Related
I considering suing 2012 for false advertisement because it listed 2012 as destruction of all humanity, they're liars . so I would need to know how many people would be willing to join my suit to possible a class action lawsuit. We must save Google, Android and AT&T!
ADMIN feel free to delete this at your choosing.
.01 Troll% .99% What? 95% Human 4% Random
FOR HUMANITY!!!! 2012!!1 AHhhhhh DOoOm Mayan DOoooommM What to do whhat to dooo!?!?!? GOOGLE AND ANDROID EPICNESS!!!?!?!?!?!?!!?!
KJSOARES2 said:
I considering suing AT&T for false advertisement because they listed the FM radio saying the phone had it,but upon learning this they removed the said feature from their site. so I would need to know how many people would be willing to join my suit to possible a class action lawsuit. I have started contact with a law office in Houston, and I intend to contact them tomorrow to see how to proceed. This is for AT&T customers only and for thoughts who purchased the Galaxy S 2 with intentions of using the FM Radio. This is not for people trying to make money for a feature they don't give a damn about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read haha.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Can't tell if real lawsuit or trolling ...
Sent from my SGS II
King Shady said:
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read haha.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
OP, are you serious? The T-Mobile G2X was advertised as a quad-band phone and it wasn't. Their website wasn't updated until about a month after people started to receive the device. You know what their response was? Crickets. The same response you'll get from AT&T. And this is a lot less impactful an omission. Whether you realize it or not you can't sue AT&T even if you wanted to. The T&C you agreed to when you signed up limits you to arbitration in case of a dispute. Instead of the nuclear option, why don't you try charm and get them to swap the phone or undo the transaction if FM radio really is that important to you. Those are your only options anyway as they're not going to change the specs on the phone or produce one just for you that has the FM radio.
This guy works for apple.
I voided my warranty and your mum.
KJSOARES2 said:
I considering suing AT&T for false advertisement because they listed the FM radio saying the phone had it,but upon learning this they removed the said feature from their site. so I would need to know how many people would be willing to join my suit to possible a class action lawsuit. I have started contact with a law office in Houston, and I intend to contact them tomorrow to see how to proceed. This is for AT&T customers only and for thoughts who purchased the Galaxy S 2 with intentions of using the FM Radio. This is not for people trying to make money for a feature they don't give a damn about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahaha!
Good luck with that.
This is from the Terms of Use for att.com which you agree to by using the site...
AT&T does not warrant that information, graphic depictions, product and service descriptions or other content of the Sites is accurate, complete, reliable, updated, current, or error-free. Despite our efforts, it is possible that a price for a product or service offered on the Site may be inaccurate or the product or service description may contain an inaccuracy. In the event AT&T determines that a product or service contains an inaccurate price or description, AT&T reserves the right to take any action it deems reasonable and necessary, in its sole discretion, to rectify the error, including without limitation canceling your order, unless prohibited by law. AT&T may make improvements or changes to any of its content, information products, services, or programs described on the Sites at any time without notice. You agree to notify AT&T immediately if you become aware of any pricing or descriptive errors or inconsistencies with any products or services you order through the Sites and comply with any corrective action taken by AT&T.
In other words, between mandated arbitration and the website ToU, you and your "lawyer" are pretty much SOL.
Barry is correct. You have no legal right or ability to file a law suit against them. In the contract that you signed, you accepted the ability to file through arbitration, but not through the courts.
i'm going to join the bandwagon here. Please do not actually follow through with this.
KJSOARES2 said:
I considering suing AT&T for false advertisement because they listed the FM radio saying the phone had it,but upon learning this they removed the said feature from their site. so I would need to know how many people would be willing to join my suit to possible a class action lawsuit. I have started contact with a law office in Houston, and I intend to contact them tomorrow to see how to proceed. This is for AT&T customers only and for thoughts who purchased the Galaxy S 2 with intentions of using the FM Radio. This is not for people trying to make money for a feature they don't give a damn about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here you go, https://market.android.com/search?q=radio&so=1&c=apps
i recommend iHeartRadio if you want to listen to ClearChannel stations..
Its seems returning your phone would be the easiest solution to this issue...
Yeah... At best a lawsuit would get you back a restocking fee. Everyone who has this device is still within their 30 day return period at this point.
Entropy512 said:
Yeah... At best a lawsuit would get you back a restocking fee. Everyone who has this device is still within their 30 day return period at this point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Approached diplomatically, I'm sure they'd waive the re-stocking charge since there was an error on the website that indicated the phone was equipped with an FM radio. I've found AT&T pretty decent to work with most of the time. There's no question there was an error, the debate is over what should be done about it.
OP, assuming they let you out of the original purchase, get an iP4S instead. You can sell it on eBay and for the same price or less get an international SGS2 instead. It has the FM radio. If you buy it from the UK or Expansys-USA it'll still have a 2-year warranty.
This is something that could effect us all. What if the world does end? Depending on the survivors there may be enough to keep at&t going.
Does that mean I'm still under contract?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
I think your contract dies with at&t. Unless you become president of at&t if you survive.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/26/dmca-update-makes-new-phone-unlocking-illegal/
What's this gonna mean for the community? We'll all be felons next year?
More 'big brother' intruding in our lives. Seems like a good waste of taxpayer money and government time that could be spent on real problems.
how would this affect us?
android is open source, and it is still gonna allow rooting
I read it to mean that unlocking smartphones WILL be allowed still...they're extending the legality for another 3 years. Switching carriers will soon be illegal though.
http://m.cnet.com/news/feds-uphold-...0756?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
Sent from my EVO LTE
eXplicit815 said:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/26/dmca-update-makes-new-phone-unlocking-illegal/
What's this gonna mean for the community? We'll all be felons next year?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This won't affect us in any way. The unlocking they're talking about refers to unlocking a phone to be used on another carriers network, not unlocking bootloaders, rooting, etc. It will be interesting to see how this affects some of the smaller carriers though, as they seem to tacitly encourage the re-flashing of devices originally sold by Sprint and Verizon to activate on their networks. This business model should be illegal under the new ruling, I'll be curious to see if there are still as many cell phone shops advertising the ability to reflash handsets and activate them on pre-paid services next year (that's pretty common around my neighborhood, but maybe not so much in better areas). Ideally I'd like to see that practice eliminated as it's the easiest way to monetize a stolen phone, and I'm still p*ssed that my EVO LTE was stolen last week.
What I'm surprised about is that it will be illegal to jailbreak/root tablets but legal for smartphones once this new ruling goes into effect.
Yeah that's interesting. I misread it, I thought it was rooting in general.
T3CHW0LF said:
What I'm surprised about is that it will be illegal to jailbreak/root tablets but legal for smartphones once this new ruling goes into effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stupid really especially for a device 9/10 will be bought without the carrier as the middle man, a fully owned, unsubsidized device. I mean hell. If I enter sudo or login as Root on my netbook/laptop wouldn't I be just as guilty lol?
BTW my laptop is an HP TM2 tablet. :silly:
Haven't read the article yet but as far as rooting goes, htc dev unlock *blegh* is basically a contract between you and the oem giving permission to modify your device as long as you leave their proprietary alone. Unless they specify that your are not allowed to exploit their software and specify in particular what area of their software (hurrah for grey legal areas) We can probably still soff the phones
Here is the ABC News link:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/now-illegal-unlock-cellphone/story?id=18319518
I just want to clarify that
I am not trying to "sensationalize" the issue.
I am not trying to pass on "misinformation."
I don't write for ABC.
I don't write legislation.
I don't vote on the passage of legislation.
I am merely sharing a link on a story that you will see sooner or later.
At least now you can say you saw it first on XDA!
DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER.
Please hit the "Thanks" button.
A link has been added to sign a petition if you are interested. It requires a "White House DOT Gov Account." Why?" Big Brother, probably.
I am not afilliated with the Federal Government,
I am not afilliated with any State Government,
I am not afilliated with Law Enforcement,
IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.
I'm just a regular dude trying to make a positive, informative contribution to the community which I love so much and am very greatful and appreciative for ALL of the contributors, and everyone who shares. Where would we be without the Devs? Running STOCK, UNROOTED!
The petiton link was found via www.phonearena.com.
White House Petition:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Let us expand on the sensationalistic thread title, as many will not click through to see the real story, shall we?
Unauthorized subsidy unlocks performed without the consent of the carrier, return to being illegal under the DMCA today.
This does not mean that AT&T or T-Mobile won't or cannot provide unlocks, although it could mean that they might become less likely to do so during the period between the user purchasing the device at new line or upgrade pricing and the contract period expiring or an ETF being paid.
Re: Carrier Unlocking Your Cellphone ILLEGAL As Of TODAY
It is not illegal to unlock my phone, like you said. It is for phones purchased after today.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda app-developers app
PaulF8080 said:
It is not illegal to unlock my phone, like you said. It is for phones purchased after today.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, you misread it. If your phone was unlocked as of today then you are grandfathered in. If it is not unlocked then it is illegal for you to unlock it without the consent of the carrier.
Edit: My apologies PaulF8080 as you are correct and the story in the first post is not written correctly.
Re: Carrier Unlocking Your Cellphone ILLEGAL As Of TODAY
*cough cough*
Ebay *cough*
*cough*
............................*sneeze*
Sent from my SGH-T879 using xda premium
This may just drive up the prices of unlocked phones on eBay. Still curious to know how carriers will know if your phone was unlocked yesterday or tomorrow. I tend to use Canadian unlocked phones anyways.
Agoattamer said:
No, you misread it. If your phone was unlocked as of today then you are grandfathered in. If it is not unlocked then it is illegal for you to unlock it without the consent of the carrier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is misinformation.
Any phone bought before today can be carrier unlocked, legally. And then there is the fact that the carriers are not really on a witch hunt to find anyone anyway. At least not yet.
Seems that story in the first post may be incorrect. You are correct kimtyson.
Unlocking phones without the express consent of the carrier who locked them became illegal thanks to edits to DMCA exemptions back in October, but it's only now that the 90-day grace period is running out. Locked phones purchased in the 90 days after the ruling are still game to be unlocked, but from here on out, for an unlocked phone to be legitimate, it'll have to have been bought that way or come with a permission slip from your carrier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Taken from: http://gizmodo.com/5978982/unlocking-your-phone-is-illegal-starting-tomorrow
DELETED -(addendum to title description)
Re: Carrier Unlocking Your Cellphone ILLEGAL As Of TODAY
It should be illegal when/if you still have contract or the phone is on EIP. other that it should be fine because you own the phone and you can do what u you want with the phone
granted it maybe, but when I saw the article, I went on to ATT chat this morning and unlocked my wife's SIII. Did my replacement note about 3 weeks back. Both phones under original 24 month contract, mine 8 months since upgrade, wife's about 6 months since her upgrade, both subsidized by the way......
Re: Carrier Unlocking Your Cellphone ILLEGAL As Of TODAY
How in the world are people going to enforce this?
Sent from my GT-P7510 using xda premium
tigeryee said:
How in the world are people going to enforce this?
Sent from my GT-P7510 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually pretty simple, service provides will no longer unlock your phone and the pay for folks will charge four times the amount, because that is what the service providers will charge them. Not hard at all.
Agoattamer said:
This may just drive up the prices of unlocked phones on eBay. Still curious to know how carriers will know if your phone was unlocked yesterday or tomorrow. I tend to use Canadian unlocked phones anyways.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, I don't think so...Apparently, it is still legal to unlock your phone if you bought it used.
Gizmodo said:
Legacy phones, i.e. "used (or perhaps unused) phones previously purchased or otherwise acquired by a consumer" are still cool to unlock, and that definition has a little bit of play in it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Re: Carrier Unlocking Your Cellphone ILLEGAL As Of TODAY
My opinion... If I want to unlock my phone fully (and the option to do so exists) I'm going to do it. It's not like I can jump carriers & not pay the ETF before the contract is up.
Just another example of crap legislation from D.C. morons.
Sent from my Thunderbolt using one opposable thumb.
This contradicts legislation already in place called fair use, which means if you buy a phone outright (no contract or used), you are free to modify it any way you please.
That law came as a result of class action against at&t and the iphone.
If you buy a phone at a subsidized price through a contract/upgrade, you break the law for flashing non-carrier software. The carrier still owns the phone until you pay it off.
Throwing a bone into the equation. For example, look at all the used ATT Notes that are for sale at this moment. I would say most of those are still involved with a subsidized 2 year contract. So how would future purchases like this be handled? I wonder if IMEI codes will have to be released before they can become unlocked. That would be the only way to run checks on this.
All I can say about that is a web service chat session with at&t gets you the code.
gibbsrob said:
Here is the ABC News link:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/now-illegal-unlock-cellphone/story?id=18319518
I just want to clarify that
I am not trying to "sensationalize" the issue.
I am not trying to pass on "misinformation."
I don't write for ABC.
I don't write legislation.
I don't vote on the passage of legislation.
I am merely sharing a link on a story that you will see sooner or later.
At least now you can say you saw it first on XDA!
DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER.
Please hit the "Thanks" button.
A link has been added to sign a petition if you are interested. It requires a "White House DOT Gov Account." Why?" Big Brother, probably.
I am not afilliated with the Federal Government,
I am not afilliated with any State Government,
I am not afilliated with Law Enforcement,
IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.
I'm just a regular dude trying to make a positive, informative contribution to the community which I love so much and am very greatful and appreciative for ALL of the contributors, and everyone who shares. Where would we be without the Devs? Running STOCK, UNROOTED!
The petiton link was found via www.phonearena.com.
White House Petition:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lmao You guys think there going to approve this and make it legal again?
T-Mobile and AT&T are the ones who created to make the idea of unlocking illegal and presented it to the Congress. I don't see them making this legal again. Obviously its a monopoly.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
This seems like it's aimed at people who are selling unlocked phones in higher numbers - it's not illegal to call up your carrier, request the unlock code, and unlock the phone, yesterday or today or whenever. It's only illegal if they say "no" and you go ahead and unlock it by some other means.
IMO, this is aimed for iPhone users - my phone took me 5 minutes to unlock, since I happened to have a SIM from another carrier. iPhones need to go through some big process to unlock, even officially. I asked for my wife's unlock code for her phone, and they gave this whole list of instructions, which included 24-48 hour wait for the code to be obtained, or something.
If I had to go through that with the Note, I might think about unlocking it by some other means as well, especially if I'm just trying to sell it.
EveryOne Petition the obama administration to: Make Unlocking Cell Phones Legal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petition the obama administration to: Make Unlocking Cell Phones Legal.
The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.
As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired.
Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.
We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.
Created: Jan 24, 2013
Issues: Civil Rights and Liberties, Consumer Protections, Technology and Telecommunications
Learn about Petition Thresholds
It's up to you to build support for petitions you care about and gather more signatures. A petition must get 150 signatures in order to be publicly searchable on WhiteHouse.gov.
Over time, we may need to adjust the petition signature thresholds, but we'll always let you know what the thresholds are.
Signatures needed by February 23, 2013 to reach goal of 100,00087,845
Total signatures on this petition12,155.
PLEASE GO SIGN IT MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...legal/1g9KhZG7
Thanks
I wouldn't ask that _uck up for a glass of water if I was dying of thirst. And why would you want to expand his fingers of incompetence to include your cell?
Umm, why post this? I don't see that it is a huge deal. All this states is that you can no longer buy a phone from (for example) Verizon and take it to MetroPC or some other carrier and unlock it to use with their service.
Most phones now are global ready, and if you buy a Nexus from Google it is unlocked for you to use as desired.
This is NOT saying that rooting or unlocking your bootloader is illegal. So again, I don't see why it is such a huge deal.
jonathon1289 said:
Umm, why post this? I don't see that it is a huge deal. All this states is that you can no longer buy a phone from (for example) Verizon and take it to MetroPC or some other carrier and unlock it to use with their service.
Most phones now are global ready, and if you buy a Nexus from Google it is unlocked for you to use as desired.
This is NOT saying that rooting or unlocking your bootloader is illegal. So again, I don't see why it is such a huge deal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. You'll do what you want to anyway...or atleast I will lol
Plus I think the president has bigger issues to tackle quite frankly
sent from my Note 2
Kinda thought the same thing. Not really a big deal. It's my impression that this is mainly to curb abuse by people who get the phone, unlock them and resell them. Giving authorities a way to prosecute those that fit that category ( that essentially fraud the subsidy that carriers provide)
Sent from my SCH-I605
Lol, you can always buy a phone from your new carrier...? It's not like they are banning cell phones.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using xda app-developers app
purged363506 said:
Kinda thought the same thing. Not really a big deal. It's my impression that this is mainly to curb abuse by people who get the phone, unlock them and resell them. Giving authorities a way to prosecute those that fit that category ( that essentially fraud the subsidy that carriers provide)
Sent from my SCH-I605
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a civil/contract matter between the carrier and the person that did that. The problem I have is that the dcma law is being turned on its head to help the carriers with this issue. I support the carriers in getting what is due to them but I object to them abusing the law.
TonikJDK said:
That's a civil/contract matter between the carrier and the person that did that. The problem I have is that the dcma law is being turned on its head to help the carriers with this issue. I support the carriers in getting what is due to them but I object to them abusing the law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have paid your ETF and/or finished your contract, why would it stop them from unlocking it?
They know they won't keep you by not doing it, and they certainly don't have use of the phone being locked in.
I think things are being blown out of proportion.
I think the real loud ones against this law are just upset that they can no longer default on a contract and sell the device unlocked on another carrier.
OP just wanted to start a political flame thread. Congrats. Mission will be accomplished.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
http://m.androidcentral.com/what-you-need-know-abut-cell-phone-unlocking
Sent from my SCH-I605 using xda premium
People that know that they will need an unlocked phone because they will be traveling will either already have one, or go into the store with the intention of buying an unlocked phone for that exact purpose.
I personally don't see the big issue about this new law. If you know you're going to be traveling abroad and need an unlocked phone, then there are several to choose from on most carriers. Plain and simple.
TonikJDK said:
That's a civil/contract matter between the carrier and the person that did that. The problem I have is that the dcma law is being turned on its head to help the carriers with this issue. I support the carriers in getting what is due to them but I object to them abusing the law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you realize how hard it is to get new laws enacted. That's why so many existing ones are modified.
You think they are going to go after John Smith that unlocks his phone cause he got a new job traveling? That would be a PR nightmare.
Now Johnny Mule that does it to every major carrier around then sells the phone after to support whoever told him to do it.....Sure.
What about the shops that deal in stolen phones but they are unlocked for other carriers? Contrary to popular opinion, those databases are rubbish and fragmented.
There are quite a few ways that this could help criminal prosecution where right now there is very little.
Sent from my SCH-I605
Starting this weekend it is illegal to unlock new phones to make them available on other carriers. Seriously: It’s embarrassing and unacceptable that we are at the mercy of prosecutorial and judicial discretion to avoid the implementation of draconian laws that could implicate average Americans in a crime subject to up to a $500,000 fine and up to five years in prison.
When did we decide that we wanted a law that could make unlocking your smartphone a criminal offense? The answer is that we never really decided. Instead, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in 1998 to outlaw technologies that bypass copyright protections. In practice it has terrible, and widely acknowledged, negative consequences that affect consumers and new innovation. The DMCA leaves it up to the Librarian of Congress (LOC) to issue exemptions from the law, exceptions that were recognized to be necessary given the broad language of the statute.
After Saturday it will be illegal to unlock a new smartphone, thereby allowing it to switch carriers. This is a result of the exception to the DMCA lapsing. It was not a mistake, but rather an intentional choice by the Librarian of Congress, that this was no longer fair use and acceptable.
Laws that can place people in jail should be passed by Congress, not by the decree of the Librarian of Congress. We have no way to hold the Librarian of Congress accountable for wildly unfair laws. There are still plenty of crazy laws passed by elected officials, but at least we can then vote them out of office.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source
For those who need to unlock your phone, you must now do it via your service carrier!
This is horiable
Just a few points I'd like to make that may clear up a few things.
When we get our phones on contract, we pay ~$200 or so for a $800 device. Cell companies subsidize our phones and don't want us buying at their low price then switching. From this point of view I could see it as a breach of contract, nothing more.
Also AFAIK, rooting your device is still perfectly fine. It's taking your ATT phone to, say, T-Mobile that's now illegal.
[If any of this information is incorrect, please post sources. The above is what I have gleaned from reading dozens of threads on this topic.]
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
What about people who run this buissness?
Sent from my GT-N7000
If you ask att for a code and say you're going overseas they almost always give it to you
Sent from my GS4 running CM11 Kandy Kane
IconRunner said:
Just a few points I'd like to make that may clear up a few things.
When we get our phones on contract, we pay ~$200 or so for a $800 device. Cell companies subsidize our phones and don't want us buying at their low price then switching. From this point of view I could see it as a breach of contract, nothing more.
Also AFAIK, rooting your device is still perfectly fine. It's taking your ATT phone to, say, T-Mobile that's now illegal.
[If any of this information is incorrect, please post sources. The above is what I have gleaned from reading dozens of threads on this topic.]
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting is still legal. It's actually protected by certain laws.
jthatch12 said:
Rooting is still legal. It's actually protected by certain laws.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting the phone is NOT illegal.
Rooting the tablet is illegal.
---------- Post added at 04:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:15 PM ----------
IconRunner said:
Just a few points I'd like to make that may clear up a few things.
When we get our phones on contract, we pay ~$200 or so for a $800 device. Cell companies subsidize our phones and don't want us buying at their low price then switching. From this point of view I could see it as a breach of contract, nothing more.
Also AFAIK, rooting your device is still perfectly fine. It's taking your ATT phone to, say, T-Mobile that's now illegal.
[If any of this information is incorrect, please post sources. The above is what I have gleaned from reading dozens of threads on this topic.]
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How's about I pay $200 for the phone, sign and stay with provider for 2 years. After 2 years, isn't that my OWN phone? Why can't I unlock it and do whatever I want with it?
I think the title of the thread is poorly chosen.
1) The new law applies to phones purchased after January 26th 2013, hence phones purchased before this date are 100% okay to unlock.
2) Only applicable on US customers.
This law can be completely ignored by clients outside of the USA. (Apparently it is part of the DMCA ruling)
There is an online petition to the white house to stay the order being run atm. (Mods should make that link/this post a sticky for the entire forum.. )
Vote to get yourself heard
spacescreamer said:
I think the title of the thread is poorly chosen.
1) The new law applies to phones purchased after January 26th 2013, hence phones purchased before this date are 100% okay to unlock.
2) Only applicable on US customers.
This law can be completely ignored by clients outside of the USA. (Apparently it is part of the DMCA ruling)
There is an online petition to the white house to stay the order being run atm. (Mods should make that link/this post a sticky for the entire forum.. )
Vote to get yourself heard
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By my understanding, it is illegal to unlock your phone after 01/26 (or 27) regardless you bought the phone a year or 10 years ago, if you unlock it b4 the 26th, it's OK. It's not now.
Agreed with you on your 2)
spacescreamer said:
I think the title of the thread is poorly chosen.
1) The new law applies to phones purchased after January 26th 2013, hence phones purchased before this date are 100% okay to unlock.
2) Only applicable on US customers.
This law can be completely ignored by clients outside of the USA. (Apparently it is part of the DMCA ruling)
There is an online petition to the white house to stay the order being run atm. (Mods should make that link/this post a sticky for the entire forum.. )
Vote to get yourself heard
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got my vote! :good:
votinh said:
By my understanding, it is illegal to unlock your phone after 01/26 (or 27) regardless you bought the phone a year or 10 years ago, if you unlock it b4 the 26th, it's OK. It's not now.
Agreed with you on your 2)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is my understanding also. They can't magically say everyone that has an unlocked phone before 1/26 is now a felon... I'm just glad that I had my phone unlocked before all this **** went down. I'm heading to England in a few months
You can still legally get unlock codes from the carrier (AT&T for us). The law speaks about subsidized phones. It is legal to purchase an unlocked phone, usually for full retail price. Also, it is unclear whether a phone is still legally considered subsidized after your two year contract ends. I can't seem to find anything on that.
creepyncrawly said:
You can still legally get unlock codes from the carrier (AT&T for us). The law speaks about subsidized phones. It is legal to purchase an unlocked phone, usually for full retail price. Also, it is unclear whether a phone is still legally considered subsidized after your two year contract ends. I can't seem to find anything on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This law is going to get complicated real fast Lol.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda premium
creepyncrawly said:
it is unclear whether a phone is still legally considered subsidized after your two year contract ends. I can't seem to find anything on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That shouldnt be the case. I mean after the contract ends.. the company would have got the revenue back from the customer.
So that shouldnt stand in the way of getting it unlocked afterwards. If it does.. it ll be a very stupid 'boot hang' for the end customer
Btw, can non American citizens vote on that petition ? And if yes, Will it count ?
creepyncrawly said:
You can still legally get unlock codes from the carrier (AT&T for us). The law speaks about subsidized phones. It is legal to purchase an unlocked phone, usually for full retail price. Also, it is unclear whether a phone is still legally considered subsidized after your two year contract ends. I can't seem to find anything on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This would be the modern equivalent of holding your phone # hostage. If this is how they interpret the law, it will get smacked down. And as with most stupid laws (DMCA being a big one), the illegality will be truly defined by prosecution/enforcement.
Saurik (the guy who develops Cydia for the iPhone) said it was if you bought the phone after the cutoff date.
I'm more inclined to believe him.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda app-developers app
Although I do not reside in usa, however this doesn't seem fair.
The customer buys a phone on contract. He decodes to use it on other networks. The phone is subsidized by the network operator thus they do not want to loose u.
But let's say I bought the phone on contact and wanted to use it on other networks.. correct me if I'm wrong.. I still need to continue paying the network provider because there is a contract on it. So what's there to loose for the operator? I'm still paying fees as dispicted in the contract.
What if I'm going abroad.. I can't use a local sim card? And forced to use roaming rates?
Sent from my GT-N7100
There are really two issues involved. For an individual to unlock their own phone for their own use, the penalty would be civil only, and the maximum fine is $2,500. On the other hand, to buy phones, unlock them and then resell them would be a criminal offence, with penalty of 500,000 or 5 years, or both for the first offense, 1,000,000 or 10 years for any additional offensees.
Several commentators feel that if the personal use issue comes to court, the court would likely rule that the law is incorrect and be thrown out. But that remains to be seen. At least one commentator stated that if the phone is subsidized, it will be illegal to unlock it regardless of the state of the contract. It will be interesting to see how the law is interpreted over time.
From what I've read, the carriers are more interested in preventing the resale of unlocked phones.
vash_h said:
Although I do not reside in usa, however this doesn't seem fair.
The customer buys a phone on contract. He decodes to use it on other networks. The phone is subsidized by the network operator thus they do not want to loose u.
But let's say I bought the phone on contact and wanted to use it on other networks.. correct me if I'm wrong.. I still need to continue paying the network provider because there is a contract on it. So what's there to loose for the operator? I'm still paying fees as dispicted in the contract.
What if I'm going abroad.. I can't use a local sim card? And forced to use roaming rates?
Sent from my GT-N7100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you ask the carrier for an unlock code using say Skype they mostly say yes
Sent from my GS4 running CM11 Kandy Kane
122ninjas said:
If you ask att for a code and say you're going overseas they almost always give it to you
Sent from my GS4 running CM11 Kandy Kane
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not always. They refused to give me a code for my Aria on three separate occasions. Seems to be dependent on the phone. Never bothered to call them for the S2, I'll unlock it with an app when I go to Europe or Asia next...
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
tedkunich said:
Not always. They refused to give me a code for my Aria on three separate occasions. Seems to be dependent on the phone. Never bothered to call them for the S2, I'll unlock it with an app when I go to Europe or Asia next...
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No harm in asking. I see success stories all the time
Sent from my GS4 running CM11 Kandy Kane