[deleted]
AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
71–80 of 157 posts
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#72His methods were illegal but can we please recognize this guy for being an ABSOLUTE HERO for unlocking all those phones and giving the people what they wanted.
A contract was violated when these phones were unlocked. In return for a locked phone the buyer received a subsidy from AT&T on the cost of the hardware. I don't want people to violate contracts with me, why should I recognize someone as a hero just because I don't like the contract? To be absolutely clear, I don't like locked phones, either, so I always buy non-carrier-locked devices and it means I pay the full, uns…
> A contract was violated when these phones were unlocked.
That doesn't make it wrong. Fun fact, contracts are violated all the time, and not just between individuals and huge telecom companies, but also between large companies. If you have an issue with it you sue for breach of contract.
Violating a contract isn't a crime for a reason.
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Subsidy is when someone gives you money, cellphone contract is when you agree to pay back the $1000 handset in 12-24 hidden installments.
No. First, a subsidy can exist in many ways. It's not explicitly "when someone gives you money". It's often the case that phones are discounted through deals such as buy one get one (BOGO), for example. When you purchase those two phones they are tied to a contract that states you'll carry new lines of service through the carrier that subsidized the phones for a period of time. That's one example of a common US carri…
[deleted]
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of these devices are unlocked in bulk and sold overseas. This deprives them of the payments that they expected for fronting the cost of the device.
I still don't understand how. Regardless of who ends up using the phone, surely the original purchaser/signer is still on the hook for the monthly payments? ie. If I buy a contract iPhone from AT&T then unlock and sell on the phone, that doesn't nullify the fact that I still owe AT&T $100 a month for 24 months, regardless of where the phone is?
Yes the original purchaser is still on the hook for the payments. However in America today there are absolutely tons of people who are on the hook for payments that they simply do not make. In the tech world people are generally financially well off that they don't realize this. There are people that will just shrug at the fact they owe money to a company.
At least if the phone is locked the carrier can just cut off service as an attempt to hopefully get payment as the phone is rendered useless without payment. However with unlocked phones theres no way for them to get the money they are owed. It's insanely expensive for them to go after each and every subcriber legally that doesnt pay.
Remember, they are loaning these devices to subscribers who cannot pay the entire cost upfront with the hope they will pay them back over the course of the contract. Unlocking the phone gets rid of the one collateral they have. Thats the reason your account must be in good standing to unlock early with every major carrier and why some do credit checks.
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#75Looks like they completely buried the lead. That is, US carriers use proprietary hardware/software devices to establish and maintain a profitable strangle-hold on the consumer. No doubt the law the broken. There's no justification for that. However, the lead is the lead is the lead, and it's burried.
Is it really a stranglehold if it's a condition of a contract that consumers agree to in exchange for subsidized hardware? Personally I would never buy a carrier-locked phone, but I have the resources available to make that choice. Though the difference is maybe not huge, how many people do you think are online directly because of a carrier subsidy?
> Is it really a stranglehold
> but I have the resources available to make that choice
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#76His methods were illegal but can we please recognize this guy for being an ABSOLUTE HERO for unlocking all those phones and giving the people what they wanted.
this guy is awesome
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the contract actually say you’re not allowed to unlock the phone? Or does it just say that you have to pay an ETF if you cancel early?
I don't remember the exact wording, but the last time I had a subsidized phone (with T-Mobile) it was made clear to me that the phone could be unlocked after a period of time. The period was shorter than the contract period. T-Mobile even unlocked the phone for me before that time was expired when I explained that I was traveling to Europe and wanted to swap the SIM when abroad.
>T-Mobile even unlocked the phone for me before that time was expired when I explained that I was traveling to Europe and wanted to swap the SIM when abroad.
Thanks for posting that, as I had no idea it was possible. I personally don't buy locked anymore, but last year that definitely would have saved me some trouble.
>it was made clear to me that the phone could be unlocked after a period of time. The period was shorter than the contract period.
I am with T-Mobile as well, and IIRC there are two main options for unlocking:
1. After you pay the price in full early.
2. After 18 months on a 24 months contract.
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#78>The indictment doesn’t get into how Fahd was caught. He was arrested in Hong Kong in February 2018 at the request of U.S. authorities. Fahd was extradited from Hong Kong to the U.S. last week to face 14 different charges in federal court
interesting that extradiction to US is ok while to mainland China - isnt. Speaks volumes about whom HK people trusts more, and it doesn't look very promising wrt. peaceful and harmonious full integration of HK.
Wrt. the original post - impressive that AT&T couldnt notice what was happening at that scale for that long. Somebody need to sell them one more audit software package.
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#79His methods were illegal but can we please recognize this guy for being an ABSOLUTE HERO for unlocking all those phones and giving the people what they wanted.
A contract was violated when these phones were unlocked. In return for a locked phone the buyer received a subsidy from AT&T on the cost of the hardware. I don't want people to violate contracts with me, why should I recognize someone as a hero just because I don't like the contract? To be absolutely clear, I don't like locked phones, either, so I always buy non-carrier-locked devices and it means I pay the full, uns…
Contracts are violated all the time - it's called efficient breach. Most of the time, there are no penalties either. If AT&T overcharges you, and you don't notice - they just take your money without consequence.
If you can get away with efficient breach of contract, do it. As a former lawyer who write contracts all day, I will give you a virtual high five.
Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network
#80His methods were illegal but can we please recognize this guy for being an ABSOLUTE HERO for unlocking all those phones and giving the people what they wanted.
The people can get what they want by buying an unlocked phone. It's not like it's hard. I haven't bought a provider-locked phone in over a decade, because I move and travel a lot. This guy is a criminal, plain and simple.