Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 171 posts

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#51

Post by warfangle »

eshvk wrote: post #22
mtgx wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I think financing campaigns should only be done by individuals and with a cap of $100 each to "equalize" the money vote, just like you equalize the regular vote, by giving a person the same vote everyone gets. But the way the system works now, the "money vote" seems to be much more powerful than the real vote, and because certain individuals or corporations can put as much money as they want on that vote,…

I think the logic behind corporate financing/lobbying is that if you allow individuals to contribute money separately, there is no reason why organized groups should not band together, analyze the election, choose a candidate and pay $100 for every one of their members to that candidate's campaign. This organized machine is going to always trump a bunch of individuals haphazardly contributing money.

Organizations should not be able to donate to campaigns or political action committees. Unions, superpacs, all of it.

If an organization wants to petition its members to donate to a campaign or political action committee, go for it. But it cannot coerce, it cannot apply punitive measures to members that do not donate, and it cannot be a religious institution that receives tax-exempt status.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#52

Post by duaneb »

pyre wrote: post #17
duaneb wrote: post #6

What exactly do these petitioners expect? A) there are far more important things to do, IMHO, then spending time wrestling telco companies over this, and B) the White House has to do zilch but respond. I love petitions, but people getting angry over e.g. repeatedly not legalizing marijuana after 0.03% of americans signed something I find confusing and frustrating. It's almost as if people are easier to ignore if they…

This was a recent change by made by the copyright office, to revoke "phone unlocking" as an exception to the DMCA. The copyright office is under the President, IIRC, so the White House has the ability to directly affect this. The other route is to just codify the exception into law, but pushing a law through about this takes time.

Best answer yet; I didn't realize that the White House actually could do something about this.

Perhaps it's not so useless after all.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#53

Post by mokus »

donniezazen wrote: post #48

When someone is not paying the full price of a phone, how can they expect to do anything with the phone? People don't actually own them.

> People don't actually own them.

Of course they do. If I buy a new house or car, I don't have to pay the full price up front, but when I have finished paying for it I absolutely do own it.

Subsidized phones are essentially loans. You pay for them over the course of your contract or with early termination fees, and when the contract is over you own them 100%.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#54

Post by nicksergeant »

manaskarekar wrote: post #7

It's funny how you have to petition to have lawmakers pay attention to an issue, when by definition, those people are there to represent the interest of the majority in the first place.

Lawmakers represent corporations in The United States.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#55

Post by nateabele »

sinak wrote: post #44

Hey everyone, I started this petition. Very glad we made it to 100k, and excited to see how the White House responds. I'm well aware that the WH may not take any real action though. Please sign up at http://fixthedmca.org if you care about this issue and want to continue helping the move to fix this issue permanently.

Yeah, I hate to be that guy, but the 'petition to end all petitions' comes to mind. Particularly the bits about 'politically safe non-answers' and 'channeling public activism into a cul-de-sac'.

:-/

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#56

Post by bhauer »

homosaur wrote: post #10
TheCapn wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have it in their heads that a successful petition is supposed to mean there will be change but that was never promised. I've always felt petitions were used by lawmakers to help filter noise. If you set a threshold for the amount of support any cause needs before you'll address it (preventing you from having to listen to each person individually) the petition system seems only logical. If the lawmakers now see…

Filter noise? You mean like concerns of citizens instead of concerns of lobbyists? A Kickstarter might be more useful than a petition in getting the attention of the US government.

I invite you to also consider using my project, Brian's Taskforce:

https://usa.brianstaskforce.com/

https://brianstaskforce.com/blog/more-than-a-petition

The idea is to combine charitable giving with petitioning so as to establish the weight or importance of your idea to the powers-that-be.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#57

Post by abraxasz »

manaskarekar wrote: post #7

It's funny how you have to petition to have lawmakers pay attention to an issue, when by definition, those people are there to represent the interest of the majority in the first place.

No, I think it actually makes sense. How are lawmakers supposed to know every single one of their voter's issues? Plus this particular issue (unlocking phones) might be a particularly important one for you, but secondary for a vast majority of people (myself NOT included). So I find the system of petitions sensible in that respect.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#58

Post by DigitalJack »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #20
pyre wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when is the President a 'lawmaker?' If you want to get law-makers (i.e. legislators) to take notice just write your representative a letter.

>Since when is the President a 'lawmaker?' Probably since overriding a veto is a lot harder than getting one more Senator to vote for the bill, which means the President has more say in what makes it into law than any individual legislator.

Don't forget signing statements and executive orders.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#59

Post by gnaritas »

betterunix wrote: post #49
jzworkman wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point number 1 is a little naive. Money and interest groups drive policy. While the poor may have just as much vote in an election, the power to change policy generally is focused on the interest groups that most support that politician. So while people may not "vote with money" policy is very much money driven.

Sure, that is how it works in practice , but nothing in the constitution of this country says, "Money buys laws!" We are generally unhappy with the idea that wealthy corporations have hijacked our legal system, because most Americans believe their vote matters just as much as every other person's vote (or at least every other person in their district).

> Sure, that is how it works in practice

Which is all that matters. How it should work in theory, matters very little.

> If you want a market-based solution to life's problems

Big "if", for many things, many don't want the depth of their wallet to determine their access to necessary services.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#60

Post by nateabele »

mtgx wrote: post #18
adrr wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all 100k people chipped in a $100, it would have more effect than this petition. We live in a time where it takes money to get elected.

That's why I think financing campaigns should only be done by individuals and with a cap of $100 each to "equalize" the money vote, just like you equalize the regular vote, by giving a person the same vote everyone gets. But the way the system works now, the "money vote" seems to be much more powerful than the real vote, and because certain individuals or corporations can put as much money as they want on that vote,…

This is not realistic now, nor will it likely ever be. By hook or by crook, money will always find its way into politics, so long as there's a high ROI (and oh boy is it high).

The only real hedge against this is a return to a constitutional government that doesn't have the power to grant special favors. That opportunity has long since passed.

Post reply on HN