Develop Bugs

Let's try to push AT&T to unlock our phones using FCC

Guys,
I was researching about unlocking my Lumia 900 since april, just like 100s of you. I was looking over nokia forums and one of the guys recommends filing complains with fcc. He even gave a link - http://www.fcc.gov/complaints
Those who purchased the phone for a full price, please fill up the form and submit. If there will be a lot of us, fcc might be able help with that.
He says that you should receive a call from AT&T very soon if FCC will decide to help you with that.

I looked in to this briefly, and I don't think unlock requests are covered. It might be viable after 53 days when at&t says they'll give codes.

We've been around this block over and over again. AT&T is not obligated to unlock your phone even if you bought it at full price, and FCC will tell you the same.

Is there any other method to unlock lumia 900 beside the unlocking code? At least if some one trying to unlock this phone would be fantastic.
Sent from my Nokia Lumia 900 using xda app-developers app

pk-air said:
Is there any other method to unlock lumia 900 beside the unlocking code? At least if some one trying to unlock this phone would be fantastic.
Sent from my Nokia Lumia 900 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No there isn't, and anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying or trying to scam out of your money. Just wait a while longer, AT&T will start unlocking them beginning Oct 8th when exclusivity period expires.

AnyMal said:
No there isn't, and anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying or trying to scam out of your money. Just wait a while longer, AT&T will start unlocking them beginning Oct 8th when exclusivity period expires.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not really sure if they will start on october 8. They already lied to me in the store that there would be no problem to unlock it.
And yeah - they are doing illegal thing by refusing to unlock the phone. They don't have any legal reason to keep it locked.

zoom2d said:
I am not really sure if they will start on october 8. They already lied to me in the store that there would be no problem to unlock it.
And yeah - they are doing illegal thing by refusing to unlock the phone. They don't have any legal reason to keep it locked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I had a dollar every time we went over this It is NOT illegal for them to refuse to unlock the phone. There is no law in US that states mobile operators are obligated to unlock phones to work on other operators. It absolutely doesn't matter whether you bought phone on contract or paid full price.

AnyMal said:
We've been around this block over and over again. AT&T is not obligated to unlock your phone even if you bought it at full price, and FCC will tell you the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is 100% false. If you buy it for full price and they tell you it can work on another network they either owe you a 100% refund or an unlock code. Fraud is fraud.
AnyMal said:
If I had a dollar every time we went over this It is NOT illegal for them to refuse to unlock the phone. There is no law in US that states mobile operators are obligated to unlock phones to work on other operators. It absolutely doesn't matter whether you bought phone on contract or paid full price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fraud is illegal. If you pay full price and they tell you it is unlocked or can be unlocked over the phone they must refund or give the unlock code. Not sure why people think the law doesn't apply to the telecom business. The problem is the methods for forcing at&t to do the right thing were spelled out... not sure if anyone actually followed the instructions.

sitizenx said:
This is 100% false. If you buy it for full price and they tell you it can work on another network they either owe you a 100% refund or an unlock code. Fraud is fraud.
Fraud is illegal. If you pay full price and they tell you it is unlocked or can be unlocked over the phone they must refund or give the unlock code. Not sure why people think the law doesn't apply to the telecom business. The problem is the methods for forcing at&t to do the right thing were spelled out... not sure if anyone actually followed the instructions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please provide a link to AT&T terms of service where it explicitly tells you that AT&T is obligated to unlock your phone when you pay full price. Please provide a link to Attorney General, Consumer Protection Agency, BBB, Federal Trade Commission, or any other regulating body that specifies mobile carriers MUST unlock phones.
I'll spare you trouble, you can't find such information because it doesn't exist. Stop making a fool out of yourself and trying to fool others. Do your homework before telling someone they're "100% false", otherwise you're just making yourself look ridiculous.

AnyMal said:
Please provide a link to AT&T terms of service where it explicitly tells you...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The at&t terms or service are irrelevant. You realize there are numerous people that bought the phone for full price and never signed up for "service" with at&t. You realize that, right? Right? If you walk in and pay full price after the salesperson says the phone will work on your network they have to either make it work on your network or give a refund. This isn't rocket science.

sitizenx said:
The at&t terms or service are irrelevant. You realize there are numerous people that bought the phone for full price and never signed up for "service" with at&t. You realize that, right? Right? If you walk in and pay full price after the salesperson says the phone will work on your network they have to either make it work on your network or give a refund. This isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure if you're really inept or just trolling. It absolutely doesn't matter if you sign up for AT&T service just like it doesn't matter if you pay full price. When you buy AT&T phone you buy AT&T phone, meaning that it is only guaranteed to work on AT&T. Not unlocked, not T-Mobile, not Sprint - AT&T. Get it? Stop trying to make a point, you don't have one.

Dear friends, I only have one thing to ask in relation to this whole discussion. For people who signed a two-year contract with AT & T and that will necessarily fulfill the contract, what difference it makes to AT & T if the phone will be unlocked or not? The commitment already exists, the contract must be fulfilled unconditionally, then why keep the devices blocked? Sadism??

sitizenx said:
The at&t terms or service are irrelevant. You realize there are numerous people that bought the phone for full price and never signed up for "service" with at&t. You realize that, right? Right? If you walk in and pay full price after the salesperson says the phone will work on your network they have to either make it work on your network or give a refund. This isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds to me like your ***** should be with the salesperson. Sales Rule #1: Tell them whatever they want to hear. And I think the phone does "work". Just not completely.
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express Pro

sitizenx said:
This is 100% false. If you buy it for full price and they tell you it can work on another network they either owe you a 100% refund or an unlock code. Fraud is fraud.
Fraud is illegal. If you pay full price and they tell you it is unlocked or can be unlocked over the phone they must refund or give the unlock code. Not sure why people think the law doesn't apply to the telecom business. The problem is the methods for forcing at&t to do the right thing were spelled out... not sure if anyone actually followed the instructions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're implying the Telco's run an illegal business and its up to us to enforce it? Pretty sure that's not what you mean, but it sure sounds like it. in the past 5 years this has received tons of scrutiny by the FCC. Any yet, the phones stay locked. That should tell you something.
I think Anymal says it with his comment about locked and unlocked. Actually, AT&T doesn't sell Unlocked phones. They sell Contract and NO Contract phones. But no matter, At&T is still AT&T

alodar1 said:
You're implying the Telco's run an illegal business and its up to us to enforce it? Pretty sure that's not what you mean, but it sure sounds like it. in the past 5 years this has received tons of scrutiny by the FCC. Any yet, the phones stay locked. That should tell you something.
I think Anymal says it with his comment about locked and unlocked. Actually, AT&T doesn't sell Unlocked phones. They sell Contract and NO Contract phones. But no matter, At&T is still AT&T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a classic case of what happens when assumptions replace common sense. People tend to assume that buying phones off contract entitles them to remove carrier restrictions, at carrier's expense. Of course, this is a completely false assumption. Carriers are not going to stop anyone from leaving, they just won't help them to do so. You were sold AT&T phone and that is exactly what you received; no more, no less. Salesman lied? Never heard of that appening before silly but if that's the case take it up with their management.
I am still puzzeld as to what breeds these assumptions, but misinformation is so persistent that many less-educated consumers (and apparently some members) are treating it as gospel.

mol14 said:
Dear friends, I only have one thing to ask in relation to this whole discussion. For people who signed a two-year contract with AT & T and that will necessarily fulfill the contract, what difference it makes to AT & T if the phone will be unlocked or not? The commitment already exists, the contract must be fulfilled unconditionally, then why keep the devices blocked? Sadism??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well a lot of us didn't put a deposit down when we got the phone. Mine was "free." I paid a $30 "activation fee." They can't just let you walk out the door with a $500 device for $30 and not have some controls in place. Yes they have a contract but if you break the contract what are they going to do? The only thing they can do is report you to a credit bureau and turn your account over to a collections agency. Even then in a lot of cases it's doubtful they will collect much.
If you pay full price? Well then yeah I have no idea about that. First of all very few people would do that in the United States and I can't imagine how it hurts at&t. That's what is so confusing about the deceptive sales practices and the obstinance.
jimski said:
Sounds to me like your ***** should be with the salesperson. Sales Rule #1: Tell them whatever they want to hear. And I think the phone does "work". Just not completely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have any "*****" as you put it. I have no need to unlock my phone at this time. I was just debunking misinformation on the internet as a public service. "Tell them whatever they want to hear" will get you in legal trouble. I've had this routine pulled on me and the companies that did it ended up paying me THOUSANDS. The problem is there is so much misinformation out there people simply do not know how to pursue these matters.
alodar1 said:
You're implying the Telco's run an illegal business...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're implying Telcos never get sanctioned for doing illegal things?!
AnyMal said:
This is a classic case of what happens when assumptions...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually several people physically went into at&t stores and were told that they could buy the Lumia 900 for the full price and get the phone unlocked and use it once they got back to Canada. Someone in another thread actually posted images of their unlocked at&t Lumia working with their Canadian sim once at&t provided the unlock code to them. No assumptions.
Folks it doesn't matter whether you are discussing phones or widgets. If someone tells you a device will work in a particular manner at at your home location and it doesn't they have to either refund you or make it work. I'm not sure why people are confused about this. Bizarre.

But don't locked AT&T Lumias work on other networks? Just without LTE (and sometimes 3G) and MMS in most cases. So if I tell you, "sure, this phone will work on other networks", am I really lying. Or just not telling the truth.
AT&T pays cash for an "exclusive period" on a phone. They have every right to prevent you from doing whatever you choose with it till they say it's ok. I'm cool with that.
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express Pro

I purchased a Lumia 900 from AT&T and threw a att.mvno sim in it, downloaded the Nokia Network Setup app from marketplace, configured it and everything works just great... very happy

jimski said:
But don't locked AT&T Lumias work on other networks? Just without LTE (and sometimes 3G) and MMS in most cases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No man. Not sure where you got that idea. There have been numerous posts about this topic. Educate yourself.
jimski said:
AT&T pays cash for an "exclusive period" on a phone. They have every right to prevent you from doing whatever you choose with it till they say it's ok. I'm cool with that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't give them the right to lie. If the salesperson says you may pay full price for this phone and we will unlock it so you can use it in Canada in October that is perfectly fine. A bit illogical but totally legal.
jimski said:
So if I tell you, "sure, this phone will work on other networks", am I really lying. Or just not telling the truth.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BOTH. Get a dictionary.
halfevildruid said:
I purchased a Lumia 900 from AT&T and threw a att.mvno sim in it, downloaded the Nokia Network Setup app from marketplace, configured it and everything works just great... very happy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What in God's holy name does that have to do with this thread.

Unlocking Cellphones Becomes Illegal Saturday. Better hurry if you plan on switching.

In October 2012, the Librarian of Congress, who determines exemptions to a strict anti-hacking law called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), decided that unlocking mobile phones would no longer be allowed. But the librarian provided a 90-day window during which people could still buy a phone and unlock it. That window closes on January 26.
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.
http://www.livescience.com/26541-unlocking-cellphones-becomes-illegal.html
Maybe this might wake some people up since it is tyranny that directly effects you .

Glad I already unlocked my note 2
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda app-developers app

A lot of things are illegal but still get done. It is always a risk. I am sure this will not be enforced highly
Sent from my SGH-T889

I agree
Sent from my Vivid 4G using Tapatalk 2

Nolenm04 said:
Glad I already unlocked my note 2
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can our device be unlocked without another carriers sim card?

Some_dude36 said:
Can our device be unlocked without another carriers sim card?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes there is multiple threads on how to do it
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda app-developers app

Thanks,
Looks like it is only illegal if you are still on contract and no worries if you paid full retail.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda app-developers app

Some_dude36 said:
In October 2012, the Librarian of Congress, who determines exemptions to a strict anti-hacking law called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), decided that unlocking mobile phones would no longer be allowed. But the librarian provided a 90-day window during which people could still buy a phone and unlock it. That window closes on January 26.
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.
http://www.livescience.com/26541-unlocking-cellphones-becomes-illegal.html
Maybe this might wake some people up since it is tyranny that directly effects you .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your joking right? Jesus Christ, what has this country become. I have the right to choose what carrier to use my phone on and if it requires unlocking IDGAF

JOSE89178 said:
Your joking right? Jesus Christ, what has this country become. I have the right to choose what carrier to use my phone on and if it requires unlocking IDGAF
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
a country where a company can sue any other company that has rounded edges on their products... 'merica
one big question I have is whether or not the government will track websites such as xda and arrest people that tell other how to unlock their phones... you do know that "hackers" get more jail time than child rapists

eurohomie said:
a country where a company can sue any other company that has rounded edges on their products... 'merica
one big question I have is whether or not the government will track websites such as xda and arrest people that tell other how to unlock their phones... you do know that "hackers" get more jail time than child rapists
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha thats true. Whats next? Using cases is gonna be illegal cause it has the same shape as the phone? Or better yet, using a different charger. & Yea they probably might start monitoring XDA Forums for "Illegal Activity".

Well, that settles it for me...I'm going to buy only unlocked
phones directly from China...way more cheaper and these
gready *****s (it all comes to money for them) can kiss my
hard earned money good buy...

And so it begins - we are all going to be bound by the testicles by carriers, just as we are by the gas pump. Once an accessory becomes a necessity in our society, somebody wants to control it, for monetary purposes. Whether it be by law (lobbyists), or policy (in a way, law)...
Umm, well all I have to say is I saw this coming. Here is an interesting thread/article I wrote almost exactly a year ago.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1475122
Furthermore, I'll say that this new "law" sounds like somebody being upset over T-Mobile taking iPhone contracts away from them... and doing it with half the cost to the consumer. It appears they are the ones being targeted by this.
This country is sad.

If I paid for it I'll do as I like .... This is bs ...
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium

mrufokid said:
If I paid for it I'll do as I like .... This is bs ...
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We'll see how far this law goes to enforce... but this is the beginning of an era of technological slavery

It is actually still very legal to have your phone unlocked by the carrier, please read the actual ruling details.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...l-under-dmca-for-smartphones-but-not-tablets/
In other words, phones you already have, as well as those purchased between now and next January, can be unlocked. But phones purchased after January 2013 can only be unlocked with the carrier's permission
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate the spread of misinformation, just about as much as people freaking the f&#@ out about things they didn't even take the time to confirm to be true, don't you all ever ask yourself "is this for real?"?

daveid said:
It is actually still very legal to have your phone unlocked by the carrier, please read the actual ruling details.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...l-under-dmca-for-smartphones-but-not-tablets/
I hate the spread of misinformation, just about as much as people freaking the f&#@ out about things they didn't even take the time to confirm to be true, don't you all ever ask yourself "is this for real?"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"... can only be unlocked with carrier's permission..."
Seems pretty black and white to me. Well that appears to read that regardless of anything, you need to have carrier's permission. Regardless of its status. This reads very black and white... T-Mobile purchased = you ask their permission to unlock it.
Did I miss something?

I was just told by my DM that We are actually going to start charging a $3.99 fee for Unlocking Devices effective 01/31/13. Are DM also said this is going to apply to all stores and CS is going to charge the fee as well. Seems like a Monopoly to me.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium

Last phone I unlocked was my mytouch 4g. Just happened to be in the store and they did it for me. And if jose is right about the $4 they ate going to charge. I dont care, if I go back home again for a vacation. It will still be cheaper to unlock and buy a sim then to roam.

mrufokid said:
If I paid for it I'll do as I like .... This is bs ...
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IKR
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium

"You can also pay full price for a phone, not the discounted price that comes with a two-year service contract, to receive the device unlocked from the get-go."
I paid full retail. As T-Mobile is no longer subsidizing phones, they should all be unlocked when you buy them after 1/26/13.

FYI: Unlocking a cell phone becomes illegal on 1/26/13

If you're considering it, maybe do it before then!
http://mashable.com/2013/01/23/unlocking-cellphones-illegal/

They can take their "laws" and shove'em. Might as well openly tell us they are doing as told to do so by the rich companies. At the end of the day people will still do it and most likely users on craigslist will end up making more money by unlocking them for users. =s

vanberge said:
If you're considering it, maybe do it before then!
http://mashable.com/2013/01/23/unlocking-cellphones-illegal/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but that's only for flashing phones to diff. carriers not unlocking bootloaders or rooting phones no?

luisrod03 said:
but that's only for flashing phones to diff. carriers not unlocking bootloaders or rooting phones no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct. Rooting is still legal.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium

(Note that unlocking is different from "jailbreaking," which opens the phone up for running additional software and remains legal for smartphones.)
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app

Making things like this illegal will just make people do it more. When the government steps in an says no you cannot do something to something you have purchased then that becomes a major issue. As far as I am concerned once you enter a contract the phone is yours to do with what you want. If you break that contract then there is an ETF. If you refuse to pay the ETF then the carrier must go after you VIA other channels. It would be the same as leasing a car and then not paying on it but while you owned it you repainted it. LOL
this is just dumb.

all thats going to result from this is that you can charge allot more when unlocking a phone on craigslist or something like that. **** i used to charge 20 bucks to unlock iphones before i got tired of handling icrap

remember laws are meant to be broken so who cares what they come up with... besides this goes back to the arguments many have had on this forum and other ones ...
if i bought the device with my money that i earned the device is mine and i can do whatever i want to do with it . if i put sprint phone on verizon and i pay my bill then im not stealing or anything like that yeah its not "right" or what they want us to do but $hit many of the things carriers do to us the consumers aint right either... as long as your doing this things for your personal device and not for stalking or in any way affect or hurt someone else who cares what the law says.....
oh and to those who follow the rules to the T and dont like my statement dont even bother replying ...

Ma$etas said:
remember laws are meant to be broken so who cares what they come up with... besides this goes back to the arguments many have had on this forum and other ones ...
if i bought the device with my money that i earned the device is mine and i can do whatever i want to do with it . if i put sprint phone on verizon and i pay my bill then im not stealing or anything like that yeah its not "right" or what they want us to do but $hit many of the things carriers do to us the consumers aint right either... as long as your doing this things for your personal device and not for stalking or in any way affect or hurt someone else who cares what the law says.....
oh and to those who follow the rules to the T and dont like my statement dont even bother replying ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like your statement!!! I IGNORE rules to the T.:beer::beer::beer::screwy::sly:
Pp.
Transmitted from another galaxy with a Jellybean infused P-5113 full of Unicorn porn.

Lasted I checked I bought my phone with my money and I will do whatever I want to do with it. Government can go stick it up their butts.

Can you even use this phone on another carrier? If so, what are the adverse consequences of unlocking it now?

I dont think the reasoning behind the law is to stop individual users, but to be able to stop stores/phiscal locations that unlock phones. There's about a bazillion phone stores that you literally can walk in and have a phone unlocked and activated.

bobturismo said:
I dont think the reasoning behind the law is to stop individual users, but to be able to stop stores/phiscal locations that unlock phones. There's about a bazillion phone stores that you literally can walk in and have a phone unlocked and activated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the carrier allows you to bring your own device the government needs to stay the hell out of it. This is just one more law to generate revenue that will be next to impossible to fully enforce, just like drug laws. There's more damn drugs imported to this country and on the streets than there was when the "war on drugs" began. Land of the free my ass, if the person is hurting no one other than themselves thats their choice. Just like you should be able to do whatever the fork you want with your device that you paid for and no one should be able to say boo about it. What's next? Gonna say I can't install linux on my PC cuz it shipped with windoze? Guess where you can stick your "laws"?
I like to break stuff!

Not only is the company making money off you when you sign the contract, they're making money when you buy a phone from them. They're pissed off because they're not getting any money for the device. Greed pure and simple. Another bit of proof that large companies have the government in their pockets. They tell the politicians to make laws that protect the company's interests. I say screw those companies and stop doing business with them. Let your money do the talking and voting.

The revolving door. Smh

Sorry but it makes sense to me... in some areas. I bought my E4GT used with a clean ESN and had it flashed to Cricket. $250 total investment (including flash and porting my existing number over), and I pay less than $60 a month. I don't get 4g but I'm always around WiFi anyway, so it's a sweet deal. But...
A few years back, my old BlackBerry on Sprint was stolen. The jackhole that took it most likely walked into a Cricket store and had it flashed and activated the same day without issue.
Also, who's to stop a contract Sprint customer from reporting a phone stolen, paying a deductible for a nice replacement, then selling the "stolen" phone on Craigslist (with a clearly advertised bad ESN for Cricket/Boost/Metro only) for a handsome profit? It only takes a few to spoil the bunch, but this is actually pretty common.
But if I buy a clean and clear phone outright LEGALLY, shouldn't I have the right to flash it to whatever carrier is compatible? There really should be some kind of middle ground, where only clean ESN phones can be legally flashed. I can see some good intentions here, but as usual, Uncle Sam goes about it in a really dumb way, bending everybody over while smiling and trying to convince us it's for the best
Trolling from my Cricket-flashed Galaxy S2 E4GT using Tapatalk 2

Im sure CDMA has long gone bee shafted. This is more as the shaft to GSM American users. Guess american businesses will lose more cash at the end of day with users either preferring to buy international unlocked phones or going the "breaking the law" route. Who is there to enforce it? And how.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Anyone able to offer a tutorial so I can unlock my phone today before it's illegal? No joke either I really want to do this before it's illegal.
It's a E4GT on Sprint wanting to flash to Metro in the Bay Area.

Zspy1985 said:
Anyone able to offer a tutorial so I can unlock my phone today before it's illegal? No joke either I really want to do this before it's illegal.
It's a E4GT on Sprint wanting to flash to Metro in the Bay Area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Assuming you got a sprint e4gt why even ask? This applies to GSM devices when they mean unlock, they mean unlock it network wise ATT/T-Mobile vice versa.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Yes. I believe ESN swapping is still considered illegal.
But you can still unlock your gsm phone legally, you just have to ask the carrier first. Just tell them you are going oversees
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium

Seriously!!!! they are kidding, Right??

Unlocking New Mobile Phones Becomes Illegal In the US Tomorrow
Posted on Friday January 25, @09:30AM
from the who-owns-your-stuff dept.
Tyketto writes
"Referencing a decision outlined in the Federal Register, Tech News Daily has published an article noting that the window to unlock your new mobile phone in the U.S. is closing. 'In October 2012, the Librarian of Congress, who determines exemptions to a strict anti-hacking law called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), decided that unlocking mobile phones would no longer be allowed. But the library provided a 90-day window during which people could still buy a phone and unlock it. That window closes on January 26.' While this doesn't apply to phones purchased before the window closes, this means that after 1/26/13, for any new mobile phone you purchase, you'll have to fulfill your contract, or break the law to unlock it."
It will still be perfectly legal to purchase an unlocked phone, which many carriers offer. This change removes the exemption for buying a new phone under contract (and thus, at a discount) and then unlocking it.

Yes to monopolize and to limit the development on android. These apple and samsung are both sharks who owns the senate )
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app

Sadly old news, just because its illegal wont stop it happening though same as console modding, piracy or any other such thing. They are just taking the view of carrier locks should be DCMA protected. I dont agree with it but well theres quite a few things I dont agree with that get into law. Thankfully im not over in the states or I would be a dirty dirty criminal.

Just to reiterate, this only applies to after market SIM Unlocking - e.g. places where you pay money to sim unlock phones. Doesn't apply to carrier sim unlocking, factory unlocked phones, or bootloader unlocking.

jonshipman said:
Just to reiterate, this only applies to after market SIM Unlocking - e.g. places where you pay money to sim unlock phones. Doesn't apply to carrier sim unlocking, factory unlocked phones, or bootloader unlocking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
You can still unlock the bootloader, root and flash to your hearts content. You just can't buy a phone on AT&T unlock by a third party and move to T-Mobile. Also it only applies to the USA.
HTC's sudden anti developer stance is far more worrying and is going to lose them a lot of customers.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app

Land of the no longer free.
People could have stopped that bill easily but hardly anyone bothered to read it and thought it was merely about illegal downloads.
Supporting a campaign against it and spreading the word was one of the reasons they went all out to close demonoid the torrent site down.

To be honest i don't see why any carrier should sim lock a phone, after all when you sign a contract you are bound for that contract length regardless of the phone being locked/unlocked.
After the contract is finished you will either stay with that carrier or upgrade again all with the phone being locked or unlocked.
I tend to get my phones from shops that sell them already unlocked & i have been with the same carrier for 8 years now.

Network SIM locking is one thing, breaking US law unlocking your damn focking phone is ridiculous, you own the focking thing anyway,Americans laws are really strange

I hope this will not happen in EU

Sounds absolutely ridiculous to me, Android's open source so whats the deal? Unless I'm missing something. As someone mentioned previously, I hope it doesn't come to the eu.

fmaskarin said:
I hope this will not happen in EU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Americans are pressuring the EU to adopt the legislation as international law. One of the few partys resisting it are these guys
http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/

Braderzf50 said:
Sounds absolutely ridiculous to me, Android's open source so whats the deal? Unless I'm missing something. As someone mentioned previously, I hope it doesn't come to the eu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does Android been open source have to do with SIM unlocking?
OP: Can you put in the title that this applies to SIM unlocking to help out people that dont read before ranting???

Fellows here comes the trend of buying unlocked phones. These carriers will cry once people start buying their own phones. They will only get the utility and less profit.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app

I can understand this as the network are subsidising the cost of the phone expecting to make the money back during the contract - but even if you unlock it to another network your still going to be liable for the monthly contract charges? so this only makes sense for PAYG which aren't greatly reduced from the unlocked price anyway.

I wish Google would put the screws to large scale mobile carriers

Title sums rant.
Android is Google's operating system, and its not like the majority of developers here are interested in what they can change on their iOS devices.
When people realize the vast improvement their device can take without the added congestion of what mobile networks think you want/are contractually obligated to bloat YOUR phone/device with, they take a different stance on Android completely (at least, I do), and will not move to another operating system UNLESS this hogwash of carrier vs. customer continues.
We purchase the phone, we OWN the phone, as long as we're not doing anything illegal, such as stealing or tampering with Verizon's physical property, WE should be able to customize the software however we want. We're not BUYING the 'software' when we're buying a phone, I'm not choosing to purchase the entire Android experience in its entirety, with absolutely no modified software guaranteed, I'm not choosing to buy the integrated "spy" software or asking for my mobile service provider to collect all this 'anonymous' data so that they can just throw me advertisements or hope I'll ever be interested in paying $2.99 a month for visual voice mail. When you buy a desktop computer, you have the option of removing all of the software components and installing your own on your physical hardware.
Isn't what Verizon is doing technically monopolizing the mobile software industry by forcing a device owner to use specific software that they will not remove? Why not just offer a 'developer edition' line right alongside of the stock phone for a premium? There are already several devices on their network that have exploits and custom software installed on them, so any inclination that their 'security' is at risk, and therefore they forbid unlocked bootloaders is a flat lie, OR wouldn't they be compelled to suspend or terminate service to all those accounts? Why do they get the option to decide which users are allowed to 'break the law' or 'terms of contract?'
I think the only way this issue can ever get resolved is if the software vendor in Google puts its foot into it and demands all carriers allow for an unlocked bootloader. Maybe we all collectively as Google customers should voice our concerns in that direction. Anyone else agree?

+1
Sent from my phone using an app

+2
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk 4

+3
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using xda app-developers app

True.
HTC needs Verizon but Verizon needs Android.
Google should start saying this is an open platform leave it alone. With 80% android market share Verizon would have to conform.

I agree, but I think people grossly overestimate the power of this community. If every single one of us stopped buying phones to try and force Google's hand, that would be a loss of like... less than a percent to Google and the manufacturers. The fact is that the very vast majority does not care about unlocked boot loaders and roms and root and s-off. So... I think we will be dealing with these issues indefinitely.
Sent from my HTC One.

Google is still the company that needs to lay down the law. They make money off of root apps and apps developed on rooted phones, they should be upset that Verizon impliments all these restrictions.

The only thing I disagree with is the term own. Unless you buy it outright you lease it until your contract is up.
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using xda app-developers app

cstrife999 said:
The only thing I disagree with is the term own. Unless you buy it outright you lease it until your contract is up.
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I had the option of paying $199.99 at a subsidized rate but was forced to have my phone locked down or could pay full price for an unlocked version, I'd be paying full price almost every time, with that infrequent time being that the phone already had an exploit.

rmaccamr said:
If I had the option of paying $199.99 at a subsidized rate but was forced to have my phone locked down or could pay full price for an unlocked version, I'd be paying full price almost every time, with that infrequent time being that the phone already had an exploit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea. Sales of the gs4 and one gpe editions were pretty decent based on this principal. Same for the nexus 4 which just dropped the 8gb model to 200... Off contract...
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using xda app-developers app

I hear ya, I dont understand it either, and the fact that HTC made the phone but has to listen to Verizon in removing the ability to unlock the bootloader? People have already unlocked the phone and its obvious that the phone still can be unlocked but Verizon is allowed to tell HTC what to do with their phone that is also on every other carrier and can be unlocked?
Its a bunch of bull and I wish I could leave Verizon but they unfortunately have the best coverage for me and I get the biggest discount from my job, so I would lose even more if I switched. At least the One is a fantastic phone even with it not being rooted and I cant say that too much about many other phones

+1

lets see what will do?

+1
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

+1
Sent from my One using xda app-developers app

Well said, but sadly it is true that both of them will be making money with or without us. The majority of smartphone users barely scratch the surface of what their phones are capable of, even before rooting or jailbreaking. A good amount of people I work with don't even have phones linked to google accounts. Just phone calls and aol mail for them. And they are rocking $300 smartphones with data packages and all.

cstrife999 said:
The only thing I disagree with is the term own. Unless you buy it outright you lease it until your contract is up.
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ This.

cstrife999 said:
The only thing I disagree with is the term own. Unless you buy it outright you lease it until your contract is up.
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You aren't leasing a phone. You are getting a subsidized price on the equipment by agreeing to stay with the company for terms of the contact. You own it. You aren't leasing it. You are not obligated to stay with them. You pay a term fee if you decide to leave to make up for the subsidy.
Sent from my HTCOneVZW using Tapatalk

That's the double-edges sword of open software like Android. The exact same rights that allow us to modify Android to be the way we want it gives carriers the ability to load up their bloatware and lock it down. I think it would be a bad idea for Google to mandate anything simply because it goes against the entire concept of Android being so open. Also it would motivate carriers to find alternatives. As huge as it is in the mobile market, the truth is most people who bought their Android phones bought them because they looked good and had neat features. If those features happen to have the name "Android", "Windows", "Ubuntu", or anything else attached to them makes no difference whatsoever.
If we want this to change we need to directly petition Verizon to stop locking things down. If they don't change their ways we need to be willing to leave them for another carrier and tell them why we're leaving on our way out the door. The reality though - as has been mentioned already - is that we're a very small part of Verizon's user base and don't really have much of a voice. Verizon currently has about 120,000,000 subscribers (Thanks for the correction josh995) in the U.S. (source) The entirety of the XDA Developers user base is 5,426,190, which obviously isn't all Verizon subscribers. We have to count on them taking the concerns of the enthusiasts into account more than casual users. Sure, we're the guys and gals that are more likely to brick our phones and make shady warranty claims, but we're also the guys and gals that buy phones at full price because we want the latest and greatest. We're also the ones that others come to for advice on phones and carriers.
tl;dr - Google shouldn't do anything about this, we need to make ourselves heard by the carriers directly.

I couldn't agree more. I still have my Verizon Galaxy nexus and will always cherish it. Its ridiculous how difficult unlocking the bootloader has become on Verizon devices. If I didn't have my grandfather data plan I'd be with a different carrier yesterday
Sent from my One using XDA Premium 4 mobile app