5 ms·

How are you going to find 100M people who agree on what is in the public interest? well how about phone unlocking? I struggle to see the case for having locked

by riggins 14y ago

How are you going to find 100M people who agree on what is in the public interest? well how about phone unlocking? I struggle to see the case for having locked phones. My first cut would be an appeal like 'the phone companies are trying to steal money out of your pocket. It's un-American. You should be free to do what you want with you phone.'

TylerE 14y ago
Ok, the case for locked phones is that you can get a $600 phone for $200. If you want to truly OWN your device, you can pay fair market value for it, and get service from whoever you want.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- gknoy 14y ago
  > the case for locked phones is that you can get a $600 phone for $200. Paying $200 instead of $600 is covered by the two year contract you sign with a carrier to get a subsidized phone, during which you pay them back the cost of that subsidization. If you leave early, an early-termination fee ensures that the subsidization is paid for. At the end of your two year contract, you've paid back the full cost of the phone, and you should be able to treat it as Yours in every sense of the word -- even if that means unlocking it and taking it to another service provider.
  - grkvlt 14y ago
    Yes, and that is _NOT_ illegal. You're quite free to unlock your phone after the contract runs out, or if you pay your carrier the fees to unlock it, in the case above that would probably be the $400 dollar difference between your price and the unlocked price. I'm not sure I see the issue here - if you want the unlocked phone, then buy it and pay for a SIM only type contract, or do such things not exist in the US?
    - thedufer 14y ago
      > You're quite free to unlock your phone after the contract runs out Do you have a source on that? I can't find anything about such an exemption; I'm fairly certain it doesn't exist.
- schrodinger 14y ago
  Stop this argument! Regardless of whether you lock or unlock your phone, you're still in a contract with the phone company. The $400 subsidy in this argument was for the value of that contract, which doesn't disappear when you unlock.
- coldpie 14y ago
  That's what the contract is for. You're either paying for the 2 years of service, or the early termination fee will cover the remaining $(400 - amount paid). Locking the phone doesn't affect the subsidy payback one way or the other.

by riggins 14y ago

TylerE 14y ago

Ok, the case for locked phones is that you can get a $600 phone for $200. If you want to truly OWN your device, you can pay fair market value for it, and get service from whoever you want.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
gknoy 14y ago
> the case for locked phones is that you can get a $600 phone for $200. Paying $200 instead of $600 is covered by the two year contract you sign with a carrier to get a subsidized phone, during which you pay them back the cost of that subsidization. If you leave early, an early-termination fee ensures that the subsidization is paid for. At the end of your two year contract, you've paid back the full cost of the phone, and you should be able to treat it as Yours in every sense of the word -- even if that means unlocking it and taking it to another service provider.
- grkvlt 14y ago
  Yes, and that is _NOT_ illegal. You're quite free to unlock your phone after the contract runs out, or if you pay your carrier the fees to unlock it, in the case above that would probably be the $400 dollar difference between your price and the unlocked price. I'm not sure I see the issue here - if you want the unlocked phone, then buy it and pay for a SIM only type contract, or do such things not exist in the US?
  - thedufer 14y ago
    > You're quite free to unlock your phone after the contract runs out Do you have a source on that? I can't find anything about such an exemption; I'm fairly certain it doesn't exist.
schrodinger 14y ago
Stop this argument! Regardless of whether you lock or unlock your phone, you're still in a contract with the phone company. The $400 subsidy in this argument was for the value of that contract, which doesn't disappear when you unlock.
coldpie 14y ago
That's what the contract is for. You're either paying for the 2 years of service, or the early termination fee will cover the remaining $(400 - amount paid). Locking the phone doesn't affect the subsidy payback one way or the other.