Slashdot Mirror
FCC To Investigate Cell Phone Unlocking Ban
Edgewood_Dirk writes "In response to the recent White House petition, the FCC will be investigating the viability and possible harm of the ban on cell-phone unlocking. Gregory Ferenstein met with FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski at a TechCrunch CrunchGov event Wednesday, where the Chairman said the 'ban raises competition concerns; it raises innovation concerns.'"
This line from the end of the article fails to inspire confidence: "Genachowski isn’t sure what authority he has, but if he finds any, given the tone of the conversation, it’s likely he will exert his influence to reverse the decision."
""Genachowski isn’t sure what authority he has"" I refer him to http://www.fcc.gov/what-we-do and specifically to
" Promoting competition, innovation, and investment in broadband services and facilities;
Supporting the nation’s economy by ensuring an appropriate competitive framework for the unfolding of the communications revolution;
Encouraging the highest and best use of spectrum domestically and internationally;
Revising media regulations so that new technologies flourish alongside diversity and localism;
Providing leadership in strengthening the defense of the nation’s communications infrastructure."
The FCC has done a lot of similar things, say for example mandating that cable companies can't sell boxes that don't include a cablecard, or requiring all cable companies to permit self install of cablecards.
What would stop them from outright forbidding cell phone locking?
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
Like all things coming from the White House Petition Site, this is an opportunity for the President to appear like he is in touch with the common man. Expect an official looking executive directive and a press release from the relevant agency. After that... We'll see.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
The fact that the Librarian of Congress can issue a directive making it illegal under the DMCA for consumers to unlock phones that have been locked by providers does not mean that the FCC can't issue an order under its authority with regard to telecommunications prohibiting wireless vendors from locking phones in the first place, which would render the issue of a DMCA exemption allowing unlocking locked phones moot.
Asking the FCC to investigate and explore possible action is, in a sense, more than the petition called for (as it called on the President to ask the Librarian of Congress to reverse the decision and, failing that, lobby Congress to take legislative action to reverse the LoC action.)
You are, like the people who figured that it was acceptable to lift the dmca exception that permitted cell phone unlocking until a couple of weeks ago, on the grounds that there is currently a respectable availability of unlocked phones for consumers to utilize anyways, failing to realize the perhaps less than immediately obvious unintended consequences of outlawing the unlocking of new cell phones.
In creating laws which protect locked cell phones from being tampered with by consumers, the system ends up creating an incentive (however slight) for cell phone providers to actually distribute locked cell phones, usually in place of unlocked ones, so that the distributors can enjoy whatever additional benefits that the legal protection actually offers. It's the same problem as with outlawing the breaking of encryption on copyrighted works... the lawmakers end up supporting a particular business model or technology that may not actually reflect what consumers really want. And because providers of such devices have been given some additional incentive to distribute such locked devices, the availability of unlocked devices will gradually start to decrease over time, ultimately leaving a consumer with little to no choice but to either purchase a locked technology, or else ultimately simply not be be part of the technologically advanced culture at all.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Perhaps I simply lack the imagination. Perhaps someone here could offer up a reasonable rationale as to how a carrier locked phone is protecting ANYONE's copyright? You understand this is being done, apparently, under the DMCA.
The carriers have no copyright over which carrier I use.
Now if they are talking about rooting a phone and loading custom firmware? That's a different matter. Because as we know, "media" such as flash drives, recordable CD/DVDs and such have been the target of pre-emtive fines/taxes which presume people will use them for violating someone's copyright and these measures are meant to compensate the largest of the copyright NPEs. (I love that -- NPEs: Non-Practicing Entities. They don't create music or art... they just buy it, limit it it and control it. We should all start calling the copyright houses copyright NPEs to better identify how they contribute to the arts.)
But that's the thing about phones. The software/firmware is a part of the functional device. The software/firmware is copyrightable... but also patentable... it is erasable... replaceable. The software which carriers peddle contains things which the consumer has no interest to say the least and often arguably serves to harm the consumer. It is not about copyright as much as it is controlling the device and the consumer by extension. This exceeds the intent and purpose of copyright AND the DMCA.
The fact that the Librarian of Congress can issue a directive making it illegal under the DMCA for consumers to unlock phones that have been locked by providers
The LoC did not make unlocking illegal.
The default status of cell phone unlocking is 'not legal'
The LoC allowed for an exemption to the law and then decided not to renew that exemption.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
The DMCA prohibits bypassing "access control measures", in this case, carrier locks that control access to cell networks. There is no requirement that they be controlling access to copyrighted material.
Reason $BIGNUM why the DMCA is a horrible law that should have been strangled in the crib.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time