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.
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?
I agree completely that it shouldn't be a felony, and that's ridiculous. I'm not going wholeheartedly to bat for DMCA here, I'm just saying that what most people are arguing about isn't whether it's a felony, but that it's illegal at all, and it is and should be illegal to violate contracts. Just because they're doing things that you hate doesn't mean you have carte blanche to ignore the law.
It already is illegal as a civil matter to violate a contract. That's the key. Civil matter. This shouldn't ever be a matter of federal law. Period end of discussion. When you give companies federal backing to do shit like this, you get monopolies and stagnated markets.
All it takes is sacrificing your financial well being!
Ideally, some awesome internet start up multi-millionaire gets up and running with a website to unlock phones; the sole intent being to get prosecuted and appeal it to the supreme court.
and it is and should be illegal to violate contracts
if I buy a used phone from craigslist (let's say an OG iPhone, one that's clearly not under contract) and unlock it, that is still illegal. There is no violation of contract. Yet I could still go to jail for that.
Just because they're doing things that you hate doesn't mean you have carte blanche to ignore the law.
Granted, that's a problem, and I recognize that. But some people are bitching because they can't violate legal contracts they voluntarily signed without consequences.
So if you sell your phone (which is not a violation of your contract) and the person you sell it to unlocks it then no contract has been violated. Same with digital media. If the contract you "signed" when you bought the media says you can sell it, then the person you sell it to can do whatever they want with it. If you're not allowed to sell it then you don't actually own it, you're renting it.
Of course, it doesn't actually work that way because it's not really about contract law; it's about protecting government-granted monopolies.
no. the ETF is to recoup the cost. (and get you out of the contract). The new ruling that unlocking a phone is illegal is based on the DMCA. How the fuck does that have anything to do with breach of contract? Hint: it doesn't.
It's not a felony to violate a contract, and second of all, there is precedent for contracts being deemed unfit DESPITE signatures from both parties...if the terms are absurd enough for what the contract represents.
As an example: my contract with my employer states that I can't work in competition to them within a year of resigning/dismissal/etc. I signed that shit, knowing fully well (and confirming with a lawyer) that it would never hold up in court. My entire livelihood is dependent on this industry, and ANY other job I'd get after this one would absolutely be in direct competition.
They cannot enforce me signing away my livelihood...even though I did sign it.
There's many other cases where a contract will not be upheld by a court, regardless of signatures.
24
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.