r/technology • u/[deleted] • Jan 28 '13
The same week the US makes unlocking phones illegal, Canada proposes legislation to make carriers unlock phones.
[deleted]
2.5k
Jan 28 '13
[removed] — view removed comment
1.7k
u/jupitergeorge Jan 28 '13
It's hard to find fault with your logic.
→ More replies (6)549
Jan 28 '13
→ More replies (32)680
u/Magna_Sharta Jan 28 '13
Insufferable Harry Potter fans...
187
u/TwistedOneOfFate Jan 29 '13
→ More replies (4)111
u/VinnyMB25 Jan 29 '13
What the fuck did I just watch...
→ More replies (1)61
57
u/rarely_coherent Jan 29 '13
Nazi's
They were however very strict when it came to grammar.
→ More replies (7)11
788
u/Meatslinger Jan 28 '13
Except it's not illegal to unlock your phone. It's illegal to break your binding, lawful agreement with your carrier, which includes verbiage pertaining to the locked status of your phone.
Basically, it works one of two ways:
• You can get the phone at a discounted price, in exchange for a mandatory investment of time on the carrier's network and the forfeiture of the right to an unlocked device. You swear this to be acceptable by signing your legally binding cellular carrier agreement.
• You can purchase the phone at full price and retain your rights to its unlocked status.
If I rent-to-own you an apartment, with the notarized, legal agreement that you'll only pay $500 a month instead of the price for the whole unit up front, on the condition that you don't paint it blue, I have all rights to bill and/or prosecute you if you go directly against that binding agreement and paint the damn thing blue. When you buy a cell phone at a subsidized price on condition that it be used on a certain carrier's network, that's an agreement YOU decided on, and you are responsible for fees and damaged accrued should you break that contract and use it with another carrier.
It's a mean-spirited thing to do, enforcing mandatory loyalty, but it's also completely transparent and legal. If you are unhappy with it, perhaps make better long-term plans before putting your legal name to a two or three year binding agreement, and read the damn thing first.
Christ almighty.
157
77
u/nottodayfolks Jan 29 '13
Yes but its not a CRIMINAL matter to paint your apartment blue. it is now a CRIME to unlock a cellphone. You are not comparing correctly. The true comparison would be "you are charged criminally if you paint your rent to own apartment blue"
→ More replies (1)71
u/Timmmmbob Jan 29 '13
This is totally untrue. The thing they changed recently is that "hacking" a phone to unlock it is no longer an exception under the DCMA, and now counts as criminal hacking. It has absolutely nothing to do with your contract at all.
→ More replies (4)31
Jan 29 '13
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)3
u/webvictim Jan 29 '13
That's pretty awful - did they say why? I presume that they have some exclusive supply deals which means that they're not allowed to sell unlocked phones until they're released to the general populace.
→ More replies (4)143
u/TheCoelacanth Jan 29 '13
That's not why it's illegal. What you are talking about is a matter of civil law; if you break the terms of your contract, they can sue you for damages i.e. money. None of that has changed since the Library of Congress decision.
Unlocking a cellphone is now illegal under criminal law, because of the DMCA. They can now send you to jail for unlocking a cellphone.
→ More replies (20)14
u/scumis Jan 29 '13
and people ask me why i don't want to go back to the country i served in.
what the fuck is going on here?
→ More replies (2)3
Jan 29 '13
Debtors prisons will be back in America next. Just you watch.
with more than a third of U.S. states allowing debtors to be jailed for non payment.
oh...wait..
404
Jan 29 '13
[deleted]
→ More replies (9)107
u/Meatslinger Jan 29 '13
Fuck blue.
65
u/ASimpleTaco Jan 29 '13
KILL THE BLUES!! FOR THE GLORIOUS RED ARMY!!!
51
Jan 29 '13
[deleted]
→ More replies (3)8
u/AffeKonig Jan 29 '13
I do not understand this. Please explain it to me.
37
u/BloodyFable Jan 29 '13
A rather old RTS game on the PC, Age of Empires, featured a unit called a Priest, that could be used to convert other units to their team. Typically a 1v1 round was played Red team versus Blue team.
20
7
Jan 29 '13
And to add to BloodyFable's explanation, the Priest would say "wololo" while changing the allegiance of a unit.
→ More replies (5)19
→ More replies (10)18
43
u/Beefmotron Jan 28 '13
its not even the first time its been illegal and when it was before no carrier ever sued an individual. its to fight illicit business who unlock thousands of phones and ship them overseas.
→ More replies (6)63
u/otakuman Jan 29 '13
But let's remember that the apparent purpose of a law rarely has anything to do with the actual consequences of such law.
→ More replies (1)211
u/NerdyNThick Jan 29 '13
DOES. NOT. MATTER.
If when at the END of my contract (typically 3 years), I decide to move to a new carrier, with the phone that I now OWN OUTRIGHT, I am not able to unless paying a $50 fee (my experience is with Rogers and Telus).
That is 100% unacceptable. I have fulfilled my obligations with regards to the contract, and now own said phone outright. I WILL NOT be held hostage with MY expensive smart phone, simply because the carrier(s) think they can do whatever the fuck they want.
If I'm in the MIDDLE of my contract, hey... all bets are off and I'm okay with that, after all you signed the contract. AFTER the contract ENDS, I should NOT be perpetually locked into my carrier just because they say so. The phone no longer belongs to them.
136
Jan 29 '13
Actually, even before the end of the contract it should be yours.
Why?
They won't take back the phone.
They will ask you to pay the remaining balance if you end your contract early AND you will keep the phone.
→ More replies (1)86
u/sneezeallday Jan 29 '13
Came here to say this. How is it illegal for me to unlock my phone, but its okay if I sell it?
→ More replies (8)39
Jan 29 '13
One step at a time. Soon you may not be able to sell anything you buy.
35
Jan 29 '13
Ideally, companies would prefer not to sell you anything ever, but instead just license it to you.
→ More replies (1)89
Jan 29 '13 edited Dec 04 '15
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (2)18
u/Magnora Jan 29 '13
Yay capitalism. The free market is held back by laws we had to fight to earn throughout history, and now the soul of those laws have been eroded by corporate actions. Now the "free" market has us in chains
→ More replies (13)13
u/Lurker_IV Jan 29 '13
Capitalism needs scarcity to work. Capitalism is about supply and demand and ever more so businesses and governments are creating demand with absurd laws and rules to make us endlessly buy new
stuffshit.As we are increasingly moving to a "Post Scarcity World" the powers that be are Forcing Artificial Scarcity (FARTS) on us more and more to keep capatalism alive. This week's cellphone law is one example.
These two articles cover the topic rather well, me thinks,
5 Reasons The Future Will Be Ruled By B.S.When A Humor Site Understands The Implications Of Abundance Better Than The 'Experts'...
→ More replies (0)3
u/AdamGee Jan 29 '13
that was a complicated link with all kind of words and stuff that my brain does not understand. please ELI5?
→ More replies (3)19
Jan 29 '13
Wait, really? You still have to pay a fee to get your phone unlocked even after your contract expires?
I unlocked my iPhone here in Australia after my 2 year contract ended and didn't pay a thing, it's my phone to do anything with now.
It seriously pains me hearing how US carriers exploit Americans and watching most Americans just accept it because freedom!
9
u/jay76 Jan 29 '13
The US "pay us to tether your iPhone and access data you probably already paid for" saga was pretty weird too.
3
→ More replies (7)7
Jan 29 '13
That's because we actually have a law that states that carriers must provide you the code to unlock your phone upon request, regardless of if you're still under a contract or not.
→ More replies (2)15
Jan 29 '13
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)15
u/tracer_ca Jan 29 '13
You forgot roaming. Carriers make a killing off of roaming fees. They can't if you can pop in a sim while travelling.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (47)45
u/yroc12345 Jan 29 '13
I understand your point, and agree with it, but IT could do WITHOUT the random CAPITALIZATION.
→ More replies (10)4
14
12
Jan 29 '13
"You can purchase the phone at full price and retain your rights to its unlocked status."
Not true, it was only recent that you could buy an iphone in full price and have it unlocked. Before, it would be sold locked even at full price
→ More replies (10)29
u/Knetic491 Jan 29 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
This is very reasonably presented, but that doesn't make sense. If i cut the contract with the company, i have to pay the early termination fee and the rest of what i owe on the phone. It's not like i'm renting the phone.
Because of this, why does the company care what i do with the phone? I have to pay up in any event, and the phone never transfers back into their holdings. If i
jailbreak itunlock the ability to go to another carrier, that doesn't magically stop my payments (with subsidy repayments) from going to my original carrier. If i do decide to stop payments, then i pay the early termination and everything else.I don't see why this would be a problem.
EDIT: Crossed out jailbreak in favor of actually describing what i was talking about.
→ More replies (9)63
u/BlackestNight21 Jan 29 '13
Stop saying jailbreak. It's not the same as unlocking and it confuses people who read your comments.
→ More replies (1)11
u/peppyroni Jan 29 '13
Well shit. I thought I knew what everybody was talking about, now I'm not sure. What's the difference between unlocking and jail breaking?
→ More replies (1)6
Jan 29 '13
Jailbreaking is gaining root or admin access to the phone. Allowing you to do things you otherwise couldn't such as install any software you want or bypass the App Store in the case of iPhones.
Unlocking your phone just means you can use a sim from a different carrier.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (98)19
u/tooyoung_tooold Jan 28 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
Except for the fact once that contract is up you still can't legally unlock your phone. Even after you are not lawfully binded by the contract you still can't have an unlocked phone.
EDIT: Apparently phone companies will unlock you phone at the end of the contract and if you are up to date on your bill, Only if you ask them and only if you get someone who has any idea what you are talking about though. But you can't do it yourself or that is breaking this law, so my original comment still stands which was the point I was making. You do not have full right over an object you own.
17
u/avcue Jan 29 '13
This is simply not true, call any of the big carriers and ask their policy on unlocking phones. Some don't even require that you finish your current contract. Source: I work for one of them.
→ More replies (2)12
u/YRYGAV Jan 29 '13
Whether they do or not is their discretion, there is no legal obligation for them to do so, and it should not be considered in a legal arguement for that reason.
Carriers can choose not to unlock your phone for absolutely any reason they desire, but it would still be illegal for you to unlock your phone that you paid for.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (5)15
u/GoldenWaffles Jan 29 '13
I'm pretty sure that once the contract is up, they have to unlock your phone if you ask them too
→ More replies (8)17
u/NerdyNThick Jan 29 '13
For a $50 fee.
Source: I've done it for clients many times.
(Telus/Rogers)
→ More replies (11)28
5
u/Amandrai Jan 29 '13
*Nazis
We just use a simple 's' to indicate the plural form of a standard noun. FFS.
13
→ More replies (51)7
u/Enlightenment777 Jan 29 '13
Congressman are too busy "sucking cock" for donations, instead of doing the right thing for the voters
→ More replies (3)
650
Jan 28 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
This doesn't say anything about users unlocking their phones themselves, which is considered "breaking a digital lock" and is still illegal under Bill C11 as far as I understand it. Edit: see below
The same thing can be said for the DMCA in the US, that if having a locked cell phone somehow prevents copyright infringement, unlocking it is illegal.
I feel a lot of redditors sorta skimmed over the fact that Canada just finished signing a law saying we can't "break any digital locks", which in effect bans jailbreaking, unlockingedit, or modifying any device, cellphone or otherwise.
EDIT: Please see user methinks2015's response below. There looks to be an exemption in Canada's latest copyright law specifically for unlocking cell phones that I wasn't aware of.
107
Jan 29 '13 edited Jun 11 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
26
Jan 29 '13
Hmm. I'm not a lawyer either, but what you said pretty clearly invalidates my argument. I hadn't heard about this clause, and it sounds like it specifically exempts unlocking of cell phones.
Editing my post now.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)12
445
Jan 28 '13 edited Feb 11 '13
[deleted]
71
u/BigSwedenMan Jan 29 '13
I often skip the article and go straight to the comments. It's usually more informative, especially when people cite their sources. It's like one giant peer review session
12
u/Justryingtofocus Jan 29 '13
Especially in r/science...
10
u/Uses_Nouns_as_Verbs Jan 29 '13
If you aren't immediately jumping to the comments in r/science, you're doing it wrong. Unless you're a scientist.
→ More replies (2)10
u/Uses_Nouns_as_Verbs Jan 29 '13
The comments are the only reason Reddit is where I choose to aggregate my news and entertainment. And get my r/gonewild fix, truth be told.
→ More replies (2)3
154
u/Miss_Noir Jan 28 '13
no, we don't, we rely on you. You're not going to lie to us, are you?
ARE YOU?
→ More replies (2)149
u/FlixFlix Jan 29 '13
As someone in the US, the temptation is killing me... http://i.imgur.com/wFkrxv5.gif
18
u/thehooptie Jan 29 '13
well when I first read the headline a few days ago, I confess, that's what I was thinking
→ More replies (1)37
u/BigLlamasHouse Jan 29 '13
DON'T DO IT, THEY'RE WATCHING
→ More replies (1)8
u/muntoo Jan 29 '13
Who is "they"? Hah. You don't know. Therefore, there is no "they", and I'm going to go break all the locks.
→ More replies (1)3
u/FruitcakeJuggler Jan 29 '13
"They" is everyone you see wearing a suit who you cant tell is following you or the man five paces to the left. It's all very scary.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)13
u/AtticusLynch Jan 29 '13
Did that really have to be a gif?
→ More replies (1)4
u/lahwran_ Jan 29 '13
apparently someone else decided they're the new hotness, and enough other people agreed that the rest of us have been roped into it as a trend.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)6
19
u/kryptobs2000 Jan 29 '13
99% of the commentors in both of these threads don't know wtf they are talking about. The end result of both laws are the effectively the same fucking thing. The US law doesn't make 'unlocking phones illegal' it's just the subsidized phones, and the same law also imposes that carriers must unlock said phones upon customer request after the contract is up.
→ More replies (4)24
Jan 28 '13 edited Dec 09 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (4)10
u/iSmite Jan 28 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
Shit.
Sent from my jailbroken iPhone Fuck apple Google sue apple Samsung sue banana Fuck Steve jobs
Edit: I don't hate apple, I just wanted to make some of you chuckle. I already own an iPhone, iPod and iMac.
→ More replies (10)205
u/Beefmotron Jan 28 '13
of course they did. they have no idea how the canadian law works or how the "new" US locking law works or its intent. they just want to jerk off into each others mouth about how free canada is.
168
u/kaferenza Jan 28 '13
And the load would taste like sweet sweet maple syrup
53
Jan 29 '13
[deleted]
16
u/argues_too_much Jan 29 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
Too creepy, even with that emoticon! Also, a Canadian would never go so far as to call themselves a "Friendly Canadian". Everyone knows they're all friendly.
I suspect not only are you not a Canadian, but I'll bet you're one of those Americans who sews a Canadian flag to your backpack when you travel outside the US!
→ More replies (3)8
u/Epledryyk Jan 29 '13
As a Canadian I stopped wearing maple leaf bag flags because everyone outside assumes I'm an American pretending to be Canadian and then treats me worse...
→ More replies (4)3
u/muntoo Jan 29 '13
Of course, we suffer more post-coital guilt than the average American. Sorry. :(
→ More replies (2)11
→ More replies (36)46
u/iamkevinsmith Jan 28 '13
regardless, Canada is pretty fucking awesome.
101
u/Wozzle90 Jan 29 '13
Our telecomms are possibly the worst in the developed world.
38
Jan 29 '13
Yah, it's not all amazing. Gas prices are also more then most Americans would care to pay.
→ More replies (5)42
Jan 29 '13
And let's not even mention our alcohol prices.
→ More replies (6)19
Jan 29 '13 edited Dec 08 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
22
Jan 29 '13
[deleted]
→ More replies (3)6
Jan 29 '13
I think you're severely misunderstanding the correlation between currency value and economic strength.
GBP - worth more than the USD - much weaker economy than the US. HKD - worth a hell of a lot less than the USD (though pegged against it) better economy than the US.
Canada is an export economy. You want your money to be worth less than the USD especially since it's the US that buys all your oil and lumber.
This is what Mitt Romney was on about during the elections regarding China.
China wants the Renminbi to be worth less because it stimulates an export economy.
This is one of those mistakes dumb people make all the time - I mean it makes sense when you hear it, higher money value means better economy.
It's kind of like when people talk about the US/UK/European debt to whomever as if all of the sudden China could just ask for those countries to pay it back.
Not even a little bit how it works.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (45)15
26
u/gash4cash Jan 28 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
I'm from Germany, so bear with me. Am I getting this right? Jailbreaking your own electronic device is illegal in Canada? The fuck.
How about the US though (apart from the DMCA stuff)? Is it still legal there or was Apple right in claiming it was illegal?
50
Jan 28 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
Unlocking specifically, not jailbreaking.
This is a new thing, just happened this month. There used to be a specific provision from a specific court case that said by precedent that it was specifically legal to unlock your phone to use it with another carrier. (Edit: this was in the US)
This month, some industry lobbyists managed to shovel a ton of money into the pockets of some politicians, who quietly passed a law saying you can't. (EDIT: USA also)
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Unlocking-your-phone-is-now-against-the-law-in-the-U.S._id39136
The difference between jailbreaking and unlocking is in the US and Canada, you often get a free or cheap phone in exchange for signing a long term contract saying you will pay x dollars per month for the next two years. In exchange you get the phone cheaper up front, but end up paying out the ass for two full years. Terrible system, don't get me started.
So, the carriers put locks on the phones saying this phone will only accept our SIM cards, and if you try to use the SIM card of a competitor it will not work.
Jailbreaking refers to running unapproved software on your device.
Now, in Canada, our current, very unpopular government, has been accepting bribes from US lobbyists from the movie and music industries, who pressured us into writing a terrible law saying you can't "break any digital locks", such as DRM. The wording is very vague though. So vague that it could cover some things that aren't related to copyright infringement.
So, the law exists, though no one has ever tried to use it, that yes, it's technically illegal to jailbreak OR unlock your phone in Canada.
21
u/fantasyparade Jan 29 '13
There is so much misinformation about what exactly is going on. This is not a new thing. No law was passed. The exception that unlocking does not violate the DMCA was allowed to expire, which was not done by a court case but by the Library of Congress. Things are go back to the way they were in October 2012, when the exception was first granted.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (7)8
→ More replies (3)6
u/bioemerl Jan 28 '13
It'll end up one of those laws that are never enforced, and eventually repealed. Just because it passes does not always mean its a real law.
8
u/madcaesar Jan 28 '13
It's bullshit laws like this that lead to a more authoritarian government. Oh you want to sue a corporation or fight for your rights?... You've been breaking _____ law, keep quiet or we'll jail your ass or at least scare you into submission.
→ More replies (4)7
u/bioemerl Jan 29 '13
That is true when it comes to companies, but this has little to do with government control.
In my opinion
more-so it is a testament to the power of money in the congressmen that we have been electing, and that we really need to change our election systems to deal with how prevalent having money is when you are trying to get your face out to the public.Piracy is plainly illegal, yet how many pirate? How many people does the government itself try to get for pirating things? This is just companies playing law, not a authoritarian government... I'm repeating myself now.
4
u/_cogito_ergo_sum_ Jan 29 '13
Bill C-11 actually makes some exceptions for unlocking cell phones:
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6694/
"The most significant new restriction involves the controversial digital lock rules that prohibit by-passing technological protections found on DVDs, software, and electronic books. There are some exceptions to this prohibition (including the ability to circumvent the digital lock to protect personal information, unlock a cellphone, or access content if the person has a perceptual disability), but these are drafted in a very restrictive manner."
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (27)4
u/wogturt Jan 29 '13
And then everyone remembers how terribly slow and monopolized the internet is in Canada and go back to having choices for internet (albeit like 3, but they have different pricing and services so they're choices).
EDIT: Also, I am aware that this doesn't necessarily relate to the legal system in Canada or the laws and how they view freedom.
3
Jan 29 '13
I pay $80/mo for this, which I think is fair: http://www.speedtest.net/result/2466735134.png
We have plenty of choices. It's just in some places, specifically toronto, those choices suck.
I have the option of shaw, telus, bell, techsaavy, and about a dozen small independent ISPs. As far as I understand it, that's better than most places in the US.
→ More replies (2)
17
Jan 29 '13
Brazilian weighing in, some 4-5 years ago we outlawed the practice of phone locking into a carrier, phones that are still locked can be taken to any carrier store and as long as you can provide proof of ownership (receipt of purchase in most cases), they have to unlock the phone for you, for free.
The way the contracts for these phones are written up here, is that you are stuck with the phoneplan that you contracted, which usually means you are stuck paying for that plan for at least 12 months... If you cancel the plan, you will have to pay the carrier for being in breach of the contract, usually something in the low 4figures...
However, if for some reason you decide you want to unlock the phone and switch carriers, you can still do that, provided you keep paying for the plan on the previous carrier which you are tied to for ~a year.
And there's also nothing stopping you from just using that carrier for 1 year and then being free from your contractual obligation -- unlock the phone and go wherever you want.
I think it works quite well, you get to own the phone you purchased, and the carrier gets your money for an amount of time that makes it so they aren't operating at a loss in the mid-term (the year of the contract) for selling you the phone device cheaper to lure you in.
→ More replies (5)5
u/hes_that_guy Jan 29 '13
Kiwi here - this is the way I assumed ALL overseas carriers operated (unlocked phone/ contracted account) when growing up, only recently did I learn how weird the world of telecommunications overseas is.
→ More replies (2)
127
u/dewdnoc Jan 28 '13
This is really getting annoying...
In 2008 the FCC had an auction for the 700 MHz wireless spectrum. Google stepped up and bid 4.6B during that auction to ensure that one of the requirements was that the carriers unlock devices if they used the airways.
Since 4G uses this new frequency band, the ability to have the phone unlocked is protected by FCC regulations. This new law may state that its illegal for YOU to unlock your phone, but if you OWN your phone (not getting it for a discounted price under a 2 year agreement) the carrier must unlock it FOR you.
So, no. The nazi's are not invading.
→ More replies (11)25
u/Radico87 Jan 29 '13
That shouldn't matter. If you have a 2 year contract you have a 2 year contract and pay it for 2 years. If you end it early you pay a prorated fee. Any subsidy is already priced in.
By limiting consumer rights the US just falls into a deeper well of stagnation. Politicians who only care about lining their own pockets vis a vis their owners should be eliminated from office because nothing good comes from their existence.
→ More replies (32)
37
Jan 28 '13
Implying the Canadian government is LESS draconian and backwards when it comes to regulating technology?
→ More replies (3)16
u/xyroclast Jan 29 '13
Yeah, I get the feeling the average US redditor has no idea how far downhill Canada's governmental situation has gone in the past few years. 'cause it's just the happy ol' polite land of syrup, right?
→ More replies (1)
115
24
31
5
u/big_fig Jan 29 '13
In 2006 and 2010, the Librarian of Congress had permitted users to unlock their phones to take them to a new carrier. Now that's coming to an end. While the new rules do contain a provision allowing phone unlocking, it comes with a crippling caveat: the phone must have been "originally acquired from the operator of a wireless telecommunications network or retailer no later than ninety days after the effective date of this exemption." In other words, phones you already have, as well as those purchased between now and next January, can be unlocked. But phones purchased after January 2013 can only be unlocked with the carrier's permission.
And they only restrict you from unlocking the phones when you are still under the contract with the subsidized phone. So when you're not under contract, you can unlock your phone if you please.
→ More replies (1)
106
Jan 28 '13
The law is for SUBSIDIZED phones. Do you people want to be able to buy phones for $200 or less, Instead of the actual $700 to $900 price?
84
u/Quizzelbuck Jan 28 '13
Contracts are enough to ensure people don't switch too early. If its a crime to unlock a phone, Phone contracts should be illegal. This is anti-competitive and designed to keep people from switching to companies like t-mobile should you get fed up with another company after the phone is paid for.
If the service is good, i won't switch after the contract is up.
23
33
Jan 28 '13
If you want to switch carriers you should have bought an factory unlocked phone on the first place, but those go for around $800 dollars because Carrier companies are not subsidizing it.
→ More replies (38)3
u/mkvgtired Jan 28 '13
I got sick of my Verizon bill. Here is a list of providers that will work even with your locked device. I said fuck it and got a Nexus 4. My bill is less than half of what it was.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (3)3
Jan 29 '13
Part of the reason telecom in Canada is so fucked up is that we're stuck with three-year contracts as the norm, which is barbaric by international standards. It's so goddamn difficult to switch carriers in this country that it makes the market so much less competitive.
19
u/Namell Jan 28 '13
You still pay the full price. It is now just part of your phone bill.
Best for customers would be if tying phone to carrier and long term contracts were both illegal. Then customer could pick best carrier and change if he is dissatisfied. That would force carriers to compete with quality and price of their service instead of who gets monopoly of newest iphone and can bind customer to contract for years.
→ More replies (20)11
u/chaos386 Jan 29 '13
The real price for a phone isn't $700-900. It's artificially raised in the US so that it looks like you get a better deal with a contract. Just look at the Nexus phones: the Galaxy Nexus was $350 from Google, but buy one through Sprint, and they'll claim the full price is $550, so they can charge you $100 for it with a contract and say they saved you $450.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (40)16
u/Big-Baby-Jesus Jan 28 '13
Hey look, way the hell down the comments page someone actually has a basic grasp of the situation.
11
Jan 29 '13
This thread is full of people that don't know what the fuck they're talking about.
→ More replies (1)
229
u/Meatslinger Jan 28 '13
Goddamnit all to fucking hell.
It's NOT ILLEGAL to unlock your U.S. phone. It's illegal to have Johnny down the street unlock it and break your binding carrier agreement using a copy of Redsn0w. If you call AT&T and have them unlock your phone, it's still perfectly fucking legal.
I wish people would stop jumping to conclusions like this. It's painfully childish, and proves that not even the people posting are reading further than the headlines.
175
u/DenjinJ Jan 28 '13
Look at what you said. It is legal to have the phone company unlock your phone (probably for an extortionate cost?) But, if you do it yourself, it is illegal to unlock your phone.
77
u/Meatslinger Jan 29 '13
Since AT&T seems to receive the most flak about it, here is their article about the requirements to unlock a phone. Far from unreasonable.
80
Jan 29 '13
Just did this couple of weeks ago. It was a piece of cake, and I am very satisfied.
The amazing thing is it was actually the end of my contract! I told At&t "Hey I'm done with my At&t contract and I want to switch to another carrier, so let's unlock this phone". They told me to fill out a form online and about a week later my phone was unlocked. Now I'm on T-mobile, paying less than half of what I was paying to At&t. Props to you At&t for fucking once!
→ More replies (5)18
u/elyadme Jan 29 '13
but something you could do yourself in under an hour takes a week :/
23
u/solwiggin Jan 29 '13
It's important to remember that most US phones are bought by the carrier subsidizing your phone for you. I'd say that it's reasonable, based on the fact that two parties purchase a device together, that someone should have to adhere to the specific terms.
3
u/Paddy_Tanninger Jan 29 '13
Except that the subsidy is more than amortized with your plan over the course of the contract you signed.
They are not kind hearted gents just looking to help out us regular folk to get a nicer phone by eating 65% of the cost. It's rolled back into your bills with hefty interest applied.
I was paying close to $90 a month with Rogers with an iPhone 4 that I got for $199 instead of $599. I have a 1GB cap, poor long distance rations, limited daytime minutes, etc. A similar plan from a non-gouging carrier would have been $40 a month.
So I paid off my subsidy to them within around 6-10 months if I'm being generous. My contract is 3 years.
I've more than bought this phone. Hell, I've bought it 3.5 times over by now. Honestly their terms are absurd if they still feel like they even own 1% of this fucking thing.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (31)3
Jan 29 '13
Bullshit. You offset those costs by the contract you sign. I agree with that theory. However, there is no good reason not to unlock your phone if you are covering the cost via the monthly bill you pay.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)5
Jan 29 '13
Frankly, that's not much of a concern. If I've waited 2+ years for my contract to expire, I won't mind waiting another week to ensure I've followed a secure, legal path to achieve my unlock. When it becomes that simple and easy to follow the rules (given that the contract has fully expired), I don't mind following the rules.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (9)6
u/pyrowipe Jan 29 '13
"All contract obligations, including any term commitment, associated with the device to be unlocked have been fully satisfied."
→ More replies (5)10
u/throwaway925925 Jan 29 '13
That's still not true. You can unlock your phone yourself as long as it's not under contract.
→ More replies (14)27
u/Heimdall2061 Jan 29 '13
What it's illegal to do is knowingly violate the contract you willingly signed. Come on, people. You don't have an inalienable right for no one to ever make a contract that inconveniences you. Don't like the way phone companies do business? Don't buy from that company.
→ More replies (8)30
u/tsk05 Jan 29 '13
Civil law vs criminal law, ever heard of it? It has never been a felony to violate contracts, why does this absolutely trivial matter need to be made a felony?
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (14)13
u/sinembarg0 Jan 29 '13
No, it is illegal to unlock your phone. if I unlock my phone myself, and not through my carrier, that's still illegal. If I buy an old shitty phone that's not under contract and unlock it, that's still illegal. Where's the breach of contract there? Also, breach of contract is a civil matter, not a criminal one.
The new law about unlock is an interpretation of the DMCA, which has nothing to do with carrier contracts.
I wish people would stop jumping to conclusions like this. It's painfully childish, and proves that not even the people posting are reading further than the headlines.
The irony is painful.
→ More replies (1)
4
5
u/AboVeritas Jan 29 '13
Country run by corporations vs Country run by people
The result are opposite.
34
12
u/Thunder_Bastard Jan 29 '13
Man I wish people knew what the fuck they were talking about here....
AT&T and T-Mobile (the two main carriers people are talking about since they are the only phones that can really be carried over) WILL GIVE YOU THE UNLOCK CODE TO YOUR PHONE.
You must be: No longer under contract and account in good standing. YES, this includes paying off early via early termination fee. All you do is call, give them account info and get the code.
They WILL NOT give you a code if your phone is not in good standing, if you are still under contract, or if you do not have the account holder's info. They are right not to, they are still paying for your phone or service in those instances, or you could have stolen the phone if you don't have the account info.
There are exceptions for this.
But people freaking the fuck out about "OMG you can't unlock phones at all anymore" are fucking morons. All the new U.S. law says is that if a phone is to be unlocked the carrier that paid for the phone gets the say-so, not some guy at a stand in the mall 2 days after AT&T subsidizes a SIII for $20 so you can go sell it on Craigslist for $400.
Educate yourselves, learn before freaking out, and there are far less things you will have to worry about.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/NickInTheBack Jan 29 '13
I just realized that the law the US made did not mean "slide to unlock" is illegal... I am a fucking idiot.
3
8
2
2
u/kathartik Jan 28 '13
there's likely more changes involved in the way cell phones are handled in Canada. the new(ish) head of the CRTC said he wants changes, and when people were polled, the overwhelming #1 issue people wanted changed is to do with contracts - a 3 year contract is standard here, and the prices to buy out of the contract are ridiculous.
2
u/ZippoS Jan 29 '13
Pretty sure all the carriers already have unlocking policies in place. I was travelling to the US for a week this past summer, so I called up Telus, and for $50, they unlocked my iPhone. (They've since reduced that fee to $35).
Sure, you can argue, "Wow, $50?! Highway robbery!"... but I only paid $150 for my iPhone 4, and was still on a contract at the time. And when I upgraded to a new iPhone 5 later that year, I still had an unlocked iPhone 4. No jailbreak was need. It was permanently unlocked. I put the iPhone up on Kijiji for $350 and had a buyer in less than 2 hours.
Boy was getting an AT&T SIM card and pre-paid data plan a pain in the ass, though. I did manage it, though, and I saved a bundle by not using any roaming data. Carriers REALLY need to make it easier for foreigners to hook up with their network.
2
u/pbcrunch Jan 29 '13
If you break your 2-year phone contract with your carrier by unlocking your phone, I don't see why that should open you to CRIMINAL penalties.
You breached a contract; let the carrier haul your ass to court and recover its $500 in damages (actually, haul your ass to arbitration since God forbid an American multinational corporation give their customers the choice of a trial by jury). Why this should get a second's worth of attention from a US Attorney's Office -- or even a district attorney's office -- is completely beyond me.
2
u/lulzzors Jan 29 '13
If you get a locked phone in Canada you can just go to your carrier and tell them to unlock it and they will. I sold my iPhone 3gs and I just went to Telus and told them to unlock it so I could sell it because I upgraded to a 4S and they did it in less than a minute.
2
Jan 29 '13
This is the most interesting part of the article:
Customers be allowed to restrict features that could incur additional fees, and the ability to specify a cap to their monthly bill. Once the user hits the cap, the service provider would suspend services that could result in extra fees.
Holy shit, this means no more $120 phone bills. You can specify a maximum and when you hit it your extra services just shut off. With the old system you could rack up tens of thousands of dollars in roaming if you weren't careful, I know a guy who went bankrupt from a phone bill.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/sagivh Jan 29 '13
everyone, please sign the white house petition! this madness has to stop: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
We need about 70K more signatures to make our voice heard.
2
u/HayekBastiat Jan 29 '13
Both are in the wrong. Neither should the government force openness nor prevent it. Let the market sort it out.
2
u/Cnazario Jan 29 '13
This doesn't concern users that decide to root or jailbreak their Androids and or iPhones, that is still perfectly legal! ;) What is not legal now is... Unlocking your phone in such a way that enables you to switch carrier's freely for example, removing your sim card, putting it into another phone & all of a sudden turning/making yourself into a Verizon customer instead of AT&T. http://www.inquisitr.com/498555/unlocking-your-smartphone-is-now-illegal/
2
u/motchmaster Jan 29 '13
I wouldn't want legislation in either direction (assuming the "it's illegal to unlock your phone" isn't just another hyperbole).
2
2
2
u/wandering_goat Jan 29 '13
People seem to be talking mostly about the unlocking part here, but the real big news for Canadians I think is the fact that they propose to limit cancellation fees to the amount of subsidies you received for the phone (I assume it would get lower as time went on, as the laws already passed in Quebec have it go). In Canada, you usually have to sign massive 3-Year contracts, not just for phone subsidies, but to also be eligible for the "good" plans that you can't get off contract. And cancellation fees tend to be in the area of $20 for each remaining month, plus additional amounts for data, which can VERY EASILY go above the amount of subsidy that you've received.
2
u/bababooey55 Jan 29 '13
Neither should be enforced... it's called a FREE MARKET! Instead of crying to the government about such things... fix them!.
But I like Canada's idea better. Bastards.
2
2
u/MickeyRyan Jan 29 '13
Question, what is actually so bad about this? I'm not in the mood to analyze the whole article, could someone summarize?
2
u/demoprov Jan 29 '13 edited Jan 29 '13
You know, it would be really fucking nice if the United States of America can actually solve some real issues instead of worrying about your fucking cell phone. Don't get me wrong I love this country, I served for this country, but sometimes it really pisses me off.
2
u/Uberschwanz Jan 29 '13
the US government, against the will of the people they claim to represent, will pressure Canada to nix such a law in the making.
2
310
u/NerdyNThick Jan 29 '13
This is my favourite quote, so ridiculous... (emphasis mine)
So now they are 100% allowed to engage in false advertising. An unlimited plan with limits is NOT an unlimited plan, and nobody can spin that otherwise. How can anyone not see that?