Slashdot Mirror
Wireless Carriers Accused of Antitrust Violations
phoneboy writes "From Wireless Consumers Alliance: A class-action lawsuit was filed on April 5 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of wireless consumers seeking to end the control of the handset market by wireless carriers. Read the Antitrust Complaint. While the complaint is fairly short and easy to understand, a summary is in order: The carriers basically dictate required features to handset manufacturers. Phones are tied to specific carriers and cannot be moved between carriers. Carriers refuse to allow handsets on their network they didn't approve. Handset manufacturers thus cannot sell handsets that aren't approved by carriers because carriers will not allow them to be used. All of this rises costs for the consumer, making it difficult and more expensive to switch carriers, and unfairly restrains trade for both handsets and cellular services. As someone who recently tried subscribing to AT&T's new GSM service with an unlocked GSM phone (they didn't allow me to "activate" the service unless I bought one of their phones), I'll be watching this case very closely."
The question is, what is the current state of regulation in the wireless arena? Do regulations currently exist similar to the old phone regulations? If not, how do the wireless carriers enforce their hardware requirements?
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Bravo!
This is highly needed. I am a big fan of Nokia phones, to the point where I won't use any other brand of phone. Unfortunately, I signed up for access with Sprint PCS 2 years ago, and a little over a year ago I extended my contract (it won't be over until May).
When I signed up with Sprint PCS, Nokia phones were an option. Today they aren't, and no matter how many times I've contacted them things don't seem to be changing.
My only choices are to (A) continue to use my 3 year old phone, (B) move on to a new provider, or (C) get a non-Nokia phone.
None of those options are satisfactory to me.
(A) my phone is outdated and no longer has the features I require. It is over large, gets horrible reception in my new Apartment, and the battery hardly lasts a day.
(B) I would have to change my phone number as I was told I could not switch my current phone number over to the new provider (it is owned by Sprint). Secondly, my options are AT&T and Verizon who are both far worse companies than Sprint (in my experience anyway).
(C) There are few phones I like, and after past experiences with current cell phone companies I've chosen to remain with Nokia, not just because I like their phones but because I like the way they run their business.
As you can see, I am in a no win situation. Any choice I make leads me to make some sort of a compromise. While this lawsuit will unfortunately not go through the courts quick enough to be a benefit to me, it is long overneeded and I can only hope it helps keep others from experiencing these same problems in the future.
Bryan
VoiceStream hooked me up in WA state with a Motorola Timeport TriBand (a phone that never made it on the U.S. market). Then I used the same phone when I signed up with PacBell Wireless (now Cingular). Finally, VoiceStream hooked me back up in Illinois. Excellent reception.
This is with the same phone. Seems to only be AT&T which has this "policy".
As most of us know, there are six widely used technologies, Analog, GSM, CDMA 800mHz, CDMA 1900mHz, TDMA 800mHz, and TDMA 1900mHz.
Most carriers only have their towers equipped for one, maybe two frequencies. In your case, while Sprint used to use the GSM technology, they now only use the CDMA 1900mHz for their phones.
Only phones made for that technology will work on that system.
The other issue that is run across quite a bit is knowledge. Most wireless representatives will have no idea how to program handsets they do not actually sell, even if they run on the same technology and frequency. A person who sells only Nokia and Motorola handsets will have no clue how to program an older Ericsson or Samsung, for example.
Another reason they require their own handsets deals with the fact that many companies (AT&T and Sprint for example) upgrade the software in the phones before sending them to the stores.
They do this to make sure you have the ability properly access their networks.
I agree that wireless providers should provide quite a bit more selection in stocking their handsets, but I would don't expect them to sell and support every type of handset out there.
Thats like requiring car manufacturers to make sure all their vehicles can use diesel, gasoline, petroleum, electricity, fuel cells and ethenol, and have them interchangable.
All it will do is drive the price of the service and handsets up, not just for the added technology, but for the additional training and expertise the representatives will need.
Well that Outback comment was hardly justified! What do you think, we use cans with a bit of string between them to communicate down here?
I've travelled quite a bit, and you know what? My Nokia GSM triband (the very latest piece of kit too, none of that stuff you're stuck with in the USA) works just as well in the Australian Outback as it does across Europe and Asia.
Only sometimes could I get it to work without hassle in what the rest of the world considers to be a telecommunications backwater: the USA.
-- A very bemused Sydneysider
...well, some level of precedent.
I'm technically not old enough to remember any of this, but from what I recall, there was some issues with the phone company not selling phone equipment to people -- only leasing.
There was some issue about the use of non-Bell phones on the system. Could someone respond with more intelligent and enlightening information regarding this?
The gist of it is that the general population won the right to use their own phones on their phone connection without being hassled by the phone company about it.
Actually...
I had a few problems with AT&T activating a phone they didn't sell.
I had been waiting for them to release the Ericsson T39, but the launch dates kept being pushed back. I called them and they said they were going to be getting the T68, no date though. I called their GSM support center and got conflicting opinions on them activating a phone they didn't sell. They told me they could sell me a SIM and I would just put it in my phone. On that note, I went ahead and bought a phone on eBay because I was tired of waiting for them. When I picked up the phone from the person I bought it from, I also stopped at the nearest AT&T Wireless store to buy a SIM. They sold me a SIM ($25) and told me to call a certain number to activate it. I call said number and the CSR basically went ballistic about the store selling a SIM without a phone. He then refused to activate the SIM. No amount of convincing would work. He said they would only activate a SIM only if it was sold with a phone from them. At that point I thought I might be SOL in getting my phone working on their network. Well, I called back and spoke to a supervisor and asked the same questions again. He told me the same things that the previous CSR had said. I then asked him what would stop me from getting one of their phones and using that SIM. He said nothing would, and couldn't tell me not to do it. I had been with AT&T since 1994 so I knew I was going to get a good deal on the Customer Upgrade Program. I went to one of the AT&T stores in downtown Seattle and bought a Motorola Timeport that they were selling for $199, my price was $9.99. After the hour long wait for them to "move" my TDMA account to GSM, I pulled the SIM out of the Motorola and stuck it in my T68 (in the presence of the clerks at the store) and the phone worked fine.
I should not have had to go through all of this to get my phone to work. Had they activated the SIM that I bought, they would not have had to spend money to subsidize the Motorola I had to buy to get them to activate a SIM. I did pay more than what AT&T is currently selling the T68 for, but I did get the portability of taking it to whatever carrier will activate a SIM.
I have heard rumors about AT&T planning to do naughty things to people who are using phones that weren't purchased from them. One is not allowing any phone with an IMEI(sp) number that is not one they sold to access their network. I do not think this can possibly be legal. I think there is a requirement for all carriers to allow access to their networks for 911 service. They can't block a phone without being in violation of that.
The problem I had with the WAP stuff is that their WAP gateway was not yet configured for the T68. Shortly after they started to sell that model, the gateway was updated.
I work for a cell phone manufacturer. If the FCC really does push the industry to interoperate more, then why are carriers asking us to implement a feature which will require GSM phones to only use their SIM cards? This is new development in the latter half of 2001, something that the carriers are expending new money on to reduce interoperability.
i'm amazed, usually here in Europe we have to sneer and hide our jealously behind sarcastic comments in all things communication related, eg you have always on DSL, we're still waiting (well, DSL is /starting/ to become more a bit widespread in some EU countries), you have 155Mbit/s OC-3c's while for the same price we get E2's (4Mbit/s), you have free local calls - we're still getting screwed by former state monopolies who still control the local loop and do their damnedest to make it difficult for the competition to get access... etc..
But at last we europeans (and those asians even more so) have a chance to cast a gloating data communications eye across the water: the USA is still in the mobile phone dark ages!
Over here, you can buy any phone and have it work anywhere in europe with any carrier. It's all GSM here. (well, actually there are pre-paid phones, and bill phones) and I can go on holiday to a little greek island and my phone could roam on either of the 2 greek carriers that covered the island. I go to london, get off the airplane and my phone has a choice of a whole bunch of networks!
My dad travels a lot, so to save on roaming costs he bought a pre-paid GSM SIM card in each country that he regularly spends time in. So when he gets off the plane, he just puts whichever SIM card into his phone according to which carrier has the best rates. the only disadvantage is that to reach him i might have to dial 4 numbers (Dad, Dad-FR, Dad-NL, Dad-ES). But hey..
Also, do people in the states have to pay full price on the handsets? At least here in EU, most of the cost of handsets is subsidised by the carriers (low-end nokia's are about EUR30 to EUR70 depending on the carrier's deal - used to be they gave them out free, but not anymore)
anyway.. GSM - we pee in your general direction! hu hu..
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.