New Bill Legalizes Cell Phone Unlocking

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
A bipartisan bill allowing for the unlocking of devices without service provider permission has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The bill known as Unlocking Technology Act of 2013 would give owners a legal right to modify any and all software or firmware on their devices.

In addition to explicitly legalizing cell phone unlocking, the Unlocking Technology Act of 2013 also modifies the DMCA to make clear that unlocking copy-protected content is only illegal if it's done in order to "facilitate the infringement of a copyright."
Click to expand...
 
inb4 Telcos spinning unlocking cellphones equivalent to "facilitate the infringement of a copyright."
 
Congress isn't completely useless after all...
 
This is a good step forward. I hate how cell phones in the US are tied to your carrier. Now we just need plans that don't hold you to a contract at an unbelievable high price for crappy service. People in the rest of the world must being laughing at us.
 
It will be a mixed blessing ... most carriers will unlock your phone if you have completed your contract ... this will just mean that we separate phone price and contract price so Americans will have to pay the same $400-700 for their smartphones that the rest of the world does ... not necessarily a bad thing but the sticker shock will be a little surprising ;)
 
Unlocking your phone doesn't automatically exempt you from the legally binding contract that you agreed to, so what exactly does this change in terms of making it so carriers can't subsidize phones anymore? What am I missing here?
 
GotNoRice said:
Unlocking your phone doesn't automatically exempt you from the legally binding contract that you agreed to, so what exactly does this change in terms of making it so carriers can't subsidize phones anymore? What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

Because the way the contracts are currently written the only thing they can hit you with are the ETFs if you breach the contract ... they are also able to negotiate carrier specific phone models to attract customers ... with unlocking they can't have carrier specific phones (except where incompatible networks allow that) so there is little advantage for them to subsidize models at the expense of their profits (at least that is my take ... maybe it won't work out that way)
 
Thread Title is not merely misleading but factually inaccurate.

This new bill PROPOSES to legalize cell phone unlocking (as well as other copy-protection circumvention for non-infringing purposes). But it is not law, it has not been passed by either house of congress, nor signed by the president, so it legalizes nothing at this point.
 
Kueller said:
Thread Title is not merely misleading but factually inaccurate.

This new bill PROPOSES to legalize cell phone unlocking (as well as other copy-protection circumvention for non-infringing purposes). But it is not law, it has not been passed by either house of congress, nor signed by the president, so it legalizes nothing at this point.
Click to expand...
The title wasn't misleading to me. When discussing a bill, the 'will legalize' or 'proposes to legalize' is implied since its a bill which cannot accomplish anything until its passed to law. If the title said 'law' then you might have a point.
 
In addition to explicitly legalizing cell phone unlocking, the Unlocking Technology Act of 2013 also modifies the DMCA to make clear that unlocking copy-protected content is only illegal if it's done in order to "facilitate the infringement of a copyright."
Click to expand...

That last part ... does that mean that all those DVD-encryption breaking software programs are now legal again?
 
jpm100 said:
The title wasn't misleading to me. When discussing a bill, the 'will legalize' or 'proposes to legalize' is implied since its a bill which cannot accomplish anything until its passed to law. If the title said 'law' then you might have a point.
Click to expand...

It's not implied because it's explicitly stated in another way.
 
lets not celebrate too soon. Who knows what little tidbits may be added to the bill that kill its purpose.
 
You want it unlocked...just call your service provider, they unlock phones for free. (Has to be off contract though, as in you replaced the phone already or the contract expired.). In other words, why pay for unlocking services and why care about these stupid legislations? If you have a contract phone and travel overseas, buy an international phone and use no-contract plans and save money in the first place.
 
I definitely don't let anyone burrow any of my electronics, but that's just me...
 
Why is everyone talking about donkeys?

Anyhow...I wonder how many times this will have to be presented to pass.
 
first they make it illegal to unlock phones.

now they want to overturn it?

typical government.
 
Xinmosni said:
v_V

It's borrow, not burrow...
Click to expand...

:eek:

dr.kevin said:
first they make it illegal to unlock phones.

now they want to overturn it?

typical government.
Click to expand...

it's not the govt that made it illegal to unlock phones, phone companies make it illegal by putting all sorts of stipulations on how you can and cannot use your phone through the EULA that strip consumers of their power, this bill puts some power back in your hands
 
dr.kevin said:
first they make it illegal to unlock phones.

now they want to overturn it?

typical government.
Click to expand...

Back during the DMCA enactment, the only side our government got was big media, but now with the internet and the general consumer becoming more aware of how big business is trying to destroy your rights as a consumer. They listened to the protests over SOPA, enough people signed the petition on whitehouse.gov to legalize phone unlocking. As the awareness grows, the voice of the people grows and the louder it gets, the more our government is likely to listen to us.
 
Wow, a useful bill for once.

But didn't they recently pass a bill making it illegal? Which one counts now? lol
 
dr.kevin said:
first they make it illegal to unlock phones.

now they want to overturn it?

typical government.
Click to expand...

Except they didn't make it implicitly illegal in the law ... they left the DMCA up to the Librarian of Congress to interpret ... it was the LoC that decided the EULAs and other agreements prevented phone unlocking/jailbreaking under the DMCA

The phone companies will already unlock your phone if you are out of contract so the only things impacted by this law (if it passes and assuming they don't change it or throw other crap in it) are:

- International travelers could unlock their phones rather than purchasing roaming packages (very minor effect as this is a niche requirement)

- Phone exclusives would now be impossible since carriers can't lock the phone to their network unless the phone model is specific to their frequencies and no one elses (this could actually present an opportunity for either programmable frequency chips or narrow frequency chips to provide carriers with phones only usable on their network, even when they are unlocked)

- You could unlock your phone while under contract ... not sure if this would affect ETFs at all ... or just encourage the carriers to end contract subsidized phones (we'd have to see the final bill to see if this would be impacted)

Since you can already unlock your out of contract phone if you ask that would not be impacted by this law
 
We wouldn't need a bill like this, if we didn't have subsidized phones with high contract prices. However, since carriers give you a discounted phone, but lock you in for X amount of months under their terms, then the consumer should have to obey to those terms. Once the contract expires, then people should be free to do what they want with the phone... This shouldn't be made convoluted.
 
kbrickley said:
- You could unlock your phone while under contract ... not sure if this would affect ETFs at all ... or just encourage the carriers to end contract subsidized phones (we'd have to see the final bill to see if this would be impacted)
Click to expand...
I never understood the logic of this. If you are under contract, you have every right to breach the contract as long as you pay the penalty previously agreed to.

The cell carriers can't possibly be victimized in this situation, so an end to phone subsidies isn't necessary.

The problem with the law before as I read it, is that even when you were out of contract, the phone still didn't belong to you and you STILL had to get carrier permission to unlock it, and were not allowed to unlock it yourself.

This of course is total nonsense.
 
Ducman69 said:
I never understood the logic of this. If you are under contract, you have every right to breach the contract as long as you pay the penalty previously agreed to.

The cell carriers can't possibly be victimized in this situation, so an end to phone subsidies isn't necessary.

The problem with the law before as I read it, is that even when you were out of contract, the phone still didn't belong to you and you STILL had to get carrier permission to unlock it, and were not allowed to unlock it yourself.

This of course is total nonsense.
Click to expand...

Since the US phones all have carrier firmware on them that limit certain capabilities (hotspots, over the air file transfer sizes, etc) the carriers still need to be involved in the unlocking process (especially while you are under contract and they still technically own your phone) ... they should automatically unlock your phone at the end of the contract though (without your asking) ... that would make more sense, since all the carriers support out of contract unlocking now
 
kbrickley said:
Since the US phones all have carrier firmware on them that limit certain capabilities (hotspots, over the air file transfer sizes, etc) the carriers still need to be involved in the unlocking process (especially while you are under contract and they still technically own your phone) ... they should automatically unlock your phone at the end of the contract though (without your asking) ... that would make more sense, since all the carriers support out of contract unlocking now
Click to expand...
Yes, it needs to be automatic though.

My dad was going to give me his old iPhone 4 for example, but it was still locked with the carrier and they wouldn't unlock it for me, had to be my dad and they had to ask all kinds of security crap and what not. When the phone is out of contract, you shouldn't have to do anything, its not your phone Verizon so RELEASE IT no matter who asks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top