Related
Ok so my younger cousin just bought an EVO from a friend at school and it is running on boost but it is Unrooted and S-On how the hell can I get this thing back on Sprint any help even a link is extremely helpful and greatly appreciated thanks in advance for any help
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
cloningisillegalpeople said:
the evo being on boost is illegal....
Cell Phone Fraud
Cellular fraud is defined as the unauthorized use, tampering or manipulation of a cellular phone or service. At one time, cloning of cellular phones accounted for a large portion of cell fraud. As a result, the Wireless Telephone Protection Act of 1998 expanded prior law to criminalize the use, possession, manufacture or sale of cloning hardware or software. Currently, the primary type of cell fraud is subscriber fraud. The cellular industry estimates that carriers lose more than $150 million per year due to subscriber fraud.
What Is Subscriber Fraud?
Subscriber fraud occurs when someone signs up for service with fraudulently-obtained customer information or false identification. Lawbreakers obtain your personal information and use it to set up a cell phone account in your name.
Resolving subscriber fraud could develop into a long and difficult process for victims. It may take time to discover that subscriber fraud has occurred and an even longer time to prove that you did not incur the debts. Call your carrier if you think you have been a victim of subscriber fraud.
What Is Cell Phone Cloning Fraud?
Every cell phone is supposed to have a unique factory-set electronic serial number (ESN) and telephone number (MIN). A cloned cell phone is one that has been reprogrammed to transmit the ESN and MIN belonging to another (legitimate) cell phone. Unscrupulous people can obtain valid ESN/MIN combinations by illegally monitoring the radio wave transmissions from the cell phones of legitimate subscribers. After cloning, both the legitimate and the fraudulent cell phones have the same ESN/MIN combination and cellular systems cannot distinguish the cloned cell phone from the legitimate one. The legitimate phone user then gets billed for the cloned phone’s calls. Call your carrier if you think you have been a victim of cloning fraud.
Summary
Remember, to prevent subscriber fraud, make sure that your personal information is kept private when purchasing anything in a store or on the Internet. Protecting your personal information is your responsibility. For cell phone cloning fraud, the cellular equipment manufacturing industry has deployed authentication systems that have proven to be a very effective countermeasure to cloning. Call your cellular phone carrier for more information.
For More Information
For more information on protecting your personal information, see the FCC’s Protecting Your Privacy guide. For information about other communications issues, visit the FCC’s Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau website, or contact the FCC’s Consumer Center by calling 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) voice or 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) TTY; faxing 1-866-418-0232; or writing to:
Federal Communications Commission
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks J. Edgar...
I'm glad he informed us about the law and the FCC. I'm going to unroot my phone now. I had no idea I was doin something I shouldn't. Thank you so much!
We're comin from a pure power source.
I don't think being rooted is illegal. From what I heard it used to be illegal though and a couple of months ago I went into a sprint store and the manager of the store had a rooted EVO 4G with a custom rom lol was kind of funny.
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium
Yea my sarcasm doesn't really come through in my typing
We're comin from a pure power source.
metalfan78 said:
Yea my sarcasm doesn't really come through in my typing
We're comin from a pure power source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha
Sent from my rooted EVO 4G with Sense 3.0 and running a v6 Supercharger
Hit that thanks button if I helped.
Hmmm...could be tricky. Since its s-on you could try running a ruu but Idk if that will fix it. Getting a phone to run on boost requires rewriting the nv memory which I'm not sure a ruu restore can do. Correct me if I'm wrong. Unless whoever rewrote the NV has the original values backed up, you maybe sol.
Sent From My Pocket
In my now locked other thread it was pointed out that changing the IMEI is illegal. Could someone point me to the law that covers this for the USA? I haven't been having much luck with google.
If you like you must know
Read it
http://www.wirelessforums.org/alt-i...-anysmartphone-even-sans-contract-104959.html
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
I don't see a link to the law in that thread. I have seen many people say that it is illegal, but I have yet to find any US law about it. Is everyone making an assumption here?
Oh its certainly illegal. You'll get more time for changing your imei than you would if you slapped your wife. Bad example? oh well
Ends said:
Oh its certainly illegal. You'll get more time for changing your imei than you would if you slapped your wife. Bad example? oh well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is my point. Everyone says this but can't seem to point to the law. I am looking for the actual law that covers this. Can someone point this out?
I do not and will not claim to know the answer to this question, but i would imagine the place to start looking for this type of information would be the FCC.
If your so determined to see this "law" a very simple google search yeilds the answer.
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.3186.IS:
Here is your answer now can we get this closed because I'm very opposed to changing imei number.
3 weeks ago my cousin was killed over his phone and the imei number of the phone is what helped catch the scumbag.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium
I'm sorry for your loss. And thank you for settling this.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747
imei's are used for good, but sadly carriers use them to squeeze extra money out of you by tracking you and forcing extra services on you..
there's plenty of people who have posted imei tweaks, but they get pulled right away.. imei changing isn't illegal everywhere, but sadly it is in us/uk, so xda is a bad place to try and find such things..
android china is fair game tho!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
there is no such law in the usa ANYWHERE but still its hard to find info on it
meleii said:
If your so determined to see this "law" a very simple google search yeilds the answer.
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.3186.IS:
Here is your answer now can we get this closed because I'm very opposed to changing imei number.
3 weeks ago my cousin was killed over his phone and the imei number of the phone is what helped catch the scumbag.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That looks like law to me.
---------- Post added at 09:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:35 AM ----------
boricuastar77 said:
there is no such law in the usa ANYWHERE but still its hard to find info on it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
.maybe you should have read all the posts on this thread
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-121 here is law you looking for but i don't know how illigal it is.
As far as I'm concerned,
A lot of people would fall under the exception "`(d) Exception- Subsection (b) shall not apply to the manufacturer of a mobile device or a person who repairs or refurbishes a mobile device unless the manufacturer or person knows that the mobile device or part involved is stolen.'."
since the phone (hopefully) is not stolen. You can consider yourself as the person refurbishing your own phone.
Then again, you're probably not going to find the information you want (I want it too) on this site, or any other site out there, because it will have international repercussions (other countries explicitly make IMEI modifications illegal).
Then again, I find it stupid that information on "how to do this" is not widely available - information for a lot of "illegal" stuff is already widely available ._.
Maybe some nice guy out there will start fiddling around with android's IMEI systems, and let us know about it. After all, the IMEI is something the manufacturer maintains, and corporations use, not something that the government enforces. Technology (and pretty much everything else) moves along way too fast for the political system to catch up to it.
meleii said:
If your so determined to see this "law" a very simple google search yeilds the answer.
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.3186.IS:
Here is your answer now can we get this closed because I'm very opposed to changing imei number.
3 weeks ago my cousin was killed over his phone and the imei number of the phone is what helped catch the scumbag.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3186
Code:
S. 3186 (112th): Mobile Device Theft Deterrence Act of 2012
Introduced:
May 15, 2012 (112th Congress, 2011–2013)
Sponsor:
Sen. Charles Schumer [D-NY]
Status:
[B][U]Died[/U][/B] (Referred to Committee)
next google search? I've tried... can't get any straight answer so far
(the bill makes "modifing IMEI" = federal crime... which suggests it's NOT a federal crime right now to modify IMEI......?)
could still be a state/local crime (unlikely), or something that's covered under civil law and not criminal
@mods, this thread is healthy discussion about whether it's legal/illegal to modify IMEI (in USA), not a "how-to modify IMEI tutorial"... dont close it, move it to general topic?
It is illegal and has been for many years.
Wayne Tech S-III
zelendel said:
It is illegal and has been for many years.
Wayne Tech S-III
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
source?
(I want something like the Congress bill posted above, but something that's actually active or passed by Congress)
I just see "oh, its illegal..."... who said it was illegal?
Is there some explicit law against it?
Or some cursory FCC regulation that might prohibit it, and was never explicitly outlawed, or there was a court case that set precedence for it?
As I said, if we need a bill to make tampering IMEI a federal crime, this means it's currently NOT a federal crime to modify IMEI?
----- part 2 of my google sleuthing-----
According to FCC Section 22.919, modifying ESNs is illegal...
However, ESN and IMEI are not the same (ESN identifies both the physical phone AND the phone subscriber, while IMEI only identifies the physical phone, with the SIM card providing the phone subscriber identifier)
Also, FCC 22.919 was repealed in 2003
http://etler.com/FCC/pdf/WT/WT 01-108/FCC 04-22.pdf
Search for "The Commission appropriately removed section 22.919 which set out electronic serial
number (ESN) hardware design requirements"
After reviewing the original purpose of the rule,
the advanced fraud control technologies measures developed to combat fraud since the adoption of the
rule, as well as comments submitted in the proceeding, the Commission concluded that the ESN
requirements were no longer necessary as a preventative measure against cellular cloning fraud. 127 The
Commission therefore removed section 22.919 of its rules.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will try to hunt the the FCC regulation on on it. Been awhile since I needed to post it as this is common knowledge among phone developers. It was passed a long time ago to prevent cloning.
Here is one article but I will find the one that states IMEI directly. This one states pretty much everything done here is illegal lol
Wayne Tech S-III
Any law any country... Changing IMEI is a criminal offence... God forbid if you change your IMEI to that of any known criminal... You think its worth the risk?
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III
diablo009 said:
Any law any country... Changing IMEI is a criminal offence... God forbid if you change your IMEI to that of any known criminal... You think its worth the risk?
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, am I allowed to change my Phone A's IMEI to my Phone B's IMEI, with both phones legally bought?
this is just a curiosity exercise... and I'm asking "WHERE IN THE USA <insert code of law, FCC guidelines...> is modifying IMEI illegal"... you haven't answered my question
example: In UK, it is illegal due to this Mobile Telephones (Re-programming) Act 2002 passed in 2002.. but then there's a loophole (i can modify IMEI if I created the device, or the manufacture allowed me to)... (I havent read any of the amendments to see if those loopholes are changed)
^^ I want someone to answer me in that format, with reference to USA laws
Illegal?
While I am sorry for your loss meleii, that was simply a bill that didn't make it past a senate vote....much like SOPA and CISPA. While I am glad that a murderer was brought to justice, that isn't the purpose of the IMEI, any more that a session cookie is to keep you from cheating at online games. It helps sometimes, but that's incidental to it's actual purpose.
I can think of several reasons that someone might want to change their IMEI, like having a smartphone but only wanting a voice plan, or for that matter using a tablet's IMEI to have a data only plan. If you've made the jump to full on internet communication (Skype, SIP and the like) then a voice/text plan is simply a subsidy for everyone else's usage.
That being said, it is illegal in several countries, most notably the UK. It is also against every carriers EULA, but so is almost everything that is done in these hallowed halls....like wifi and bluetooth tethering without paying for a plan that includes it, installing software OSs on devices that were never intended to have it, or releasing the DRM deathgrip on content.
Saying that something is bad, wrong, immoral, or even just a piss poor idea that is bound to cause headaches for yourself and damage the image of the modding community is one thing, but to say something is illegal without being able to produce a law doesn't hold up.
If anyone does find the text prohibiting this in the wild, like buried in the text of the DMCA, or in an obscure FCC regulation, I stand ready to apologize and take back everything I've said.
Like any useful tool, it's only as good or bad as the people using it. I've used my lock picks to help friends get into their homes when they got locked out, and thieves use them to get into peoples homes to steal. I don't condone or make excuses for people dealing in the stolen phone market, but they aren't the only reason for this to exist.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01...ile-phones-becomes-illegal-in-the-us-tomorrow
I think it applies to a carrier unlock., not a bootloader for custom roms.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
"You have 48 hours."
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
Carrier unlocking is what it's talking about. This is also further proof that the the United States is has become "by the corporation for the corporation".
" Unlocking a phone frees it from restrictions that keep the device from working on more than one carrier's network, allowing it run on other networks that use the same wireless standard. This can be useful to international travellers who need their phones to work on different networks. Other people just like the freedom of being able to switch carriers as they please. "
Assimilated using the interface that interacts with the advanced internet.
unlocking becomes the new jailbreaking lol
I didn't see this thread, hopefully a Mod will have mercy on me and delete my thread.
The basis of this law being passed is so weak that it really does make me quite concerned that the rooting community is going to come into focus before long. The judge ruled that unlocking a phone infringes on copyright laws, which it really doesn't, and I suspect that long term the rooting community will be a target. You can already see from companies like Motorola and now HTC that this is an area of concern for them.
Personally I am concerned for it, but would hope that companies that openly support rooting like Samsung and Google will come to our aid.
If the government DOES take action against rooting, I would hope that a judge would look at an OS like Android and rule that rooting cannot by definition be illegal since everything is open source. But we all know how that is likely to go.
I registered and signed the petition. Not sure if it'll do much, but hope it catches attention.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda premium
It only applies to carrier unlocking, it does not affect unlock bootloaders.
latindor17 said:
It only applies to carrier unlocking, it does not affect unlock bootloaders.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With an immediate outlook you are absolutely correct. The problem here is the precedent that is being set.
If courts rule that simply unlocking a phone that is no longer "leased" per the terms of a contract is copyright infringement, there is not a huge jump for the courts to then apply this to the rooting community. Companies are already laying groundwork against custom ROMs, like HTC, Motorola, and to an extent Apple with the jailbreaking community. This could snowball in the future and make life really miserable for anyone wanting to root.
Copypasta from other thread.
Technically, the issue I see here is that you're 'leasing the phone' from the telco. This is apparent because if you cancel your service before the contract expires, you pay a 'fee' associated with a 'termination'. If you don't return the phone they 'gave' you, you are also charged another fee. They technically 'own' the phone until you've fulfilled the contract (afaik), therefore, they can legally tell you 'you can't use this phone on another service provider until you fulfill the terms you agreed to with us'.
Now if that contract later on specifies 'you shall not use software on your device unless it is specifically approved by acme telco.' or the like, then I could see a strong case for 'rooting is illegal' as you technically 'agree' to the service contract when you purchase service from that provider.
NOTE: You can still purchase unlocked phones from the service provider (or manufacturer) but they're usually more expensive (you know that discount you get from sprint? that's cause they pay for the rest of the phone, in the hopes that you won't default on the contract you sign.)
I like how you added in the part about "no longer "leased" per the terms of a contract" as that does change the argument you present, however, that's not what's at issue here. What's at issue here is you 'carrier unlocking' a phone that you specifically agreed to use on their network, so you can use it on another network (technically, this is a breech of contract, and technically you've defaulted if you do this by not following the terms of the contract).
benmatlock said:
Copypasta from other thread.
Technically, the issue I see here is that you're 'leasing the phone' from the telco. This is apparent because if you cancel your service before the contract expires, you pay a 'fee' associated with a 'termination'. If you don't return the phone they 'gave' you, you are also charged another fee. They technically 'own' the phone until you've fulfilled the contract (afaik), therefore, they can legally tell you 'you can't use this phone on another service provider until you fulfill the terms you agreed to with us'.
Now if that contract later on specifies 'you shall not use software on your device unless it is specifically approved by acme telco.' or the like, then I could see a strong case for 'rooting is illegal' as you technically 'agree' to the service contract when you purchase service from that provider.
NOTE: You can still purchase unlocked phones from the service provider (or manufacturer) but they're usually more expensive (you know that discount you get from sprint? that's cause they pay for the rest of the phone, in the hopes that you won't default on the contract you sign.)
I like how you added in the part about "no longer "leased" per the terms of a contract" as that does change the argument you present, however, that's not what's at issue here. What's at issue here is you 'carrier unlocking' a phone that you specifically agreed to use on their network, so you can use it on another network (technically, this is a breech of contract, and technically you've defaulted if you do this by not following the terms of the contract).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I have read on this legislation is that regardless of whether or not you are still in the contract you may not unlock the subsidized phone sold to you by the phone company. I am the first to admit my understanding of this is far from perfect, but what I have read indicates that you CANNOT unlock the phone regardless of whether or not you are in the contract. This is, in my opinion, an area that the telephone companies should not be able to regulate. I took the "lease" terminology from the post you referenced earlier. In reality this is not a lease as much as it is a "lease to own" situation. The company does not request the phone back after the contract expires and cedes ownership of the property at that point to the individual. Under these circumstances the contract to use the phone specifically on their network is fulfilled.
I agree with you completely that while still under contract this is a completely valid legislation, and users should understand the terms of the contract, but it has also been reported extensively that the legislation extends beyond the end of the contract and allows phone companies to enforce these copyright laws after the expiration of the contract. THIS is the precedent that concerns me for the rooting community.
Xiutehcuhtli said:
What I have read on this legislation is that regardless of whether or not you are still in the contract you may not unlock the subsidized phone sold to you by the phone company. I am the first to admit my understanding of this is far from perfect, but what I have read indicates that you CANNOT unlock the phone regardless of whether or not you are in the contract. This is, in my opinion, an area that the telephone companies should not be able to regulate. I took the "lease" terminology from the post you referenced earlier. In reality this is not a lease as much as it is a "lease to own" situation. The company does not request the phone back after the contract expires and cedes ownership of the property at that point to the individual. Under these circumstances the contract to use the phone specifically on their network is fulfilled.
I agree with you completely that while still under contract this is a completely valid legislation, and users should understand the terms of the contract, but it has also been reported extensively that the legislation extends beyond the end of the contract and allows phone companies to enforce these copyright laws after the expiration of the contract. THIS is the precedent that concerns me for the rooting community.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, what I have read on the legislation (just got done reading the jist of the part about phones) from the verbage, it implies that carriers (like AT&T for example) offer 'unlocking provisions' that allow you to unlock the device after the expiration of the contract.
benmatlock said:
Well, what I have read on the legislation (just got done reading the jist of the part about phones) from the verbage, it implies that carriers (like AT&T for example) offer 'unlocking provisions' that allow you to unlock the device after the expiration of the contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will read some more at work tomorrow. Too late for me to put that thinking cap on.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
deleted
VoluntaryMan said:
It's not illegal for me since I'm using Ting which doesn't frown upon customers running custom ROMs or rooting routing their phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not illegal to use custom ROMs yet for anyone.
Unlocking phones is still legal for phones purchased before the 27th. For most people, this law will only affect you with the next phone that you buy.
Thinking about this..
How would they ever be able to figure out you've done this? Are they going to call other Service Providers and ask "hey man, you got this imei on your network??"
They aren't going after the users. Just the sellers of unlocked phone as its the process of unlocking that's supposedly now illegal.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
I would say at this point for all of us here in this forum at least would understand that Sprint as our carrier as well as Verizon will not ever ever allow a non carrier specific ESN on there network , even if say someone were to flash one of our devices to cricket or metro they would no longer be allowed to switch that device back.
So this law that is highly geared towards aggravated theft and people being hurt even killed over there very expensive smartphone (let's be totally honest iSuck ) and with out any hassle putting it on a different carrier and not be traced, has nothing to do with the rooting community or custom ROMs especially here on xda where it is moderated to not allow copyright infringement or taking credit for any company's work
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
▀▄► 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
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