Verizon Refuses To Release Update That Would Kill Samsung’s Note 7

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
I’m not sure where Verizon is coming from, since the average person only has one phone anyway and nobody should be using a Note 7. How do carriers even get away with this when the manufacturer of the device declares it a danger?

Verizon will not be releasing a just-announced Galaxy Note 7 software update designed to stop the recalled smartphone from charging. In a statement, the leading US mobile carrier attributed the decision to concerns over safety for customers who might not have another mobile phone to use after the Note 7 has been crippled. …Verizon seems to think it’s already done an effective job communicating the recall to consumers alongside Samsung, but the carrier believes this update is a step too far — even for a phone that’s a very real fire hazard.
 
So, according to Verizon not being able to text your BF is a bigger safety concern than bursting into flames.

OK...
 
I personally think once carriers started to really push the pay-full-price-in-installments they should have gotten out of the "software" side of the business all together. When the carrier is subsidizing 2/3 of the price, one would expect they would recoup the cost with contracts and software deals.

If I am paying full price for the device I expect the stock experience.
 
I agree with the post above.

All phones should be updated ota.

There's no reason carriers should have any say in firmware or software updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TonyZ
like this
tunatime said:
Samsung shouldn't even brick them if people want to keep uesing it and it blows up thats on them not samsung.
Click to expand...
I half agree. I think it would be a bad idea to brick phones without warning, but there should be a sunset date with annoying reminders of the recall and that the phone needs to be exchanged due to the fire hazard. 6 months from now should be a reasonable time period. If someone chooses to ignore the warnings, yeah at that point it's up to them, but there's no duty for the carrier to ensure it stays operational just from a liability standpoint.
 
I think I'll side with Verizon on this one.

Honestly word has spread and many notices have been given to users about the danger of the phone.

Can't keep spoon feeding and holding an idiot's hand.
 
DTN107 said:
I think I'll side with Verizon on this one.

Honestly word has spread and many notices have been given to users about the danger of the phone.

Can't keep spoon feeding and holding an idiot's hand.
Click to expand...

I disagree, if something happens with one of those still in the wild and someone gets hurt you'd think this would be a financial liability for VZW.
 
Just don't accept any updates. Eventually, if you keep declining it long enough it just stops prompting you.
 
Um, they can tell what device is attached to the network and Verizon could very easily check their stats to see if they've communicated the danger or not.

If they still have a significant amount of Note7's attached then it's safe to assume that this patch is warranted. I assume the patch likely notifies the user to replace their phone.
 
tunatime said:
Samsung shouldn't even brick them if people want to keep uesing it and it blows up thats on them not samsung.
Click to expand...

I wonder if they would be held partially liable for property damage/injuries/fatalities from a burning phone after this decision. IMO that risk sounds worse than the chance of stranding someone without a phone.

Imagine a scenario like a nursing home burning down because an employee's personal phone exploded on the charger.
 
Last edited:
TonyZ said:
I disagree, if something happens with one of those still in the wild and someone gets hurt you'd think this would be a financial liability for VZW.
Click to expand...

It's no more a financial liability for VZW than it is for Best Buy if your kid pulls the 70" OLED over on top of themselves and is killed. They sold the product, Samsung is responsible for its condition.
 
silent-circuit said:
It's no more a financial liability for VZW than it is for Best Buy if your kid pulls the 70" OLED over on top of themselves and is killed. They sold the product, Samsung is responsible for its condition.
Click to expand...
This is a good point i love my 55in oled tv but the dam thing is so thin it wobbles its not just phones becoming so thin its everything.
 
tunatime said:
Samsung shouldn't even brick them if people want to keep uesing it and it blows up thats on them not samsung.
Click to expand...

you say that but people will still blame them for anything that happens.

Master_shake_ said:
I agree with the post above.

All phones should be updated ota.

There's no reason carriers should have any say in firmware or software updates.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, I hated waiting for at&t to release windows 10 for my phone.

pxc said:
I half agree. I think it would be a bad idea to brick phones without warning, but there should be a sunset date with annoying reminders of the recall and that the phone needs to be exchanged due to the fire hazard. 6 months from now should be a reasonable time period. If someone chooses to ignore the warnings, yeah at that point it's up to them, but there's no duty for the carrier to ensure it stays operational just from a liability standpoint.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree here. By this point people know about the recall, they just refuse to return their phones. Until you turn it off these people won't respond. No number of emails, calls, text, letters or any other things will change that. At this point Samsung has no other option as they will be the ones held accountable for anything that happens because they are not doing enough to fix the issue. The only fix is killing the phones.
 
Spidey329 said:
If they still have a significant amount of Note7's attached then it's safe to assume that this patch is warranted. I assume the patch likely notifies the user to replace their phone.
Click to expand...
I think there was already a patch that tells people to bring it in for the recall (every time it gets a charge).
This update blocks you from charging the battery.
 
I'm torn. I dislike support of willingly bricking a product via update. Not a great practice to set. But this phone is an actual danger, and not just to users by those around them. It's different than ignoring something like an airbag recall.

People have had PLENTY of time to respond to the recall. Yes most people only have a single phone that they are far to attached to, but this is a high end phone that was not cheap. It wasn't being bought by people who couldn't make some sort of change to something that wasn't in danger of exploding.

Fuck em, brick it.
 
Exavior said:
I have to disagree here. By this point people know about the recall, they just refuse to return their phones. Until you turn it off these people won't respond. No number of emails, calls, text, letters or any other things will change that. At this point Samsung has no other option as they will be the ones held accountable for anything that happens because they are not doing enough to fix the issue. The only fix is killing the phones.
Click to expand...
I think at this point relatively few people are still *using* a note 7. They may have unusual circumstances that prevent returning their phone, good or bad (consider someone who is out of the country during the recall as an example). Some may want to keep the phone for research, or as a testing unit for particular reasons (investigate the battery fire flaw, do testing on this particular processor/gpu/display type or resolution device, etc). It's important to note that people have paid for the device, or are paying for the device as part of a data plan. Killing the phone without ample warning would suck for those people. I think Verizon is right to pause before taking such a drastic measure.
 
DTN107 said:
I think I'll side with Verizon on this one.

Honestly word has spread and many notices have been given to users about the danger of the phone.

Can't keep spoon feeding and holding an idiot's hand.
Click to expand...
I agree with this but could also see Verizon/Samsung pushing something out to help the stupid people.
 
Anyone who still has a Note 7 knows the risk of using it. If you won't return it and it catches fire in your pants pocket, then it's on you, dumb ass.
 
I support Verizon on this one. Who owns the phone after all? Samsung has made a good faith effort to notify folks and offered to replace the phones (or exploding washers for that matter) at no cost to the owners. Plus there has been a lot of press coverage on this. The folks that insist on continuing to use the devices in question should bear the full responsibility if something goes wrong. At some point, Samsung should be declared free and clear on this assuming they carry through on the free replacements in a timely fashion.

Further, what if something goes wrong with the kill signal and phones other then the intended target get killed? Who is liable then?
 
Dead Parrot said:
Further, what if something goes wrong with the kill signal and phones other then the intended target get killed? Who is liable then?
Click to expand...

You clearly don't understand how any of this works.

Samsung knows the exact range of IMEI numbers that were assigned to the Note 7, and more specifically, to the Note 7s branded for and sent to Verizon. Further, that range was probably assigned and reserved months if not well over a year ago. Short of sending the wrong firmware over the air to the wrong model of phone (which in so far as I know has never happened -- and the update routine has built in checks so it would be fine even if that happened) this basically can't go wrong.
 
Unless there is a law mandating that this product cannot be used, I (my opintion) do not think a manufacturer has a right to purposefully break a consumers product. The consumer did not buy this product on a condition of allowed usage like in the case of a lease or a subscription. This is a bought product. It is the consumers choice.
 
silent-circuit said:
You clearly don't understand how any of this works.

Samsung knows the exact range of IMEI numbers that were assigned to the Note 7, and more specifically, to the Note 7s branded for and sent to Verizon. Further, that range was probably assigned and reserved months if not well over a year ago. Short of sending the wrong firmware over the air to the wrong model of phone (which in so far as I know has never happened -- and the update routine has built in checks so it would be fine even if that happened) this basically can't go wrong.
Click to expand...

You are correct, I don't know the details about updating phones like this. Doesn't change the validity of my point. Does Verizon want to assume the legal risk for sending a kill code to turn off devices owned by their customers to benefit a 3rd party company? Does Samsung even have the legal right to send a kill code? Verizon could find it self in a lawsuit or even facing hacking charges for sending malware with the intent of causing a computer device to malfunction. That is basically what Samsung is asking Verizon to do, use a computer network to deliberately cause harm to computers owned by other people. Does meet the basic definition of malicious computer hacking.
 
Dead Parrot said:
You are correct, I don't know the details about updating phones like this. Doesn't change the validity of my point. Does Verizon want to assume the legal risk for sending a kill code to turn off devices owned by their customers to benefit a 3rd party company? Does Samsung even have the legal right to send a kill code? Verizon could find it self in a lawsuit or even facing hacking charges for sending malware with the intent of causing a computer device to malfunction. That is basically what Samsung is asking Verizon to do, use a computer network to deliberately cause harm to computers owned by other people. Does meet the basic definition of malicious computer hacking.
Click to expand...

Agreed. They would probably find themselves in a safer position if they phone just was forced to make annoying chimes every hour letting you know it has to be returned, and having no way to mute that sound. Phones have become lifelines at this point, I myself use mine as gps very often, would it just getting a black screen from a kill switch update while driving be a good move? Probably not. Nor would it be good when so many systems are in place to warn for missing children, emergency situations, disaster etc. Yes this is extreme, but when you figure how many of these are still in the wild, that statistic becomes more viable. And the way things work right now, if that phone caught fire and burned a familys house down with them in it would be far less damaging then if some rare scenario of a kid gets abducted and when they try to trace the phone, it gets bricked by the update.

I think they should just play youtube videos of annoying orange over and over at full volume until it gets returned for full refund and all expenses incurred by this as well as the phone of their choice. Bite the bullet and give people free stuff before you cause a PR disaster.
 
Doubt Samsung can be held liable after this, they are doing what they can to disable the device and remove it from circulation. Verizon are the ones who are allowing it to continue...

I don't give 2 hoots if you think its your right to keep using the phone, put simply it isn't your right... What if the phone catches fire while you are driving, causing an accident, catches fire in a hotel with other people inside... On a plane, on a bus, etc etc you have no right to put other people in danger for your own selfish needs.

You have no excuse to keep using it at this point, Samsung have offered you a full refund, another device etc.
 
they have no right to disable your device, without fair compensation and consent, if they did that they would have a bunch of lawsuits to deal with
 
buhbuhfet said:
they have no right to disable your device, without fair compensation and consent, if they did that they would have a bunch of lawsuits to deal with
Click to expand...

I can agree with this, but they have offered both full refunds and replacement devices.

Now they are trying to make sure that no one else gets hurt because some moron doesn't take a legitimate safety recall seriously.

I'm all for this approach, and IMHO, Verizon are being completely foolish here.

Do they want burn victims suing them? What if one of these things goes off in the air and takes down a plane because some moron fails to take the recall seriously. Even if we set aside right or wrong for a moment, does Verizon really want to open themselves up to that kind of a lawsuit?
 
buhbuhfet said:
they have no right to disable your device, without fair compensation and consent, if they did that they would have a bunch of lawsuits to deal with
Click to expand...

They have offered compensation... a full refund, a replacement device, bonus credit. They hare done more than enough. It is selfish pricks who think keeping their device is more important than public safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top