Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
1–10 of 107 posts
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#2Meanwhile, progress is being made to legalize cellphone unlocking. With grassroots groups leading the charge, the Obama administration announced its support for overturning the ban last week.
I'm astonished that people overwhelmingly believe this falsehood. The White House response opposes legalized phone unlocking, except to phones already out of contract. When they say they "support unlocking", they have a different interpretation of what that means:
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.
[...] 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.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cel...
A (very) few journalists are paying attention:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/obama-s-stance-on-unlock...
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#3Meanwhile, progress is being made to legalize cellphone unlocking. With grassroots groups leading the charge, the Obama administration announced its support for overturning the ban last week. I'm astonished that people overwhelmingly believe this falsehood. The White House response opposes legalized phone unlocking, except to phones already out of contract. When they say they "support unlocking", they have a differen…
> I'm astonished that people overwhelmingly believe this falsehood.
Maybe that "falsehood" doesn't conform to your beliefs about what sort of unlocking should be allowed, but I think the quote you highlighted is a reasonable one.
There are legitimate reasons to allow restrictions on what can be done with subsidized devices which are still bound by a service agreement. Your comment suggests that you're astonished that people are swayed by those reasons, which comes across as a bit insulting.
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#4Vote with your wallet. Don't buy locked phones.
Once the consumers know the power they have in their hands, change will come easier.
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#5Meanwhile, progress is being made to legalize cellphone unlocking. With grassroots groups leading the charge, the Obama administration announced its support for overturning the ban last week. I'm astonished that people overwhelmingly believe this falsehood. The White House response opposes legalized phone unlocking, except to phones already out of contract. When they say they "support unlocking", they have a differen…
> We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
You don't own a subsidised cell phone until your contract is out.
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#6[deleted]
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#7Meanwhile, progress is being made to legalize cellphone unlocking. With grassroots groups leading the charge, the Obama administration announced its support for overturning the ban last week. I'm astonished that people overwhelmingly believe this falsehood. The White House response opposes legalized phone unlocking, except to phones already out of contract. When they say they "support unlocking", they have a differen…
> I'm astonished that people overwhelmingly believe this falsehood. Maybe that "falsehood" doesn't conform to your beliefs about what sort of unlocking should be allowed, but I think the quote you highlighted is a reasonable one. There are legitimate reasons to allow restrictions on what can be done with subsidized devices which are still bound by a service agreement. Your comment suggests that you're astonished that…
Maybe that "falsehood" doesn't conform to your beliefs about what sort of unlocking should be allowed,
I think their definition disagrees with most peoples' definitions, including the one in the petition itself:
"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."
Unlocking phones under contract is implicitly their core complaint. The White House response didn't actually respond to it.
Your comment suggests that you're astonished that people are swayed by those reasons,
I do not think this; I think they aren't aware of the issue at all.
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#8"...once we buy an object — any object — we should own it."
Sure, but a purchase often comes with restrictions that you agree to before deciding on the purchase. If you don't agree to the restrictions you can avoid the purchase altogether. I can buy a six hundred thousand dollar house and still not have the right to put a garden gnome on my lawn if I bought in a community with by-laws that prohibit that.
"Because manufacturers have copyrighted the service manuals, local mechanics can’t fix modern equipment. And today’s equipment — packed with sensors and electronics — is too complex to repair without them. That’s a problem for farmers, who can’t afford to pay the dealer’s high maintenance fees for fickle equipment."
So farmers are buying "fickle" equipment that is expensive to repair and the blame is put on copyright abuse? Copyright is just the mechanism used to enforce the business model. The equipment manufacturer made a business decision and this is part of their business model by choice. Any other manufacturer is free to supply equipment and compete on a different business model. If the issue is really that significant to the market then farmers will flock to the competition that provides manuals with their equipment.
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#9"...once we buy an object — any object — we should own it." Sure, but a purchase often comes with restrictions that you agree to before deciding on the purchase. If you don't agree to the restrictions you can avoid the purchase altogether. I can buy a six hundred thousand dollar house and still not have the right to put a garden gnome on my lawn if I bought in a community with by-laws that prohibit that. "Because man…
Yeah, the article was over-simplifying a bit.
I doubt that Wired thinks I can buy a copy of their (print) magazine and then, since I own it, I can do whatever I want with it (like scanning it and putting it online).
Re: Forget the Cellphone Fight — We Should Be Allowed to Unlock Everything We Own
#10Vote with your wallet. Don't buy locked phones. Once the consumers know the power they have in their hands, change will come easier.
That is fallacy. Carriers are oligopoly with high cost of entrance. So if all carriers provide only locked phones there may not be enough devices on the market.
There should be laws preventing forced vertical integration. If you sell hardware you cannot restrict the os(you are free to provide os, but locking of the bootloader should be left to the user). If you sell OS you cannot limit what applications the user can run and from where to obtain them etc ...