Slashdot Mirror
Bill Proposes Canadian Cellphone Unlocking Rights
SJrX sends in a CBC report that the Canadian New Democratic Party has tabled a bill requiring all cellphone companies to provide unlocked cellphones. (Wikipedia notes, "The party is regarded as falling on the left in the Canadian political spectrum.") This reader adds, "The fact that there is a minority government currently should help this bill's chances of getting passed." "The bill proposes three rules: cellphone carriers would be required to notify customers at the point of purchase whether a phone is locked to work only on their network; they would have to remove such a lock free of charge at any point after the conclusion of the customer's service contract; and they would have to remove it if the customer does not enter into a contract within six months of buying the device up front."
"Sure you're free to take this phone to another carrier, just don't circumvent the DRM to do it"
Between laws like this, universal healthcare, low crime, etc. I'm considering hiring a coyote to smuggle me and my family across the border. All of the advantages of modern America without all the ultra-right-wing bullshit and wars. I'd pay higher taxes and put up with more snow for that.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I'm a Liberal and have been since I started voting. For the most part, I sympathized with the NDP (since they are a left party and I am similarly left in most of my views) but just didn't think most of their agendas were in line with my interests and goals. Of late, however, they have taken new "modern" issues very seriously and are coming out on the side I support, which is to say the side of the populace rather than corporate overlords. As the Liberals languish in a bygone era and the Conservatives drive further towards a system that I loathe (and all other options simply not worth considering unless I've already put a bullet in my head), I find myself becoming increasingly inclined to vote NDP in upcoming elections. Kudos to them and I hope they keep forcing the other parties to seriously consider consumer rights as various subjects are discussed and debated.
Keep in mind that the Neo Democrats (NDP) are a minority party. As long as the ruling conservatives get the backing of the liberals (the main opposition party), they can beat the project and kill it outright. Stephen Harper has shown time and again to be a shill of the MPAA and RIAA, so this outcome is the most likely one.
Phone company sympathizers that will claim it hurts business...
wont someone think of the rich CEO's!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This news comes on the heels of some of the larger Mobile carriers recently launching their GSM (most 3.5G) networks.
Before very recently there was only one company in the entire country that utilized GSM and that was Rogers. Every other company was CDMA. There were a few other company names that used GSM, but they simply bought/rented bandwidth off of Rogers towers. The largest of which was Fido, however they were eventually bought up by Rogers.
This sounds like a good thing to me and I hope it goes through. It probably wont because Telco's here have a lot of power just like they do in the USA.
My provider is set to launch their GSM network in a few weeks and I'm pretty excited.
Over here in Sweden, 3rd party unlocking of phones is legal. (or at least has been, haven't seen much advertising for that lately, come to think of it.)
You could pay the equivalent of $50 or something to some bozo with a computer and a cable to crack the operator lock.
Obviously, if you signed a contract with monthly fees for a number of months, you'd still have to pay those, but there were some marketing stunt where you could get a locked phone without monthly fees virtually for free. You could then unlock it and sell with a nice profit.
That kind of deals obviously don't come often. Maybe there was just the one.
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
Ted, however, is against it on the grounds that it's totally bogus.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I am writing you due to my concern and displeasure with what I feel are unacceptable, anti-competitive practices in Canada's mobile phone industry.
Foremost among my concerns is the practice of "Cell Phone Network Locking". Cellular phones are expensive pieces of equipment. Consumers nowadays can expect to either pay hundreds of dollars or be required to lock themselves in to a three year contract in order to get a handset subsidized by their network provider.
I understand and respect the network's need to protect their investment in terms of the "minimum contract time", but my problem arises at the end of the contract term (or immediately, in the case of the consumer who purchases their hardware outright).
Networks sell their hardware in a "Network Locked" state. This means that a phone purchased from Rogers will only work on Rogers owned networks, Bell only with Bell and so on... If a consumer who owns their phone outright is in any way unsatisfied with their service or have to switch providers for any reason, they are forced to abandon their hardware and "start again" with a new and expensive handset or enter another long contract.
Modern cell phones will typically cost $500 but can climb to almost $1000 for top-of-the-line hardware.
A recent article in the news cites Canada's cell phone rates as being amongst the world's most expensive (http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/08/11/canada-cellphone-rates-expensive-oecd.html).
Though many countries do not have laws regarding the practice of SIM locking, a number of countries do seem to have been able to strike a fair balance between consumer protection and corporate profits.
I would urge you to consider pursuing Canadian regulations like those described in the following countries: Brazil, Denmark, Finland, France, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore and Spain. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_lock) All of these countries have regulations that in one way or another allow the consumer to freely own their handset after they have paid for it. Often there is some fair and reasonable period of protection for the company.
Whether it be like Hong Kong's "until the phone is paid for", or Denmark's "Six Months" isn't really an issue for me, but for the time being it seems that relying on Canadian providers to voluntarily provide unlock codes to consumers is not working. I believe a legislative implement will be what is best for Canadians.
Competition is good for the consumer as is choice, allowing customers who have paid for their hardware to choose which provider to get their service from will hopefully improve our situation.
A second issue which seems to be getting coverage elsewhere is the move to charge consumers for receiving text messages. I am strongly against this as it opens the door for consumers to be forced into paying "Junk Mail".
Although I'll admit that I'm not necessarily an NDP supporter regularly, I am certainly in agreement with their current "I'm Against The Text Message Cash Grab" campaign that they seem to be running (Even if the language is a bit inflammatory for my tastes, the message is clear). Should you find yourself in a position to suppourt a bill on this issue, I would be pleased if you did.
Thank you very much for your time,
And here we are nearly 10 Months later and they're introducing a bill?
Could it be possible that the political system actually works? Surely there's some other explanation. Please, Oh Please, let there be some other explanation... I'd hate to be forced into voting for the NDP as the only party that isn't completely incompetent.
Rogers Bought Fido, and merged their two GSM networks. Telus and Bell, who both used CDMA, are in bed together now, and created their own GSM network, so they could get the iPhone. So now, we actually do have a choice where we get our contracts from. The only problem is that the plans are so similar these days, that they all cost about the same for the same amount of minutes, data, etc... If I didn't know better I'd say they were price fixing.... hopefully the new wireless companies (Wind, hopefully soon to be Shaw), will actually do some radical things to pricing that will bring down the incumbents...
Funny. That looks familiar.
Telus and Bell built a JOINT network. It's the same 3G network operating on 850Mhz & 1900Mhz.
Their CDMA Network is on the way out and will not be upgraded.
Rogers also has a 3G network operating on 850Mhz & 1900Mhz.
So, you have the nations three biggest carriers operating on the same frequencies of 850Mhz & 1900Mhz HSPA(+).
The only thing not compatible is the first and second gen networks.
The only carriers that this doesn't affect are Mobilicy and Wind.
a. because they don't have contracts and in case of Wind, will unlock your phone (after 3 months) (not sure about mobilicity)
b. they are on the AWS band and are only compatible with each other. (1700Mhz/2100Mhz)
--- tracer.ca
I was disappointed to see that the dog wasn't holding a gun. Clearly that family is not fully committed to being armed.
Putting moderation advice in your
You're generally wrong.
Telus runs two networks. Their new HSPA+ (21mbps) network runs on both 850 and 1900 spectrum.
Rogers has both GSM AND HSPA/UMTS on 850 and 1900. Generally their 3G HSPA stuff is on 850 while the 2.5G EDGE is on 1900 but this is changing in many rual centers.
You can take an iPhone for example, and work perfectly fine on Telus, Bell, or Rogers (provided it is unlocked which they are from the Apple Store up here).
The particular phone you gave an example for was a bad one as well. The N900 has 2.5G EDGE/GSM on all Canadian frequencies. But it's 3G is only on the AWS band, which is T-Mobile in the USA or WIND Mobile here in Canada. You're also wrong about the SIM, Bell and Telus (and Nokia..what?) have their GSM network which has SIM cards like any other.
Telus/Bell still run their CDMA network but it is generatlly depreciated and not many phones are sold for it any longer.
SO basically there is no incompatible bullshit other than the info in your post. LTE will be welcome of course.
It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
This bill is good intentioned, but practically useless, given the state of affairs of the cell phone market reality in North America (yes, USians, you too!)
In Europe, Africa and most of Asia, everyone standardized on GSM. You ask the network for a phone number, and they give you a SIM card, you go to any shop and buy any phone and it is guaranteed to work with any network you choose. Not only that, but phones work everywhere from Hong Kong to Dubai to Spain to Johannesburg. Nothing special, other than getting a SIM card if roaming is too expensive.
In the USA and Canada, we the consumers, have accepted things that are never acceptable elsewhere. For example, we had CDMA, which is used only in the USA, Canada, Japan and perhaps another one or two smaller countries. CDMA does not have a SIM card. The phone is made by the manufacturer and locked to a certain network that sells you the phone.
Even when GSM came to North America, it was done in bands that were not the standard ones used elsewhere in the world, which was circumvented when quad band phones were put on the market. Meaning they work in Europe and Canada/USA, but they have a higher price and have more silicon inside to handle this fragmentation.
When 3G came by, more fragmentation occurred. The governments started selling "spectrum", and companies like Google and Cricket grabbed certain bands (WINDMobile, Mobilicity and Public Mobile in Canada did the same). AWS was invented.
This means that a phone from Rogers will not work with WINDMobile and vice versa.
So what use will the bill be if they are operating at different frequencies?
Not only that, we see industry lobbyists asking for "more spectrum". The excuse is that spectrum is too crowded, but the real reason is more fragmentation and balkanization so they can lock in customers more and more. Why does Europe which is more densely populated, or Egypt have more carriers, yet all handsets work on all networks?
See this article I wrote earlier: Mobile phone carriers lobby for more balkanization by asking for more spectrum as well.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
Of course.
Dividing the year into 25 months instead of the customary 12 is very convenient.
That way we can still claim that we have 3 full months of summer.