Slashdot Mirror


White House Petition To Make Cell Phone Unlocking Legal Needs 11,000 Signatures

On January 26th, unlocking a cell phone that is under contract became illegal in the U.S. Just before that went into effect, a petition was started at whitehouse.gov to have the Librarian of Congress revisit that decision. "It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full. The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked." The 30 days time limit on the petition is almost up, and it's about 11,000 signatures shy of the amount necessary to ensure a response from the Obama administration (100,000 total, recently increased from 25,000). The creator of the petition received a Cease & Desist letter from Motorola in 2005 for selling software that would allow users to unlock their phones, and he thinks it's only a matter of time before such legal threats begin again. This is part of a larger battle to protect the way consumers can use their devices. While it's still legal for people to root their phones, the Librarian of Congress failed to expand that legal protection to tablets, even though the devices are incredibly similar. The Librarian's decision (PDF) needs further review, and if the White House petition doesn't get enough signatures by February 23, such a review may not happen.

13 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. Don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's my phone, I paid for it and I honestly don't give two shits if some asshole in congress thinks I can't do what I want with something I own. Go ahead, make it illegal, fill up the jails and prisons just a little bit more. My guess is that a small handful of people might get into trouble over this, but the vast majority of us will do what we want WITH OUR OWN PROPERTY.

    1. Re:Don't care by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Better still, make *locking* phones illegal. It's anti-competitive and should have been outlawed right from the start.

    2. Re:Don't care by erice · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you truly paid for your phone then it is perfectly legal to jailbreak it. If you have a subsidized phone that you only partially paid.

      Not true. In exchange for the subsidy, you entered a legally binding contract that requires you to pay for service for a limited time period. The phone is yours. The state even requires you to pay sales tax on the unsubsidized price at the time of purchase. It is this contract that ties you to the carrier, typically for two years. The lock is completely unnecessary for ensuring that the carrier gets paid and only serves to obstruct the owner from using their own device in any way that doesn't bring extra profit to the carrier above and beyond the required service agreement.

  2. Petition starter here by sinak1159 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Thanks for the support Slashdot. As CanHasDIY notes, it doesn't mean that the decision will be reversed, and I think at best this will be the start of a process to getting the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions revisited by Congress. But hopefully it'll help.

  3. Re:Unlocking of cell phones by LateArthurDent · · Score: 3, Informative

    Do you know why their doing this?It's because of the problem of so many people getting cells/droids under a contarcted agreement then deciding they want to switch to a diferent carrier without having to pay a large fe to get out of the original contract so I can understand why the major company's want this law.The people themselves are the reason this is happening,it is not the fault of the providers whatsoever,it is the fault of the users

    If you get out of your contract agreement, you're going to pay a fee which is dependent on how long you have to go on your contract, regardless of whether you can unlock your phone or not. The fee is for breaking the contract, not to unlock your phone.

  4. Re:False Equivalence by Clomer · · Score: 5, Informative

    "...have the Librarian of Congress revisit that decision" != "Make Cell Phone Unlocking Legal"

    That is all.

    The summary is poor. The petition itself actually states "We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal."

    --
    Intelligent responses welcome, flames will be met with marshmallows.
  5. Re:I'm sure posting it on /. by mariasama16 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, its currently only needing 10,125 signatures, so some people are signing it (and I'm one who created an account to sign it myself).

  6. petitions don't write laws by Khashishi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are there any examples of a "We the people" petition actually doing anything even if successful?

    1. Re:petitions don't write laws by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are there any examples of a "We the people" petition actually doing anything even if successful?

      We got the beer recipe. Hooray.

  7. Re:Unlocking of cell phones by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you know why [they're] doing this?[ ]It's because of the problem of so many people getting cells/droids under a [contracted] agreement[,] then deciding they want to switch to a [different] carrier without having to pay a large [fee] to get out of the original contract[,] so I can understand why the major [companies] want this law.

    Whew, much better - that poorly typed shit is hard for me to read.

    Here's the issue with your argument - cellular carriers already charge hefty fees for early contract termination, so your main talking point here is demonstrably false.

    Also, this "law," which BTW isn't really a law as the Librarian of Congress is not a fucking Legislator , merely adds insult to injury by preventing everyone from unlocking their phones, up to and including folks who unwittingly bought a locked phone outright (it happens), and people like me that actually fulfilled our contractual obligation, and now possess a fully paid for, albeit nearly obsolete, device.

    The people themselves are the reason this is happening,it is not the fault of the providers whatsoever,it is the fault of the users

    Psychologists refer to this sort of behavior as victim blaming, and is oft employed exclusively by narcissistic assholes.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  8. Re:i did by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I see. Your time is better spent bitching about said Internet petition on Slashdot.

  9. Meanwhile, southwards... by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here in Brazil, it is illegal to sell locked phones.

  10. Also a petition for a people's FCC chairman by doug141 · · Score: 3, Informative
    There's also a petition to appoint Susan as FCC Chairman.

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/appoint-susan-crawford-fcc-chairman/73mtqt0q ,

    Susan Crawford, law school professor and author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly in the New Guilded Age, says “Truly high-speed wired Internet access is as basic to innovation, economic growth, social communication, and the country’s competitiveness as electricity was a century ago, but a limited number of Americans have access to it, many can’t afford it, and the country has handed control of it over to Comcast and a few other companies.”

    In a recent TV interview, she pointed out high speed access in Hong Kong costs a fraction of what it does in New York city, because the US providers don't enter each other's markets. She wants to change that.

    http://billmoyers.com/segment/susan-crawford-on-why-u-s-internet-access-is-slow-costly-and-unfair/