Slashdot Mirror
Massachusetts Plans a Cell Phone Bill of Rights
freaktheclown writes "Via Engadget, the news that Massachusetts' state legislature is considering a cell phone bill of rights, which would 'limit contracts to one year, require easier to understand monthly bills, and force carriers to fix dead zones.' You may recall that California adopted a similar bill of rights last year before it was shelved last January."
Are carriers "allowed" to adhere to offer these "rights" by raising the price? Why don't we let the economics of the industry take care of this? T-Mobile offers one year contracts, but makes you (generally) pay more for the phones. You can't eat the cake (heavily subsidized phones) and have it too (short contract).
But seriously folks...
Also, fixing dead zones, AFAIK, would require more cell towers. If the lack in some areas was due to municipal zoning issues, how is that reconciled? Does the state bill allow the cell carriers to steamroll city/county planning commissions?
The main question on my mind, though, is would the cell phone carriers offer fewer freebies and worse deals if contracts were limited to one year, or would the competition in the market end up causing Mass. consumers to get deals on one-year contract that the rest of the country only gets on two-year contracts.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
I don't see a lot of strong evidence that that's not the case. One danger in imposing caps and restrictions like this is that it provides a convenient collusion point for all carriers. The government mandates this is the worst we can do, and gosh-darn-it, that restriction is awfully chafin, we would like to do even worse than that, but this stupid regulation prevents us, so we're stuck here doing the worst we're allowed.
While doing things that reduce the barriers to switching to a competing carrier are good, and making sure that no one carrier can ever get a lock on a particular market would also be good, I don't see a lot of point in these other restrictions.
What I would like to see in a 'cell phone bill of rights' are things like "I have the right to not be called for commercial (profit or non-profit) purposes by entitities that I have not given explicit permission to call me. And if you do receive any such calls, you have the right to not be charged the airtime for them.".
Commercials are an ever-present creeping kudzu that will take over any vehicle of communication if given half-a-chance. Even google is starting to put commercials inline with search results and only marking them off with a colored box.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
The only requirement I'm waiting to see is unlocked phones so the carriers can't keep stifling cool new technology. Verizon really screws customers be disabling/removing nice features that the manufacturers put in and advertise.
Definitely. The cell phone market is not a good example of a free market system due to the former monopoly players involved, and the monopoly practices they are able to use through tower control.
I predict that US cell companies will one day soon be revealed to be colluding and price-fixing, and doing all sorts of nasty oligopoly/monopoly illegal things.
e.g. why the fuck is text messaging on most carrier 5-10 cents to send and again to receive? that's pure profit (excepting when people are flooding the text channel, evidentally). Why do they charge from opening the line as opposed to the receiver picking up the call? How do they magically attribute 20 minutes of calltime in chunks to my own number? (I don't have that much voicemail!)?
Why do they lock down phones and features within phones?
I'm disgusted with the US cell phone companies compared to options abroad. We as consumers are getting screwed over, and most people don't even realize it.
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
How about contract reform?
Generally, contracts are very one-sided. I mean the cell phone company can cut you off at any time, but if you cut them off when on a contract, you must pay.
Anything they can get their hands on means a swift and harsh punishment will be coming.
I mean you can always say 'don't sign the contract!' that's fine and dandy, but the very act of looking at the contract usually means you want (and sometimes need!) whatever service is being provided.
Look at any contract. When you apply for a job and get hired, you usually have to sign a contract saying something like 'everything i do on company time is owned by the company, even if i'm on break or lunch, i have the right to be fired at any time without warning or reason, i must donate all worldy goods to the company, etc.' in exchange for employment and getting paid for what you're working on.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
HRmm... odd. We have 6 month limit, and they are forced to tell you the total cost in those six months.
And we still have 15 cents cell phones.
That's in Denmark by the way.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.