> >>This has to be illegal
> >
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> doing
> so.
Dell locks out many configuration changes in the BIOS of its computers,
not because you might not have a reason for them, but solely to reduce
support costs, as some folks will mess up their computers, rather than
improve them.
>>>This has to be illegal
>>
>>And what would be the illegality?
>
>I don't know. It just looks shady. If the phone is locked it is because the
>carrier wants it locked ...
Duh.
>and they would unlock it if you have a reason for doing so.
Oh, sure they would, if you just tell them your contract has expired, so now you
want to use *your* phone with another company. Buy a bridge, anyone?
So then you think it would be legitimate for, say, GM to sell you a car carrying
electronics that force you to buy all your gasoline from GM-owned gas stations?
Or a tv manufacturer to restrict the channels that a TV can receive to those in
which it has a commercial interest?
-- Larry
Scott Stephenson - 24 Apr 2004 02:22 GMT
> >>>This has to be illegal
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> So then you think it would be legitimate for, say, GM to sell you a car carrying
> electronics that force you to buy all your gasoline from GM-owned gas stations?
If they subsidized the car and made me aware of the terms before
purchase,why not?
> Or a tv manufacturer to restrict the channels that a TV can receive to those in
> which it has a commercial interest?
Same as above.
> -- Larry
pltrgyst - 24 Apr 2004 04:54 GMT
>If they subsidized the car and made me aware of the terms before
>purchase,why not?
Ah, but that's the key point: *no* cellular carrier tells you in advance that
the phone is locked to their network. Not one.
-- Larry
LithiaSpgs - 25 Apr 2004 14:05 GMT
>Ah, but that's the key point: *no* cellular carrier tells you in advance that
>the phone is locked to their network. Not one.
I agree on that. They should br required by law to do the following:
1. Inform you that the phone is locked to them and will be for a period of 2
years.
2. Give you the option of paying full price for an unlocked phone.
3. Unlock the phone after the lock period expires.
John S. - 25 Apr 2004 16:55 GMT
>3. Unlock the phone after the lock period expires.
Actually, depending on the country but here in the states, the contract should
be all that is needed to lock you to the carrier.
Phone subsidies should go away and people should simply shop for the phone that
they want and go on with it like a lot of the rest of the world.
The American public thinks that they "deserve" free phones when nothing is
further from the truth. The word "deserve" is way over used.
--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
LithiaSpgs - 26 Apr 2004 23:26 GMT
>The American public thinks that they "deserve" free phones when nothing is
>further from the truth. The word "deserve" is way over used.
That is because the providers have adopted that business model and pushed it
hard. I agree. I would rather BUY my phone and pay lower rates. Metro PCS does
not subsidize their phones and their rates are much lower than anybody else is.
($35 month unlimited)
nospam4me@nospam.com - 27 Apr 2004 12:00 GMT
I am not looking for an argument but I think Metro PCS subsidizes
their phones to some degree too . You can find the Nokia 2270 with
the 1st month of service for 110-130 at some retailers and their
phones can only be used on their service . I like the MetroPCS
business model too but wish their Atlanta coverage wasn't so spotty
(like swiss cheese ). I also liked the the old Powertel month to
model .
>>The American public thinks that they "deserve" free phones when nothing is
>>further from the truth. The word "deserve" is way over used.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>not subsidize their phones and their rates are much lower than anybody else is.
>($35 month unlimited)
Mike S. - 25 Apr 2004 14:41 GMT
>>If they subsidized the car and made me aware of the terms before
>>purchase,why not?
>
>Ah, but that's the key point: *no* cellular carrier tells you in advance that
>the phone is locked to their network. Not one.
In a previous "Does ATTWS unlock phones?" thread some months ago, a poster
quoted from the contract IIRC where is clearly states that the phone will
only work on their network.
Todd Allcock - 26 Apr 2004 05:41 GMT
> >If they subsidized the car and made me aware of the terms before
> >purchase,why not?
>
> Ah, but that's the key point: *no* cellular carrier tells you in advance that
> the phone is locked to their network. Not one.
...except AT&T. Read the fine print on ANY AT&T Wireless literature
and there's a blurb explaining how AT&T's phones will operate on AT&T
service only, and may not function with other carriers, etc.
LithiaSpgs - 25 Apr 2004 14:03 GMT
>So then you think it would be legitimate for, say, GM to sell you a car
>carrying
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>in
>which it has a commercial interest?
If you volunteer to sign up accepting those restrictions, yes. If you sign up
for ATT WS and get a free phone that they subsidized, you agree to accept the
fact that it is locked to them for a certain period of time.
Richie - 03 May 2004 06:32 GMT
There is a big difference between a contractual agreement between parties
(which a mobile phone contract is) and something being legal or illegal.
A law must be passed by the legislature or, in some states, by voters.
If an agreement is broken, the injured party may seek recourse in court to
recover damages.
There is NOTHING illegal about unlocking a phone. The carriers lock their
phones simply to encourage customers to use their services. Carriers are
not obligated to unlock the phones that they sell although some carriers
will do so as a courtesy. Customers may unlock their phones on their own.
> >So then you think it would be legitimate for, say, GM to sell you a car
> >carrying
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> for ATT WS and get a free phone that they subsidized, you agree to accept the
> fact that it is locked to them for a certain period of time.
Anton Ish - 23 May 2004 06:31 GMT
How does one go about unlocking phones?
Does the ATT contract actually mention that the phone is locked?
>There is a big difference between a contractual agreement between parties
>(which a mobile phone contract is) and something being legal or illegal.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>the
>> fact that it is locked to them for a certain period of time.
Stuart Friedman - 23 May 2004 12:51 GMT
Anton Irish asked: "How does one go about unlocking phones?"
As was mentioned in the prior posts, ATT will not unlock a phone, therefore
you need to restort to "self help methods." You can either pay to have
your phone unlocked or there are a number of coimpanies which will do it
commercially. Basically, the methods used to unlock a phone boil down to
two: (a) you can use a key number generator to create the unlock code
necessary to unlock the phone. Using this method you create the same code
that the mobile provider would and input it yourself. Commercial unlockers
generally refer to this process as "remote unlocking;" (b) you can attach a
datacable between your mobile and a PC (or a self-standing device) and run a
program on that machine that either cracks the code or partially (or fully)
reflashes the memory of the phone to defeat the lock.
What solution you go with generally depends on the make and model of the
phone. Most Nokias are pretty to unlock using a key generator. With the
new Motorolas, the key number generators aren't widely circulating and
you'll probably need to work with a professional company.
I'm sure that others will have additions, comments, and deletions to what I
have posted, but this should be a start.
Richie - 24 May 2004 04:59 GMT
> Does the ATT contract actually mention that the phone is locked?
No the AT&T contract does not mention that the phone is locked. But the
contract does say that the phone is for use with the AT&T network and may
not be compatible with other networks.
That's what's wrong these days. People are becoming sheeps just following
the crowd. It's easy to take it just the way it's served without thinking.
> >>This has to be illegal
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> carrier wants it locked and they would unlock it if you have a reason for doing
> so.