Just FYI: Saturday Jan 26th It Will Be Illegal in the US to Unlock Your Phone

[FoxKat]

OK, mystery solved...now I understand the confusion. At least with iPhones, you must first Jailbreak the phone, so that you can then install and run an unsigned application that would otherwise be prevented from running.

Once the phone is Jailbroken, the unsigned app - the carrier unlocker is then installed and run, completing the carrier unlocking process.

Where it differs with Android phones is that from what I know, you don't need to Jailbreak them to install and run unsigned software that will unlock them from the carrier. To install unsigned software, or at least software not on the Play Store, you simply have to check a box in the Settings , Security & Screen Lock menu to "Allow installation of apps from unknown sources". So the term Jailbreak is synonymous with carrier unlocking when referring to at least iPhones. The same is apparently not true for Android phones.

Sent from my A210 using Tapatalk HD

[Frederuco]

It is also possible to unlock an iPhone without jailbreaking. I just did it through a 3rd party for $10 for my iPhone 4. That is the type they are trying to block.

[FoxKat]

It is also possible to unlock an iPhone without jailbreaking. I just did it through a 3rd party for $10 for my iPhone 4. That is the type they are trying to block.

Well, I suppose I'm not surprised that someone has figured out a way through the protection and bypassing that step. It's only a matter of time before someone breaks through whatever roadblocks manufacturers put in place.

I certainly won't make the wrong distinction in this case again. Thanks for bringing my misunderstanding to my attention.

Sent from my A210 using Tapatalk HD

[comk4ver]

Well I have here a petition going around to try and get the courts to adjust this.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...legal/1g9KhZG7
Another thing it was to stop people from avoiding roaming charges in other countries.
http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/fp...illegal-in-u-s

[xsylus]

So what they're saying is that I either have to use the crappy phones my carrier provides or I have to spend an outrageous amount of money on a carrier that has the phone I really want and be stuck with a contract. Seriously?


This will probably be enforced about as well as the piracy cases; it's only worth their time to go after those who offer unlocking services rather than individuals. So tired of my consumer rights being trampled on.

Another thing I'd liked to know is sellers on ebay who break their contract with a carrier have phones with "bad esns" and they sell them for the sole purpose of being used on a different carrier which allows those of us with shallow pockets to actually afford a phone without signing a ridiculous contract. So what happens to those sellers? Are they stuck with the phones? Ugh, this whole thing is ludicrous.

[FoxKat]

My understanding is this isn't a new law.

Well, considering the cutoff of the old rules apparently being the end of 2012, I would bet it's been on the table for at least that long.

Sent from my A210 using Tapatalk HD

[fobpartisan]

So instead of buying a phone from a specific carrier it'll be more like leasing a phone. U use the phone until u no longer want to pay for it or it breaks. Sad how an 83 year old granpops that most likely has no idea how to use a smart phone okayed this into a law which the congres nor the united states citizens didn't vote on. What is next. U buy a car in 2014 and u can only use shell gas in it. If u use chevron it is stealing profits from shell. Ridicules.

[xeene]

i want to see them enforce the law. what pisses me off more is that they're wasting out tax dollars on this idiocy. no wonder our national debt is increasing, because we have morons in most important places.

[FoxKat]

So instead of buying a phone from a specific carrier it'll be more like leasing a phone. U use the phone until u no longer want to pay for it or it breaks. Sad how an 83 year old granpops that most likely has no idea how to use a smart phone okayed this into a law which the congres nor the united states citizens didn't vote on. What is next. U buy a car in 2014 and u can only use shell gas in it. If u use chevron it is stealing profits from shell. Ridicules.

Except that Shell didn't contribute anything to the development, manufacturing, advertising or distribution of the car. In contrast, Verizon (insert your favorite carrier here), not only contributed to the software for the phone, but also to the marketing, advertisement and distribution via their website, television, radio and print advertising, and direct retail distribution in their stores. If Shell both contributed to and sells the car, then they'd have a right to recover costs and to profit from its distribution and use.

You have to look at the big picture to fully understand why this make at least some reasonable sense.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[FoxKat]

i want to see them enforce the law. what pisses me off more is that they're wasting out tax dollars on this idiocy. no wonder our national debt is increasing, because we have morons in most important places.

So, are you saying it's OK for Verizon to contribute to the overall success of the phone just so somebody can take it to a competing carrier and allow them to reap the fruits of Verizon's labor? Lets see someone do that to your products or your job...how long would that last? You do all (or part of), the work to make something and then instead of you getting paid, they send your salary to your neighbor.





Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2