I saw this article below that seems interesting and very related to our next cell phone choice. Huawei and ZTE appear to be the next wave of competition against major cell phone manufacturers. Do you guys think this is a real threat or just big business at work? I would not be surprised to replace my GS2 with one of these brands in a year.
Article starts below or read online here http://touch.latimes.com/#story/la-na-pn-chinese-firms-20121007/
House intelligence panel warns against two Chinese firms
WASHINGTON — The federal government should “view with suspicion” attempts by two Chinese telecommunications companies to expand in the U.S. market because of a strong risk that they would aid spying and cybertheft by China, a yearlong investigation by the House intelligence committee has concluded.
In a 52-page report accompanied by a classified annex, House investigators working for Democrats and Republicans said that Huawei Technologies Co. and ZTE Corp., two private companies with deep ties to the Chinese government, had failed to satisfy security concerns.
“Despite hours of interviews, extensive and repeated document requests, a review of open-source information, and an open hearing with witnesses from both companies, the committee remains unsatisfied with the level of cooperation and candor provided by each company,” the report says. “Neither company was willing to provide sufficient evidence to ameliorate the committee’s concerns.”
The report recommended that the U.S. government bar the two globally dominant firms from access to any sensitive U.S. networks and from acquiring U.S. assets. The companies make routers, switches and other parts of the worldwide telecommunications nerve system.
Huawei has hired a team of lobbyists in Washington, including several former congressional aides, as it seeks to sell products to U.S. telecom carriers and otherwise gain a toehold in the American market. ZTE officials have also expressed aspirations to do significant business in the United States. But large U.S. telecoms are not likely do business with the Chinese firms if U.S. officials warn against it.
House intelligence committee chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and ranking member C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) appeared on CBS’ “60 Minutes” Sunday to discuss their inquiry.
“If I were an American company today … and you are looking at Huawei, I would find another vendor if you care about your intellectual property, if you care about your consumers’ privacy, and you care about the national security of the United States of America,” Rogers said on the broadcast.
With $32 billion in annual revenue, Huawei is the world’s largest telecommunications equipment maker, while ZTE has $13.7 billion in revenue and is the fifth-largest. The firms specialize in technology that can be easily manipulated for electronic eavesdropping in ways that are extremely difficult to detect, the report says.
Huawei “exhibits a pattern of disregard for the intellectual property rights” of other companies, the report says, urging private companies “to consider the long-term security risks associated with doing business with either ZTE or Huawei for equipment or services.”
The report was tougher on Huawei than on ZTE. It charges that that “during the investigation, the committee received information from industry experts and current and former Huawei employees suggesting that Huawei, in particular, may be violating United States laws. These allegations describe a company that has not followed United States legal obligations or international standards of business behavior.”
The allegations, including bribery and corruption, will be referred to the Justice Department, the report says.
Aside from those unspecified allegations, however, the unclassified version of the report does not specifically link either company to wrongdoing or spying for China. U.S. intelligence officials say China has mounted a brazen state-sponsored campaign to steal the intellectual property of American and other Western companies, often through cyberattacks that siphon information out of poorly defended computer networks.
Although the U.S. engages in extensive electronic spying, it does not undertake economic espionage, U.S. officials insist. At the same time, they contend, China has a strategy of bypassing research and development by stealing it. China denies this.
The report focuses mainly on questions neither company answered to the committee’s satisfaction about ties to China, its government, and its defense and intelligence services.
Although Huawei is a private company, it receives significant support from state-owned Chinese banks that it refuses to detail, the report says. ZTE would not discuss its work for Chinese military and intelligence services, the report says.
At a September hearing before the intelligence committee, both companies denied that they would do anything improper on behalf of China.
“Huawei has not and will not jeopardize our global commercial success nor the integrity of our customers’ networks for any third party, government or otherwise,” Charles Ding, senior vice president of Huawei, told lawmakers.
i work for uscc.. we have a zte phone coming soon that has windows mobile 7.5.. other than that its specs are pretty mediocre and not better han the sgs2.. zte is one of the largest phone manufacturers in the world.. but pretty sure there playing the catch up game and releasing windows phones might not get them where they need to go lol
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app
I wouldn't be surprise if it's true. But then again, they can already be doing it to the other manufactures phone's that they assemble in china.
I agree that the phones I have seen by these manufacturers look pretty basic but their latest stuff like this looks nice http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwi...nfoId=3442&directoryId=6001&treeId=3745&tab=0
Don't get me wrong I like my phone and Samsung products but when it comes time to buy I'm shopping around.
Not like our own government doesn't do this already to us. They're just mad they won't do it fir them.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
Could be true, the Chinese are pretty sneaky when it comes to espionage, both political and corporate. I'm sure they'd love to add some kind of spyware to a mobile device to gain access to a users sensitive data.
We are legion, for we are many.
Sent from the DarkSide of the GalaXy with a MEK device
This is looking good... I never thought I'd see something so nice come from Huawei.
http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwi...nfoId=3265&directoryId=6001&treeId=3745&tab=0
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Mattix724 said:
This is looking good... I never thought I'd see something so nice come from Huawei.
http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwi...nfoId=3265&directoryId=6001&treeId=3745&tab=0
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice specs on paper, more than likely total sh!t IRL. Huaweis processors(which that has) are known to be way over hyped on paper and not live up to their claims. Plus its running a 64-bit system, where the hell are they gonna get a 64-bit compatible version of android? It would end up running a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit system which seems kind of pointless :thumbdown:
We are legion, for we are many.
Sent from the DarkSide of the GalaXy with a MEK device
Is Windows phone 8 a 64bit OS? I don't know much about it.
Related
HTC WireTapping Violations Class Action Legal Help
If you or a loved one has suffered damages in this case, please click the link below and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.
Please click here for a free evaluation of your case
https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/submit_form.html?label=carrier-iq-federal-wiretap-act-laws-smartphone&forward=1201
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against CIQ Claiming Smartphone Wiretap Violations
Seattle, WA: A group of consumers filed a nationwide class-action lawsuit claiming that smartphone manufacturers HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd use software developed by Carrier IQ, Inc. ("CIQ") that illegally intercepts incoming text messages and captures users' key strokes—including those used to compose email and text messages or to dial numbers—without consumers' knowledge or permission.
In mid-November, software developer Trevor Eckhart published a video blog illustrating the operation of the CIQ software recording keystrokes, including information sent to secure websites using HTTPS security protocols used in e-commerce and other security-sensitive sites.
After Eckhart published his discovery and documents he found on CIQ's website, CIQ accused him of copyright violations and threatened legal actions unless he capitulated to the company's demands. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a public-interest digital rights watchdog stepped in to defend Eckhart and CIQ later apologized to Eckhart and rescinded its demands.
According to CIQ, its software is embedded on smartphones to allow the company to collect data for the benefit of cellular carriers and device manufacturers, which is important to improving customer experience, such as logging information related to dropped calls. CIQ says its program does not log keystrokes or intercept messages and it does not store or resell the information.
The lawsuit alleges that, in reality, the program does record keystrokes and the content of messages, and could transmit the information to third parties, possibly including information sent to secure websites using HTTPS security protocols used in e-commerce and other security-sensitive sites such as banking.
The complaint was filed on behalf of four smartphone users and names smartphone manufacturers HTC and Samsung as defendants along with CIQ. The lawsuit could be amended to include other smartphone manufacturers that embed the CIQ software on their devices.
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accuses the companies of violating the Federal Wiretap Act and California's Unfair Business Practice Act. The Federal Wiretap Act prohibits the unauthorized interception or illegal use of electronic communications.
The lawsuit asks the court to award damages under the Federal Wiretap Act, and prevent companies from including similar software in future smartphones.
mchristian said:
HTC WireTapping Violations Class Action Legal Help
If you or a loved one has suffered damages in this case, please click the link below and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.
Please click here for a free evaluation of your case
https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/submit_form.html?label=carrier-iq-federal-wiretap-act-laws-smartphone&forward=1201
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY........MONEY!!!...hahahahahaha
▀▄► Unlocking Any Phones in USA 100% illegal ! ◄▀▀▄▄ READ!!! ALERT!!
Unlocking Phones Now Illegal in USA
In October, 2012, the US Librarian of Congress changed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to prevent users from unlocking their phones and using them to access multiple service providers. However, the change also allowed for a temporary, 90-day period before the new legislation would be put in place, during which users would be free to unlock their devices.
That period ended on Saturday, 26 January, and it is now illegal for American smartphone users to unlock their phones without permission from their service providers.
Unlocking phones allows people travelling in foreign countries to access local mobile networks and avoid large bills from their domestic providers.
However, in its ruling on the changes to the DMCA, the US Federal Register explained that since several providers offered unlocked versions of phones already, there was no reason that users should be legally allowed to unlock phones themselves. In it's original ruling, the Federal Register explained:
"While it is true that not every wireless device is available unlocked, and wireless carriers' unlocking polices are not free from all restrictions, the record clearly demonstrates that there is a wide range of alternatives from which consumers may choose in order to obtain an unlocked wireless phone.
"Thus, the Register determined that with respect to newly purchased phones, proponents had not satisfied their burden of showing adverse effects related to a technological protection measure."
US service provider Verizon sells pre-unlocked versions of each phone it stocks, while AT&T unlocks any device which is out of contract. Many Us phone users unlock their devices in order to be able to use them abroad with a different network, allowing them to make big cost savings.
In response, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Mitch Stoltz told Engadget that the changes to the DMCA would deprive users who unlock their phones themselves of any legal defence, and reduce the value of the used phone market, where locked devices sell for less money:
"What's happening is not that the Copyright Office is declaring unlocking to be illegal, but rather that they're taking away a shield that unlockers could use in court if they get sued," Stoltz said. "This shows just how absurd the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is: a law that was supposed to stop the breaking of digital locks on copyrighted materials has led to the Librarian of Congress trying to regulate the used cellphone market."
An online petition to the White House to make the unlocking of phones legal again has already received more than 25,000 signatures:
"As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired," the petition explains. "Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
"We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision," the petition continues "and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal."
The worst-case scenario for an individual or civil offense could be as much as a $2,500 fine. As for those planning to profit off of the act or a criminal offense -- such as a cellphone reseller -- the fine could be as high as $500,000 and include prison time.
Cellphone Websites Based in USA or OWNERS living in USA of offshore websites will be Prosecuted to full extent of the law.. Customer's unlocking phones from now will be charged.. FBI will start raiding these people for the customer invoice list.
Education and knowing the new laws will prevent any accidental jail time..
Just want to let everyone know this...
This is all true, no B u l l $ h i t...
Be safe!!
-----------------
unlock baseband htc galaxy s3 prepaid iphone 3 4 5 6 4s ipad jailbreak rtsa samsung flashing firmware Samsung note 2 root tab unlocking androidnck CMEA unlocking codes 5.0.1 6.0 6.0.1 6.1 BlackBerry (Torch/Storm/Curve/Bold/Pearl), Samsung, Motorola, LG, Sony Ericsson, HTC, Huawei, Toshiba. Unlock AT&T Tmobile Vodafone Telus Digicel MetroPCS Orange Sprint Verizon unlock apple h20 Net10 Virgin Mobile Nextel Cingular Alltel Boostmobile pageplus Telcel MysimpleMobile Simple Mobile Network Unlocking NCK Calculator
gsm1999 said:
Unlocking Phones Now Illegal in USA
In October, 2012, the US Librarian of Congress changed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to prevent users from unlocking their phones and using them to access multiple service providers. However, the change also allowed for a temporary, 90-day period before the new legislation would be put in place, during which users would be free to unlock their devices.
That period ended on Saturday, 26 January, and it is now illegal for American smartphone users to unlock their phones without permission from their service providers.
Unlocking phones allows people travelling in foreign countries to access local mobile networks and avoid large bills from their domestic providers.
However, in its ruling on the changes to the DMCA, the US Federal Register explained that since several providers offered unlocked versions of phones already, there was no reason that users should be legally allowed to unlock phones themselves. In it's original ruling, the Federal Register explained:
"While it is true that not every wireless device is available unlocked, and wireless carriers' unlocking polices are not free from all restrictions, the record clearly demonstrates that there is a wide range of alternatives from which consumers may choose in order to obtain an unlocked wireless phone.
"Thus, the Register determined that with respect to newly purchased phones, proponents had not satisfied their burden of showing adverse effects related to a technological protection measure."
US service provider Verizon sells pre-unlocked versions of each phone it stocks, while AT&T unlocks any device which is out of contract. Many Us phone users unlock their devices in order to be able to use them abroad with a different network, allowing them to make big cost savings.
In response, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Mitch Stoltz told Engadget that the changes to the DMCA would deprive users who unlock their phones themselves of any legal defence, and reduce the value of the used phone market, where locked devices sell for less money:
"What's happening is not that the Copyright Office is declaring unlocking to be illegal, but rather that they're taking away a shield that unlockers could use in court if they get sued," Stoltz said. "This shows just how absurd the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is: a law that was supposed to stop the breaking of digital locks on copyrighted materials has led to the Librarian of Congress trying to regulate the used cellphone market."
An online petition to the White House to make the unlocking of phones legal again has already received more than 25,000 signatures:
"As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired," the petition explains. "Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
"We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision," the petition continues "and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal."
The worst-case scenario for an individual or civil offense could be as much as a $2,500 fine. As for those planning to profit off of the act or a criminal offense -- such as a cellphone reseller -- the fine could be as high as $500,000 and include prison time.
Cellphone Websites Based in USA or OWNERS living in USA of offshore websites will be Prosecuted to full extent of the law.. Customer's unlocking phones from now will be charged.. FBI will start raiding these people for the customer invoice list.
Education and knowing the new laws will prevent any accidental jail time..
Just want to let everyone know this...
This is all true, no B u l l $ h i t...
Be safe!!
-----------------
unlock baseband htc galaxy s3 prepaid iphone 3 4 5 6 4s ipad jailbreak rtsa samsung flashing firmware Samsung note 2 root tab unlocking androidnck CMEA unlocking codes 5.0.1 6.0 6.0.1 6.1 BlackBerry (Torch/Storm/Curve/Bold/Pearl), Samsung, Motorola, LG, Sony Ericsson, HTC, Huawei, Toshiba. Unlock AT&T Tmobile Vodafone Telus Digicel MetroPCS Orange Sprint Verizon unlock apple h20 Net10 Virgin Mobile Nextel Cingular Alltel Boostmobile pageplus Telcel MysimpleMobile Simple Mobile Network Unlocking NCK Calculator
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This belongs elsewhere...
gsm1999 said:
Unlocking Phones Now Illegal in USA
In October, 2012, the US Librarian of Congress changed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to prevent users from unlocking their phones and using them to access multiple service providers. However, the change also allowed for a temporary, 90-day period before the new legislation would be put in place, during which users would be free to unlock their devices.
That period ended on Saturday, 26 January, and it is now illegal for American smartphone users to unlock their phones without permission from their service providers.
Unlocking phones allows people travelling in foreign countries to access local mobile networks and avoid large bills from their domestic providers.
However, in its ruling on the changes to the DMCA, the US Federal Register explained that since several providers offered unlocked versions of phones already, there was no reason that users should be legally allowed to unlock phones themselves. In it's original ruling, the Federal Register explained:
"While it is true that not every wireless device is available unlocked, and wireless carriers' unlocking polices are not free from all restrictions, the record clearly demonstrates that there is a wide range of alternatives from which consumers may choose in order to obtain an unlocked wireless phone.
"Thus, the Register determined that with respect to newly purchased phones, proponents had not satisfied their burden of showing adverse effects related to a technological protection measure."
US service provider Verizon sells pre-unlocked versions of each phone it stocks, while AT&T unlocks any device which is out of contract. Many Us phone users unlock their devices in order to be able to use them abroad with a different network, allowing them to make big cost savings.
In response, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Mitch Stoltz told Engadget that the changes to the DMCA would deprive users who unlock their phones themselves of any legal defence, and reduce the value of the used phone market, where locked devices sell for less money:
"What's happening is not that the Copyright Office is declaring unlocking to be illegal, but rather that they're taking away a shield that unlockers could use in court if they get sued," Stoltz said. "This shows just how absurd the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is: a law that was supposed to stop the breaking of digital locks on copyrighted materials has led to the Librarian of Congress trying to regulate the used cellphone market."
An online petition to the White House to make the unlocking of phones legal again has already received more than 25,000 signatures:
"As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired," the petition explains. "Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
"We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision," the petition continues "and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal."
The worst-case scenario for an individual or civil offense could be as much as a $2,500 fine. As for those planning to profit off of the act or a criminal offense -- such as a cellphone reseller -- the fine could be as high as $500,000 and include prison time.
Cellphone Websites Based in USA or OWNERS living in USA of offshore websites will be Prosecuted to full extent of the law.. Customer's unlocking phones from now will be charged.. FBI will start raiding these people for the customer invoice list.
Education and knowing the new laws will prevent any accidental jail time..
Just want to let everyone know this...
This is all true, no B u l l $ h i t...
Be safe!!
-----------------
unlock baseband htc galaxy s3 prepaid iphone 3 4 5 6 4s ipad jailbreak rtsa samsung flashing firmware Samsung note 2 root tab unlocking androidnck CMEA unlocking codes 5.0.1 6.0 6.0.1 6.1 BlackBerry (Torch/Storm/Curve/Bold/Pearl), Samsung, Motorola, LG, Sony Ericsson, HTC, Huawei, Toshiba. Unlock AT&T Tmobile Vodafone Telus Digicel MetroPCS Orange Sprint Verizon unlock apple h20 Net10 Virgin Mobile Nextel Cingular Alltel Boostmobile pageplus Telcel MysimpleMobile Simple Mobile Network Unlocking NCK Calculator
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow that's crazy
This is not related to Note 2 directly. I've already moved a handful of these types of threads to XDA General, I suggest you take this conversation there OR in the Off Topic thread here.
Locked
After seeing the White House support ending the sim card unlocking ban I think we should start another one to petition the White House to ban the carriers form locking the boot loaders of their devices. Is this a good Idea?
Link to White House Answer
here is a link to the source of the white house answer:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/04/white-house-phone-unlock/
here is the full response to the petition:
Thank you for sharing your views on cell phone unlocking with us through your petition on our We the People platform. Last week the White House brought together experts from across government who work on telecommunications, technology, and copyright policy, and we're pleased to offer our response.
The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties. In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. 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. It's common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers' needs.
This is particularly important for secondhand or other mobile devices that you might buy or receive as a gift, and want to activate on the wireless network that meets your needs -- even if it isn't the one on which the device was first activated. All consumers deserve that flexibility.
The White House's position detailed in this response builds on some critical thinking done by the President's chief advisory Agency on these matters: the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). For more context and information on the technical aspects of the issue, you can review the NTIA's letter to the Library of Congress' Register of Copyrights (.pdf), voicing strong support for maintaining the previous exception to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for cell phone carrier unlocking.
Contrary to the NTIA's recommendation, the Librarian of Congress ruled that phones purchased after January of this year would no longer be exempted from the DMCA. The law gives the Librarian the authority to establish or eliminate exceptions -- and we respect that process. But it is also worth noting the statement the Library of Congress released today on the broader public policy concerns of the issue. Clearly the White House and Library of Congress agree that the DMCA exception process is a rigid and imperfect fit for this telecommunications issue, and we want to ensure this particular challenge for mobile competition is solved.
So where do we go from here?
The Obama Administration would support a range of approaches to addressing this issue, including narrow legislative fixes in the telecommunications space that make it clear: neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation.
We also believe the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with its responsibility for promoting mobile competition and innovation, has an important role to play here. FCC Chairman Genachowski today voiced his concern about mobile phone unlocking (.pdf), and to complement his efforts, NTIA will be formally engaging with the FCC as it addresses this urgent issue.
Finally, we would encourage mobile providers to consider what steps they as businesses can take to ensure that their customers can fully reap the benefits and features they expect when purchasing their devices.
We look forward to continuing to work with Congress, the wireless and mobile phone industries, and most importantly you -- the everyday consumers who stand to benefit from this greater flexibility -- to ensure our laws keep pace with changing technology, protect the economic competitiveness that has led to such innovation in this space, and offer consumers the flexibility and freedoms they deserve.
So I got this letter from The white house petition site saying this :
*
It's Time to Legalize Cell Phone Unlocking
By R. David Edelman, Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy
Thank you for sharing your views on cell phone unlocking with us through your petition*on our We the People platform. Last week the White House brought together experts from across government who work on telecommunications, technology, and copyright policy, and we're pleased to offer our response.
The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties. In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. 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. It's common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers' needs.
This is particularly important for secondhand or other mobile devices that you might buy or receive as a gift, and want to activate on the wireless network that meets your needs -- even if it isn't the one on which the device was first activated. All consumers deserve that flexibility.
The White House's position detailed in this response builds on some critical thinking done by the President's chief advisory Agency on these matters: the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). For more context and information on the technical aspects of the issue, you can review the NTIA's letter to the Library of Congress' Register of Copyrights (.pdf), voicing strong support for maintaining the previous exception to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for cell phone carrier unlocking.
Contrary to the NTIA's recommendation, the Librarian of Congress ruled that phones purchased after January of this year would no longer be exempted from the DMCA. The law gives the Librarian the authority to establish or eliminate exceptions -- and we respect that process. But it is also worth noting the statement the Library of Congress released*today on the broader public policy concerns of the issue. Clearly the White House and Library of Congress agree that the DMCA exception process is a rigid and imperfect fit for this telecommunications issue, and we want to ensure this particular challenge for mobile competition is solved.
So where do we go from here?
The Obama Administration would support a range of approaches to addressing this issue, including narrow legislative fixes in the telecommunications space that make it clear: neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation.
We also believe the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with its responsibility for promoting mobile competition and innovation, has an important role to play here. FCC Chairman Genachowski today voiced his concern about mobile phone unlocking (.pdf), and to complement his efforts, NTIA will be formally engaging with the FCC as it addresses this urgent issue.
Finally, we would encourage mobile providers to consider what steps they as businesses can take to ensure that their customers can fully reap the benefits and features they expect when purchasing their devices.
We look forward to continuing to work with Congress, the wireless and mobile phone industries, and most importantly you -- the everyday consumers who stand to benefit from this greater flexibility -- to ensure our laws keep pace with changing technology, protect the economic competitiveness that has led to such innovation in this space, and offer consumers the flexibility and freedoms they deserve.
Tell us what you think about this response and We the People.
Stay Connected
Stay connected to the White House by signing up for periodic email updates from President Obama and other senior administration.
The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111
SOOOO.....TIME TO UNLOCK!!!
*
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app
From what I gathered. Still will be illegal to unlock a phone if "bound by a service agreement" so if your under contract they can refuse to unlock your phone
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
Haha. I was just about to post the exact same thing as the OP. Just got the email too.
So if bound by a service agreement, they don't have to unlock the phone. But what's stopping anyone from doing it on their own?
+Bound for Valhalla!
Nice to see our government can work for us for a change.
sswb27 said:
Nice to see our government can work for us for a change.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They just wanted it off their desk so they can continue to raise our taxes and make their wallets fatter.
Probably just another Ilumminati trick lol
FCC May Approve T-Mobile/MetroPCS Merger Without Full Vote
According to a Communication Workers of America Union attorney, the Federal Communications Commission will approve the T-Mobile/MetroPCS merger without holding a vote. Monica Desai, attorney for the CWA says the deal will be approved “at the bureau level instead of the commission level.”*David Kuat, analyst for Stifel Nicolaus & Co., says this development, if true is a positive signal for the deals prospects.
“I assume it’s good” for the deal’s prospects and shows the merger is “basically non-controversial” aside from the union’s concerns about employment, David Kaut, a Washington- based analyst with Stifel Nicolaus & Co., said in an interview with Bloomberg. “No one thinks this is going to be blocked.”
That’s not to say everyone is in favor of this news as Debbie Goldman, telecommunications policy director for the CWA calls it “outrageous.” “It’s unprecedented that a deal that is this big and has raised controversies about its employment impacts would not be voted on by the full commission.”*For its part, the CWA is concerned the deal would cut “a significant number of jobs,” but failed to supply a figure in their March 4th filing to the FCC. T-Mobile says it plans to continue hiring at call centers, “increasing the number of overall US positions,” but also failed to give specific numbers. T-Mobile laid off close to 100 employees last week in efforts to cut overlapping staff in anticipation of the deals close.
As anticipated, T-Mobile and MetroPCS will continue to run as two separate brands and businesses maintaining two separate networks of retailer stores and dealer franchisees for at least the next two years.*The deal is expected to win full regulatory support in the hopes of boosting T-Mobile’s position in the market as regulators begin to look at AT&T and Verizon as having too much power.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium