5 ms·

This is a promising response, although one part is of (possibly unfounded) concern: "And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren't bound by a service

This is a promising response, although one part is of (possibly unfounded) concern: "And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren't bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network." This makes it sound like unlocking a phone while you are still on contract would not be excepted.

DigitalJack 14y ago
That is a matter of contract law. If you are no longer obligated by the contract you agreed to, then there should be no barriers to unlocking.
- betterunix 14y ago
  Why should there be any barriers while you are on contract? What if someone wants to use their phone one two different networks for some reason, swapping SIM cards occasionally (OK, I cannot come up with a reason why, but that does not mean no such reason exists)? If you are paying for your service, what's the problem?
  - uvdiv 14y ago
    swapping SIM cards occasionally (OK, I cannot come up with a reason why Because if you travel, your contract provider will charge you extortionate fees. It's one of the ways they nickle-and-dime. You can get cheaper plans from foreign telecoms.
onedognight 14y ago
> This makes it sound like unlocking a phone while you are still on contract would not be excepted. You don't really own the phone until the contract that got you the phone is terminated. They agree to buy your phone for you if you agree to n-months of service.
- betterunix 14y ago
  "You don't really own the phone until the contract that got you the phone is terminated." ...then why do you wind up paying sales tax on it?
  - jmj42 14y ago
    The same reason you pay sales tax on a car you finance. Just because you are paying for the phone over 2 years does not mean that you get to defer sales tax.
    - betterunix 14y ago
      (1) You can sell a car you financed to someone else, even if they buy their gas from a different gas station. (2) You are not taking out a loan on the phone. You are paying a discounted price for it in exchange for signing a contract for service. You bought the phone when you paid the sales tax.
      - onedognight 14y ago
        > (1) You can sell a car you financed to someone else, even if they buy their gas from a different gas station. Yes, but you must pay off your loan (the early termination fee) first and then you own the car and can sell it (i.e. as Obama suggested, after your contract ends).
        betterunix 14y ago
        OK, but you are ignoring the second point: the cell phone company is not issuing a loan to you, they are selling the phone to you at a discount. It is a loss leader strategy, not a financing program.
- larvaetron 14y ago
  This misinformation is not true and appears to be widespread. You purchase a phone at a reduced price and agree to sign a 12/24 mos. contract with a carrier. If you stop paying your bill, the carrier can sue for non-payment and ETF, but that does not have anything to do with the device. The phone is yours. There is no lien on the device.
rjv 14y ago
Meaning you'll have to opt out of your contract (and pay early termination fees) prior to unlocking. At which point, you will have paid for your device in full. I think this is completely reasonable.
duskwuff 14y ago
And I see no problem with that. If you're on contract, your cell provider gave you your phone for free (or at a very steep discount) in exchange for your agreeing to use it exclusively with them for the next 1-2 years. Having the phone locked to only work on their network is part of that agreement. Don't like that part of the agreement? Don't sign it, and pay the full price for the phone.
- betterunix 14y ago
  Why should the law protect loss leader strategies? My local supermarket does not get some special legal protection for its loss leader strategy with milk and eggs. What makes cell phone companies worthy of this special protection of their business, which puts independent cell phone stores at a substantial disadvantage?
  - mrgoldenbrown 14y ago
    The contract issue is mostly orthogonal to unlocking the phone - most contracts that give you a reduced price have a clause allowing you to cancel early, with a penalty cost that loosely approximates the subsidy that went towards your phone. The problem is that even if you wanted to pay this penalty, the DMCA makes it illegal to unlock your phone.
    - betterunix 14y ago
      Except that you might want to unlock your phone even without canceling your contract. Maybe you want service from two cell providers simultaneously for some reason. Why should the DMCA stop you from doing that?
      - daxelrod 14y ago
        Some reason like traveling overseas.
      - mrgoldenbrown 14y ago
        We are in agreement. Orthogonal means the two issues (unlocking being legal under DMCA vs unlocking being prohibited by contract in exchange for a free phone) should be treated separately.
ceejayoz 14y ago
> This makes it sound like unlocking a phone while you are still on contract would not be excepted. I don't have a problem with that. The phone's essentially lease-to-own at that point. As soon as the subsidy is paid - via monthly contracts or early termination fees - it should be unlockable.

DigitalJack 14y ago

That is a matter of contract law. If you are no longer obligated by the contract you agreed to, then there should be no barriers to unlocking.

betterunix 14y ago
Why should there be any barriers while you are on contract? What if someone wants to use their phone one two different networks for some reason, swapping SIM cards occasionally (OK, I cannot come up with a reason why, but that does not mean no such reason exists)? If you are paying for your service, what's the problem?
- uvdiv 14y ago
  swapping SIM cards occasionally (OK, I cannot come up with a reason why Because if you travel, your contract provider will charge you extortionate fees. It's one of the ways they nickle-and-dime. You can get cheaper plans from foreign telecoms.

onedognight 14y ago

> This makes it sound like unlocking a phone while you are still on contract would not be excepted. You don't really own the phone until the contract that got you the phone is terminated. They agree to buy your phone for you if you agree to n-months of service.

betterunix 14y ago
"You don't really own the phone until the contract that got you the phone is terminated." ...then why do you wind up paying sales tax on it?
- jmj42 14y ago
  The same reason you pay sales tax on a car you finance. Just because you are paying for the phone over 2 years does not mean that you get to defer sales tax.
  - betterunix 14y ago
    (1) You can sell a car you financed to someone else, even if they buy their gas from a different gas station. (2) You are not taking out a loan on the phone. You are paying a discounted price for it in exchange for signing a contract for service. You bought the phone when you paid the sales tax.
    - onedognight 14y ago
      > (1) You can sell a car you financed to someone else, even if they buy their gas from a different gas station. Yes, but you must pay off your loan (the early termination fee) first and then you own the car and can sell it (i.e. as Obama suggested, after your contract ends).
      - betterunix 14y ago
        OK, but you are ignoring the second point: the cell phone company is not issuing a loan to you, they are selling the phone to you at a discount. It is a loss leader strategy, not a financing program.
larvaetron 14y ago
This misinformation is not true and appears to be widespread. You purchase a phone at a reduced price and agree to sign a 12/24 mos. contract with a carrier. If you stop paying your bill, the carrier can sue for non-payment and ETF, but that does not have anything to do with the device. The phone is yours. There is no lien on the device.

rjv 14y ago

Meaning you'll have to opt out of your contract (and pay early termination fees) prior to unlocking. At which point, you will have paid for your device in full. I think this is completely reasonable.

duskwuff 14y ago

And I see no problem with that. If you're on contract, your cell provider gave you your phone for free (or at a very steep discount) in exchange for your agreeing to use it exclusively with them for the next 1-2 years. Having the phone locked to only work on their network is part of that agreement. Don't like that part of the agreement? Don't sign it, and pay the full price for the phone.

betterunix 14y ago
Why should the law protect loss leader strategies? My local supermarket does not get some special legal protection for its loss leader strategy with milk and eggs. What makes cell phone companies worthy of this special protection of their business, which puts independent cell phone stores at a substantial disadvantage?
- mrgoldenbrown 14y ago
  The contract issue is mostly orthogonal to unlocking the phone - most contracts that give you a reduced price have a clause allowing you to cancel early, with a penalty cost that loosely approximates the subsidy that went towards your phone. The problem is that even if you wanted to pay this penalty, the DMCA makes it illegal to unlock your phone.
  - betterunix 14y ago
    Except that you might want to unlock your phone even without canceling your contract. Maybe you want service from two cell providers simultaneously for some reason. Why should the DMCA stop you from doing that?
    - daxelrod 14y ago
      Some reason like traveling overseas.
    - mrgoldenbrown 14y ago
      We are in agreement. Orthogonal means the two issues (unlocking being legal under DMCA vs unlocking being prohibited by contract in exchange for a free phone) should be treated separately.

ceejayoz 14y ago

> This makes it sound like unlocking a phone while you are still on contract would not be excepted. I don't have a problem with that. The phone's essentially lease-to-own at that point. As soon as the subsidy is paid - via monthly contracts or early termination fees - it should be unlockable.