Slashdot Mirror
What You Need To Know About Phone Unlocking
Now that unlocking a new phone is under many circumstances illegal in the U.S. (!), Digital Trends has collected a useful set of answers outlining just what that means. As they put it, a "quick guide to answer all your why, how, and WTF questions." Among them, some explanation of the rule-making process, the reasoning that led to the end to the unlocking exception to the DMCA (including the Ninth Circuit's 2010 Vernor v. Autodesk decision), and illustrations of situations in which it is not illegal to unlock your phone.
I know it is in Australia (ACCC).... would have thought US had more protection.
EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
From the article: "In the long run, you will likely end up paying more for your locked device than for an unlocked one." But how is this true even when the only carrier with coverage in your area doesn't give a discount on monthly service for bringing your own phone?
...and I'll be unlocking them now that they've made it "illegal". I just don't fucking care what the United States government has to say about anything, anymore. They've lost all credibility in the eyes of most intelligent, thinking people.
the phone subsidy is there to sell pricey contracts. If your don't want the subsidy, look at the network's no-contract affiliate.
If i read the article correctly , the whole issue is with the software on the phone and the copyright on it. So if i hack my android phone and flash my legal aosp or CM rom on it, where is the dmca problem?
further, network locking is something else then software locking. so how is network locking related to software locking and dmca?
FTA:
Why is it illegal to unlock a smartphone?
Because unlocking a phone requires making changes to its firmware – software that is copyrighted and owned by your carrier – which would be a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
I don't understand. If I buy a book, and make some edits (cross out some paragraphs, change some words) that's not illegal. Perhaps it would be if I distributed the book (or copies of it). Selling pens to make the edits isn't illegal either.
How is changing firmware different?
Unlocking devices isn't as relevant in the US as it is in other parts of the world. The big 4 in the US all use different technologies to provide service, so taking a device from carrier a to carrier b doesn't make sense in terms of being useful. Of course there is always the argument of "it's my device let me do what i please" and I agree more with that, but those people should pony up the full retail value of the product. If you buy a phone that is carrier subsidized you're essentially financing the phone over 2 years.
If the carriers want to move to an unsubsidized model they should give consumers an incentive to pay upfront costs. T-Mobile's "value plan" is a good example. The customer buy's the device at a discount and pays an additional fee of $20 until the device's retail value is paid off. The plan then becomes $20 cheaper. If carrier's want a BYOD to work they need to offer cheaper rates.
The carriers can offer their retail salespeople a rate plan of $20 at the cost of BYOD. Why can't they do this for consumers? The plan's dont even have to be that cheap, but a $40-50 plan is not out of the realm of possibility. When I worked retail I bought my own Galaxy S3 and paid $25 for my plan. For an upfront cost of ~$520 I saved about $1800 over the cost of a 2-year consumer rate plan
I'm not a USA citizen, but as a Brazilian (country which all kinds of operator locking were ruled *illegal* a few years ago), I seriously recommend you guys to unlock your phones, being it legal or not, you needing it or not. It's a simple matter of having your rights respected.
" Because unlocking a phone requires making changes to its firmware – software that is copyrighted and owned by your carrier – which would be a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)."
But I own the hardware? So I can install anything I like, right? Or am I forced to suck whatever they throw at me?
Go douche, you skank.
The locked subsidized phone model is not viable, at least not here in Denmark.
A year or so ago all the major carriers here agreed that they would stop the subsidizing and thus the locking of new phones. The value of the phone simply did not match how much the forced subscription (6 months) would yield and as many customers simply switched phone and carrier every 6 months, they consistently lost money.
So now you either pay the full price for the new phone or in installments on your phone bill. If you end your subscription after the first 6 months but before the phone was paid for, you had to pay the remainder in order to end the contract. Simple and avoids the creation of stupid laws to fix a broken business model.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
"Keep your mouth shut and never rat on your friends."
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Dear Customer,
We apologize for the shitty service that resulted in your failure to get first post but this was due to our routine packet inspections designed to improve your service. During these scans we have detected an unauthorized software on your smartphone and have remotely disabled your device. To discuss the deactivation of our block and reset of your device please call +1-OWN-YOU2. There is a processing charge of $79 to re-enable your device so please have a valid credit or debit card handy.
Regards AT&T
What happens if I unlock my phone while I'm abroad?
If so, there is an intermediate stage between 'intact' and 'destroyed'.
Arent most of these devices offered at a discount if you sign a contract? I have always use prepaid and paid full price for my phones so i dont know. If so i could understand why they would get upset, since they provided you a greatly discounted phone at their loss, in exchange for the promise of your business.
I don't understand why this law was necessary. If I take my phone some where else, I will have to break my contract with the phone company or pay for two plans. If I cancel my plan, I pay a termination fee that results in the phone company getting their subsidized portion of the phone back (financially). Everyone walks away and calls it quits. The phone goes with me because I paid for it in full. Also, if the phone companies all have policies allowing you to go out of the country and arrange to swap your SIMS, again what was the point? Where is the damage being done if I should unlock my phone? If we are going to have DCMA protection of copyrighted software./firmware, it should be aimed at situations where replication of a copyright material is being made.
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
jailbreaking is still ok.
My understanding is that this only applies to newly purchased phones, starting today, 1/27.
Any phone purchased on 1/26 or before can still be legally unlocked.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
they should be forced to unlock / offer low cost roaming not $10+ a meg roaming fees.
Remember it?
Making laws based on opinions that stem up from false informations leads to witch hunts.
Isn't there (much?) GPLed code in phones? Has anyone looked into this? Of course it would require reverse-engineering and even that won't prove what the source code is.
So how about just replacing the code altogether?
I bought my iphone from apple's website for full fetail. went month-to-month with one phone company, then just changed the sim card to change providers. definitely the way to go!
Just because there is a law against doing something, doesn't necessarily make it right. Laws provide a scaffold which enables an orderly society to coalesce, but every once in a blue moon we need to ditch the old scaffold in favor of a new one - that time is approaching.
If we all followed the law, segregation might still be in effect, alcohol would still be illegal, some of the most insightful scientific and philosophical ideas may have never been written down on paper prior to the age of enlightenment. Apple is now a hindrance to technological progress and they will pay the price for it.
Some more background info for us non-US readers, please?
I don't see the issue here. I've bought my iPhone and then got a cell phone contract for them that didn't include a phone, so no subsidies and no unlocking required.
If the carrier pays the phone for you (and you pay him back over time) then they seem to have a legit interest that you don't say "thanks" and take your business elsewhere before the refinancing time is up.
So what's the issue here?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
From what I understand of the unlocking process, firmware itself is not altered assuming I still member what firmware is from my firmware development years. Doesn't unlocking it just set an access code?
I seem to recall being able to unlock and re-lock certain phones in the past without a need to upgrade the firmwarw.
I thought Obama was emperor. Oh wait- the Supreme Court. No, the EPA. Now it's the Librarian of Congress? When can I be Emperor for a day?
OK, my lame humor aside- I'm growing more and more frustrated with these Executive Branch Orders. I thought We the People ruled through our Congress. I'm sorry, but if I buy that phone, it's mine to modify. If I void my warranty, so be it.
OK, lets take this to extremes: if I buy a car and change the look, add a spoiler, ground effects, whatever, I'm now violating someone's copyrighted design, right? And it's not hidden from public sight- I'm out in public showing off my willful desecration of someone's original work.
Is there any way we can take back our own government?
All you need to know is that this only applies to phones under a cellular contract. Cellular contracts are awful things to begin with and now they are even worse. The only thing that makes people sign them is the high price of phones which WILL go down. In a few years and smartphones will be $50. Granted, the carriers will find some excuse to charge $500 for them, but if you've got half a brain in your head you'll just buy your phone outright and avoid the contract.
In the meantime there's Walmart. They now sell unlocked, prepaid smartphones. No contract, unlimited talk, text and data for $50/month (prepaid) I believe it's $60 for international calling. It's on the Verizon network so coverage is better than most. I don't generally shill for Walmart but this is by far the best cellular deal out there. I've even heard you can get them to transfer certain phones from other carriers (Verizon for example) I'll be losing my work phone in about 6 months and I'll be going strait to walmart after work.
It seems like Verizon and AT&T spend millions that they collect from their monopoly of the spectrum and give it to politicians to who then make laws in their favor. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=B08&year=a
The government sales of the free spectrum to the highest bidder is one of the biggest scams ever. Carrier-less mesh networking technology has been a viable alternative for a long time ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking ) but the government persists in licensing the most useful spectrum frequencies to the highest bidder for billions of dollars ( http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/default.htm?job=about_auctions ) while restricting the unlicensed spectrum like 802.11 to limited frequencies with severe power restrictions.
This is based on the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA - and act which is not really about copyright but rather about encryption and the legality of removing encryption. Nothing about copyright changed in the DMCA. Except that now instead of having to actually violate copyright to be in violation of a law, you simply need to access copyrighted material you have purchased or licensed without using the method of access supplied by the content provider to be in violation.
I would love (LOVE) to find out which congressmen have, or have family members, with ripped material in their possession and go black-ops apeshit on their houses. Because I can guarantee you that most* of them never really figured that this would be the result; their handlers simply told them that this was absolutely necessary to stem piracy and save everything that is good an wholesome in the universe from evil hackers.
*The rest are actively in bed with the labels and would crush anyone who stands between them and an augmented payday. No party has a monopoly on either side.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Copyright doesn't enter into it. The process of "unlocking" is an unauthorized (by the creator) circumvention of digital rights management. Boom - against the law - game, set, match.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2026236/phone-unlocking-ban-could-could-hit-you-in-the-wallet.html
Take/send your phone outside the US and unlock it there. The DMCA prohibits the act of unlocking, not the possession of an unlocked device. Fortunately that bought and paid for piece of crap legislation only applies in the land of the economically enslaved, so unlocking outside the US is still perfectly legal. I see a big business opportunity in the making.
"The primary reason cited by the Librarian is, there are an increasing number of phones you can buy that come unlocked. Apple and its carrier partners sell the iPhone 5 unlocked, for example. Google’s Nexus 4 also comes unlocked. T-Mobile has plans to offer more of its phones unlocked. And retailers like Best Buy offer all sorts of unlocked phones. In short, the Librarian decided that there’s no reason to alter the DMCA to allow people to unlock any phone since people can easily buy an unlocked phone nowadays, if they choose to do so."
Now that it's "illegal" one wonders how long unlocked phones will continue to be offered, otherwise why make it illegal?
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
The problem is that usually the carrier lock is not on the code you can modify (i.e. not in the general software ROM, where the OS is), but rather in the radio chip which is most likely running closed source software.
But this is the USA. Wouldn't it be possible for the carriers to report when a phone IMEI that is supposed to be locked to a different network shows up on theirs? Heck that could even be made a legal obligation.
I'm unlocking my phones and you can't stop me.
Come and get me motherfuckers, and you'll have to pry the phones out of my cold dead hands!
Anymore than it is illegal to write in a book you bought which contains copyrighted content. This is not about copyright, it is about private property rights and the Library of Congress has no authority in that realm.
"Verizon sells all iPhone 5s unlocked, meaning you could take your device over to AT&T or T-Mobile without having to unlock the device."
You could take your Verizon CDMA iPhone over to AT&T or T-Mobile, but you won't ever get it to work on their networks.
Can you (legally) buy a locked phone in the uSA, leave the country and unlock it one where it is not illegal, then bring it back?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
If you list your phone on ebay.com you can have it seen in the UK on ebay.co.uk as well.
If you list a CDMA only, no sim please let us know with a clear "This is a CDMA phone with no simcard slot available for the W-CDMA ("3G" "UMTS") systems in use in the UK" - but you can still use it like a tablet.
Don't forget to buy a spare old phone for travelling. I'll be glad to sell you one. Ker-ching. Or indeed... to swap your locked phone for one.
A blog I run for the wealth
I think I'd rather have unlocking be legal even if it meant the end of subsidized devices.
Why would it mean the end of subsidized devices? You've signed a multi-year contract with the company to get the subsidized device so why should they care whose network you use it on - you will still be paying them their pound of flesh to use their network regardless of whichever other network you sign up for.
In fact it is very probably to their benefit for you to use another network since then they'll get the money and someone else will get the network traffic to deal with! The only possible benefit is that it lets them make huge profits on roaming but for the US only less than 40% (assuming a 300M population) of the US even have a passport so an even smaller fraction will travel abroad in any given year. In fact it probably is this which is driving it - in the EU, which has controlled roaming charges, unlocking a phone seems to be far more common (at least that's my impression without hard evidence to back it up).
"A 16GB unlocked iPhone 5, for instance, will cost you $650. Buy the same phone through AT&T, Sprint, or Verizon, and you’ll pay just $200 thanks to carrier subsidies – but you also have to agree to a two-year contract. In the long run, you will likely end up paying more for your locked device than for an unlocked one."
Yeah... that would be true if you bought an unlocked phone and then just threw it in a drawer without using it. If you actually sign up for a voice and data plan in both cases how is paying an extra $450 going to save you money? (especially the way so many people upgrade their phone every few years).
another retarded law... the no common sense prevails, yey... i guess i am an outlaw, ha ha ha
In a world not controlled by giant oligarchy phone companies you can "buy" a car from a dealership, take it home and paint it purple.
You can do the same to your house because even though you owe 99% of it's value to the bank it belongs to you.
For some reason, the same thing isn't true for a $500 phone. Why can't I buy a phone from T-mobile with a 2 year contract, take it home and immediately switch it to AT&T but continue paying T-mobile for the phone for 2 years?
If you think this is wrong, please sign this petition: http://wh.gov/yA9n
I'm doing it anyway.
Mohamed Bouazizi was a 26 y.o. Tunisian who burned himself alive because of government oppression, he became the trigger for the people removing the oppressive tyrannical government from power.
You have that mostly right. The self-immolation was an act of protest against the lack of opportunity that Mr. Bouazizi faced. He was not necessarily explicitly interested in overthrowing the government, he just wanted a chance to earn a living wage.
Aaron Schwartz was a 26 y.o. American who killed himself because of government oppression
There has never been any solid evidence of that being the reason for Mr. Schwartz killing himself. Being as untreated mental health problems are the top cause of suicide in the US, and the US has a terrible track record of ignoring important mental health issues, it is very likely there was an underlying cause that we will never be able to fully diagnose.
you are SUPPOSED to remove tyrannical oppressive regime from power, what is going on?
Based on your history of political statements, it is abundantly clear that you want the US to replace "tyranny" with fascism by giving your cult leader unlimited power for unlimited time. The goals of your religion are not compatible with the life that Mr. Schwartz was leading and likely would have lead to the same result for him.
You want to concentrate more power in the hands of fewer people, Schwartz wanted the opposite. In other words, Schwartz is not a martyr to your cause as he opposed your dream of producing fascism for the people.
Are phones locked even without a contract? If not, then buy one of those and get over with. Where I live in Europe you get a better contract if you have your own device. And even some carriers sell you an "sponsored" but unlocked phone as you will have to sit the contract term out anyway.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
The FCC is considering letting some places use the 3550 to 3650 mhz frequency for small cell phone networks. I know this is on the socialism side. Get a few liberal states, like California, to push for state control of the 3400-3600 mhz band, and they can set up a state owned cell phone network. Cell phone tech seems to be mature now, and now might be time.
Why did the rule change?
Because the Librarian was convinced, for a number of reasons, that allowing unlocking was no longer a necessary exemption.
The primary reason cited by the Librarian is, there are an increasing number of phones you can buy that come unlocked. Apple and its carrier partners sell the iPhone 5 unlocked, for example. Google’s Nexus 4 also comes unlocked. T-Mobile has plans to offer more of its phones unlocked. And retailers like Best Buy offer all sorts of unlocked phones. In short, the Librarian decided that there’s no reason to alter the DMCA to allow people to unlock any phone since people can easily buy an unlocked phone nowadays, if they choose to do so.
Furthermore, new court decisions have changed the interpretation of the law. In 2010, the Ninth Circuit court decided in Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc that we cell phone owners do not actually “own” the software running our phones. Instead, we are only “licensing” this software – a key difference – which means that we don’t have a right to alter that software. This also played a role in the Librarian’s decision.
What the fuck!? Yes, the fact that I don't own the copyright to the firmware should prevent me from modifying it and distributing it. But it should NOT prevent me from modifying it on MY hardware without distribution. I should be able to do WHATEVER I WANT with the hardware I purchased. This INCLUDES changing bits here or there. Copyright only applies to redistribution.
This is CLEARLY an example where the industry first bought the congressmen and the president, then wrote the laws in their favor that were passed without anyone in congress reading them, then bought the judicial decision too. FUCK them, unjust laws shall not be enforced.
It's time for a lot more JURY NULLIFICATION to fix this bullshit.
Liberty.
Because people confuse cellular carriers with cell phone stores. Amazon Wireless is a cell phone store & carrier contract agent. Most places you go are only carrier contract agents which have cell phones in stock. You don't buy a cell phone from a Verizon Store, you take out a mortgage with a bank that stipulates the mortgage cannot be refinanced with any other bank. They give you keys to the house in exchange for a signature, but your ownership doesn't even start until the mortgage has been paid off. Since the mortgage is non-transferable, you're essentially renting the house until the mortgage is paid.
This is why I switched to pre-paid and I encourage everyone else to do so as well. Verizon's data bucket is an obvious cash grab from anyone too stupid to avoid the honeypot. By the time people realize how fucked over they have been, they're stuck with a 2 year contract. Nobody wants evicted from their house, so I expect Verizon is either too stupid to realize they are jumping the shark with the buyers remorse, or they have an exist strategy some time in the next 3 years and they are inflating profits in anticipation.
The KISS explanation is some rocket scientist wanted to boost quarterly earnings for a couple years before he deploys his golden parachute and jumps from the plane. New CEO? Old CEO wants to retire? Hard to say, but the board of directors was stupid enough to take the bait.
Please join me in dollar-cost-averaging massive shorts of Verizon Stock over the next several years. Buy AT&T & Sprint because they will be the ones to receive the customers as they come screaming out of the beehive. They will use the capital influx to buy up Verizon infrastructure/regulators until the FCC kicks down the door and chops up the Verizon network to be absorbed by the survivors.
Sooo ... If I bring my unlocked phone from Canada and travel in the US could my phone be taken from me at the border?
The Verizon iPhone 5 is a multi-mode device (it supports both GSM and CDMA) and will get HSPA+ on AT&T and areas of T-Mobile's network that have been "refarmed". T-Mobile still pretty much sucks though, so you'll likely just get EDGE. What you won't get is LTE speeds on AT&T or T-Mobile with the Verizon iPhone 5, but it doesn't matter much since AT&T's data plans are limited out the wazoo and T-Mobile has no LTE yet, anyway.
Every time I need to buy a ticket to Havana or unlock a phone, it's a quick trip over the border and back. Since they didn't make POSSESSION of an unlocked phone a crime, it's pretty easy to alibi.
Gently reply
Why would anyone in their right mind do that? Buy an unlocked phone on a credit card and pay it off over whatever period of time you want to.
Then use it with whatever carrier you want and you won't be paying for two service plans.
Even though credit card interest is outrageous, it's still got to be better than your suggestion.
First sentence of the third paragraph should read, "...cling religiously to the part of the Constitution which they say protects gun ownership..."
You are welcome on my lawn.
Great answer- thank you!
It helps when they lobby, sorry bribe, the law makers to do exactly what they're told
In no way were any law makers bribed here!
They bribed an appointed official instead.
The customer not being allowed to use his property as he sees fit?
"Oh, but phones are sold with a contract so they're cheap"
And it's my fault that your business idea is faulty? Is this the new free market? If a business idea gets twisted against its inventor we legislate away the twist so a faulty scheme can work out?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
And why can't I get voice service on a smart phone without a data plan? I'm nearly always in a wifi spot, so paying $30/mo for data is a waste of $360/year per phone.
If you didn't buy it with rhodium backed currency nothing you "own" is really yours.
I smell some new mom and pops popping up that could do it
while they do something else (wink, wink) and the user gets an
unlocked phone ! Your welcome !
This was epiphanic for me. Thank you.
Reporting them would be like sending rich jews back to Germany when you could take their jewels and pack them on a boat at huge personal profit.
Around here 7-11 offers a prepaid plan with the only monthly cost being the 911 fee. After that you pay as you go, so for "light" use it's cheaper than the cheapest fixed-rate plan.
They have an up-to-2G/month "unlimited web browsing" addon for $10/month that gets you most of the way to a full data connection when used with a proxy on the phone. This gets you texting for free with one of the various texting apps.
So, data and texting for $11.25 a month. Try getting that with a contract plan.