to potential legal penalty.

Genachowski said, "It’s something that we will look at at the FCC to see if we can and should enable consumers to use unlocked phones."

Source: TechCrunch



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Solandri on 3/2/2013 4:05:08 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The problem with your argument is that when a person gets a "free" phone as part of a contracted period of time, during the contracted time the phone isn't the customer's, it is the phone company's phone.

When you buy a car with a "no money down" loan, the bank giving you the loan doesn't require you to use only their approved service and gas stations.

quote:
One understandable consequence of letting someone walk out of the phone company office with a (arguably) valuable phone is the risk to the phone company of the customer not abiding by the terms of the contract e.g. they don't pay their monthly account on time.

Banks and companies that make auto loans and home mortgages face the same problem. But they've found lots of ways to deal with it without requiring the car or home buyer to buy services only from their pre-approved list.

The carriers are trying to have their cake and eat it too. They want to pretend they're selling you a phone so you bear the end of life costs when the phone is obsolete. But they simultaneously want to treat it as if they're leasing it to you by controlling what you do with it once your contract is up.

They can't have it both ways. If they want to make it a leased phone and keep it locked to themselves after your contract is up, I have no problem with it. But they should be required to market it as a lease so the price people are willing to pay is lower than if it's a purchase.


"We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki