off-topic (maybe): petition to re-legalize unlocking cell phones in USA
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
I am a member!
Petition to re-legalize unlocking of cell phones in USA:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
It was recently banned and the petition almost has enough votes to get a response from the whitehouse.
Nice to see that it has got some attention so far.
At the moment there is a bad culture of people accepting that their mobile phones are "owned" by their service provider. Talking to a few people has helped me realise that.
I'm not in the USA so I haven't signed it. But I'm definitely supportive of opposition to the DMCA, because restrictive US copyright laws generally make their way to the rest of the world.
I am a member!
Yea- I'd like to keep this at the top of the forums for a few days. I'm sure it'll get the attention it needs for a reply. It is almost there now. Unlocking is very popular thing among hackers. Actually I am hesitant to call people who unlock hackers. I think a real hacker is going to object to trackers.
I am a member!
:) Good to hear! I wouldn't buy one either. At least not a locked one.
[Unnecessary comment, essentially about me not liking cell phones, removed, but important part about their ill effects maintained...]
Cell phones give you brain cancer:
http://www.infowars.com/cell-phones-cause-brain-cancer-scientists-warn/
Cell phones are tracking and listening devices:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G1fNjK9SXg
I'm not so sure about the "brain cancer" thing. I haven't done any research, but I think I read somewhere that that's just overhyped preliminary studies. Mainstream media often does this; it makes things sound more exciting than they really are.
One huge example of this is the mainstream media on "global cooling" in the 1970s; at the time, climatologists debated over whether aerosols lowering global temperatures would have more of an effect (global dimming) or greenhouse gases raising global temperatures would have more of an effect (global warming). Mainstream media turned the hypothesis of global dimming into "scientists predict ice age!". Of course, when it turned out to be incorrect, they never owned up to this because "we misreported on global dimming, sorry!" is not a very exciting news story.
According to the new law, Mobile phones purchased before January 26th 2013 is not illegal. Whereas unlocking mobile phones purchased January 26th 2013 is illegal. And yes to re-legalize unlocking phones people can sign in the online petition.
Those who have purchased mobile phones before 26/01/2013 can definitely unlock your mobile phones. Unlocking a mobile phone using unlock code is the safest and easiest way to do so. You people can get the unblock code for a mobile phone either from the respective network provider or from any trusted vendor online. For example, You can get accurate unlock codes from http://www.classicunlocking.com/ at affordable cost with free unlocking instructions.
I've heard of the idea behind that website on CNN. It will be hard to hit the 100,000 votes but nothin is impossible.
I can't vote because I'm not in the USA but I support the idea !
I am a member!
I also signed the petition despite my views on said devices.
I remember the old days where in school they would teach us how to build transistor radios. We would take a radio apart and see how it was made and then proceed to build a crude, but functioning radio. The point to this is, that some of these kids were ahead of the class, because they were tinkerers. They were already familiar with what made these transistor radios run.
Should our children today be thrown in jail for being innovative? I think not.
I am a member!
The petition is 11,000 short of 100,000 needed for a response from the US whitehouse. If you haven't signed and are a US citizen you might want to consider doing so. This is your last chance. The petition ends February 23rd.
104 000 and counting. We'll see about the response.
I am a member!
:)
Just noticed. Glad I helped fix this. Sort of.
It is only going to get a response. Probably not a solution.
That is reality though.
I can't understand, why you all wants re-legalize it?
If I got it right, unlocking illegal only when you bought it locked and configured on using concrete provider.
Because of this, you got a discount, when you bought the device.
In such the case, unlocking is fraud. You will get freedom and a discount, and the provider will get nothing.
If you want freedom to unlock a device, then simply buy it without discount.
That's unjust. If it's my device (i.e. my personal property), I should be able to do whatever I want with it, regardless of what the company that sold it to me wants to do.
Maybe you would buy a lawn mower that's bolted shut so only the manufacturer can repair it. In that case, you should still have the right to break open that lock by force so you can do repairs on the lawn mower yourself. The only temptation you should ever have to resist doing that is the possibility of losing the warranty or doing irreversible damage.
"If it's my device, I should be able to do whatever I want with it"
What's the problem? If you want freedom, then buy it without discount.
"Maybe you would buy a lawn mower"
No. And I never seen people using lawn mower. If not count workers of parks.
"only the manufacter can repair it"
This is different case. You're not have any choice.
"resist doing that is the possibility of losing the warranty"
Very funny. Why I need to repair it myself, if I have warranty?
> "If it's my device, I should be able to do whatever I want with it"
>
> What's the problem? If you want freedom, then buy it without
> discount.
But doesn't everyone deserve the chance to get freedom? Maybe some
people don't value it, but might at a later date.
Andrew.
Then they must buy new device without discount.
> In such the case, unlocking is fraud. You will get freedom and a
discount,
> and the provider will get nothing.
Please don't believe the propaganda that it's about the discount. In
the U.S. you're typically required to agree to keep the service for
one or two years with the carrier getting money from you in your
monthly bill (and you'd better believe that the pricing plans are
designed for them to recoup any phone subsidy.) If you don't keep the
service for the full contract term you incur a penalty in the form of
something called an Early Termination Fee. Make no mistake: the
carrier absolutely gains that money back one way or the other. So,
locking phones isn't about some sort of "discount" but purely an
anti-competitive tactic to discourage their customers from switching
to another carrier.
Sorry, but even now I don't see the problem. Any customer have choice between freedom and a discount.
"pricing plans are designed for them to recoup any phone subsidy"
Maybe. But I not see, why this make difference.
Any commercial company have right to make money.
Even if a company have 300% profit.
I can't understand the one thing. Why unlocking was legal? If you signed document with company, then this must be illegal to unlock the device. Even without any special laws.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires