3 ms·
Illegal and unconstitutional. It's not up to the carries to dictate which phones work on their Network. That's the reason for standardization of network protoco
by writepub 8y ago
Illegal and unconstitutional. It's not up to the carries to dictate which phones work on their Network. That's the reason for standardization of network protocols
Do you really want, hypothetically, a phone maker, say Apple, to get into a sweetheart deal with AT&T and make phone service on non Apple IMEIs unreliable? Or for AT&T to target certain political, religious groups ....
- geofft 8y agoUnconstitutional? The carriers are private companies, I'm not sure what in the Constitution would apply. (I'd agree with "illegal" for the same reasons Ma Bell can't require that you use one of their phones on their phone lines, but that's just because lawmakers decided it should be illegal; they weren't constitutionally obligated to make it illegal.)
- tptacek 8y agoIt could be an antitrust problem (which wouldn't make it unconstitutional, to be sure.)
- apostacy 8y agoThey are pseudo-governmental de-facto public utilities. They have been heavily invested in and subsidized by the government, and given special permission to provide vital infrastructure. So no, they can't just do whatever the hell they want. With that said, They SHOULD have a surcharge for ZTE phones, if they are hostile to their network.
- i_am_proteus 8y agoI think I missed the part of the Constitution that prohibits a telecommunications company from determining which devices can operate on its network.
- mc32 8y agoI guess I missed out on the unconstitutionality of many carriers not carrying Nokia Windows phones or Sony Android phones or Motorola phones...