Develop Bugs

Anyone care to discuss unlocked phones? I hope this isn't true.

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 Now Illegal

So with this new legislation claiming that unlocking a cell phone infringes on copyright laws, how long before the question of rooting comes before a judge?
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. Would just like some thoughts from everyone.

Xiutehcuhtli said:
So with this new legislation claiming that unlocking a cell phone infringes on copyright laws, how long before the question of rooting comes before a judge?
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. Would just like some thoughts from everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
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.)

Make Unlocking Cell Phones Legal

The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.
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.
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.
The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.
We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7

Socializing the Cause
If you really want your support to count then be sure to promote this petition by linking it to your Facebook and/or Twitter accounts.

*bump*
Just two days left...I know we can do this! Please promote the petition on your Twitter and Facebook. We are so close!

:good:

We Did It!
100k signatures and climbing. Boom!
Thanks to everyone who supported this petition!

Qapla'!
Success!
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/its-time-legalize-cell-phone-unlocking

Keep unlocking legal.

In case you have not heard
this is important
We the people, have less than one week, to get 30,000 more votes.
lets prove to the world that democracy works.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
This is what the petition says, if you don't feel so inclined to click the link.
The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.
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.
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.
The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.
We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7

Alright Ladies and Gents

After spending an hour on the phone with Motorola, and being escalated five different times i finally spoke with someone who actually knew what they were talking about. The gentleman i spoke with said that there currently is no software available to unlock the BL for our Droid Turbo 2 how ever, they have my email on file and i was assured by the supervisor on duty for the tech dept that i would receive an email as soon as the BL unlock was available. So unfortunately unless the Devs here can find something, we are going to have to wait for Motorola to release there official unlock.
I will keep everyone posted here and as soon as i hear anything you will be the first to know.

I am curious, according to the FCC FAQ: "Your postpaid device is eligible to be unlocked by a participating provider after you have fulfilled the applicable service contract, completed the device installment plan or paid an early termination fee. Your prepaid device is eligible to be unlocked by a participating provider no later than one year after activation, consistent with reasonable time, payment, or usage requirements." It goes on to say that, "...providers have agreed to unlock eligible devices, provide you with unlocking instructions, or initiate an unlocking request to the device manufacturer – or provide an easily understood explanation of denial – within two business days of receiving an unlock request." For myself Verizon participates in the FCC's CTIA. My question stand has anyone gone through the formal channels with this and if so what was the result and if denied did they notify the FCC via their complaint section below the FAQ?
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/cell-phone-unlocking-faqs
http://www.ctia.org/policy-initiatives/voluntary-guidelines/consumer-code-for-wireless-service

My bloods curdling hearing the mear fact that we must talk to motorola's support...

nmbenson said:
I am curious, according to the FCC FAQ: "Your postpaid device is eligible to be unlocked by a participating provider after you have fulfilled the applicable service contract, completed the device installment plan or paid an early termination fee. Your prepaid device is eligible to be unlocked by a participating provider no later than one year after activation, consistent with reasonable time, payment, or usage requirements." It goes on to say that, "...providers have agreed to unlock eligible devices, provide you with unlocking instructions, or initiate an unlocking request to the device manufacturer – or provide an easily understood explanation of denial – within two business days of receiving an unlock request." For myself Verizon participates in the FCC's CTIA. My question stand has anyone gone through the formal channels with this and if so what was the result and if denied did they notify the FCC via their complaint section below the FAQ?
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/cell-phone-unlocking-faqs
http://www.ctia.org/policy-initiatives/voluntary-guidelines/consumer-code-for-wireless-service
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this refers to carrier unlocking, say, moving a gsm locked phone from at&t to t-mobile. now with that regulation, most phones aren't locked any more, or are easily unlocked. does not affect the bootloader at all unfortunately

Man, the US cellular device market needs to be shaken up. ALL the OEMs need to band together - pull all devices from all carriers, make devices that're compatible with all carriers, and sell 'em at slightly over-cost through normal retail channels, IE: Walmart, BestBuy, Target, Amazon, Newegg, etc. Leave the carriers with nothing to sell but their service. No more locked-down devices. No more carrier lock-in.
I love my DT2, but every day that goes by without a 6.0 update, especially considering the kernel source is out, is a day closer to me buying an X Pure and selling the DT2.

Unless laws change, the carriers do NOT have to activate just any Ole phone that is compatible on their network... It in their best interest to usually, but if manufacturers tried to bully/strong arm them they could fix that very quickly...
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk