Database Info

esn change legality?

Everybody says changing esn is illegal.
1. Does anybody know anybody who got in trouble for changing esn?
2. say i got two devices, if i swap esn's of both of these device. It that illegal ? If yes can anybody point me to the law that states its illegal?
3. I heard some repair centers change esns, are they licensed to do that, do they have any kind of special permit?
thanks

I'm still searching for proof for you at a federal level (I'm 100% sure this is illegal in the USA) but I found something on a state level that shows it.
http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=180670013.K
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/97-98/bill/asm/ab_1101-1150/ab_1127_bill_19970703_amended_sen.html
http://www.romingerlegal.com/new_jersey/appellate/a4869-96.opn.html
http://www.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/olls/sl1997/sl.194.htm
So what's that now, Idaho, California, New Jersey and Colorado? I think the point's been proven, it is completely illegal to alter your ESN without the consent of the manufacturer of the device.

i read those, it doesn't look like it is illegal if you paid for phone service, and you swap the esn to another device, as long as you discontinue using the first device. it isn't as if you are adding a second line of service for no money, you're just putting it on a new phone.
ehow has a page describing how to do it, in fact. i just googled esn switching, and there it was, seems fairly simple

Black93300ZX said:
I think the point's been proven, it is completely illegal to alter your ESN without the consent of the manufacturer of the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, only avoiding payment is against the law. some banned people nowadays

Hmm
Sorry to resurrect but was researching this myself recently.
The controlling federal law seems to be: http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/1029.html
HOWever, I think the law is DEFINITELY worded vaguely and/or NOT aimed at the use the OP might have in mind (having two phones around the house instead of one--just like how people like to have have 2 landline extensions in a single dwelling).
My apologies if this kind of conversation is frowned upon/not allowed. A warning by any senior member/mod and I'll be sure to not pursue this any further on XDA.
Thanks!
Panamaniac

It's a great way to trick phone company's into giving you cheaper internet plans if you switch the esn from a dumb phone to a smart phone.
That being said don't do it its not worth the trouble you could get into
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App

thenotoriouspie said:
It's a great way to trick phone company's into giving you cheaper internet plans if you switch the esn from a dumb phone to a smart phone.
That being said don't do it its not worth the trouble you could get into
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not in every case. Like maybe if you want to use the smartphone without paying for data service (because you don't want data service).
See, with GSM carriers, they can see what phone you're using IF it's in their database. And the phone will only be in their database IF and ONLY IF it is branded by them. So if I'm on T-Mobile and I pop my SIM card into an unlocked AT&T phone/totally unbranded straight-from-manufacturer phone, they don't see what phone I'm using. Want proof? Do that and log in to your account online. Normally, the website will tell you what phone you're using. Instead, this time it'll show you a generic icon/question mark. So if you want to use an iPhone on T-Mobile without a data plan, you can do that. If you want to use a Blackberry on AT&T without a data plan? Also not a problem. As long as they don't know you're using a smartphone, a data plan won't automatically be forced onto your account. GSM gives you choice and freedom.
With CDMA carriers, we have to go through great lengths just so that we can use the phone we want, or just so that we can use a phone we already paid for. If I'm on Verizon with a Blackberry Bold and I want to jump on Sprint, why should I have to pay for the same exact phone AGAIN? It's really not hard to reprovision a CDMA phone to work on another carrier. All you need to do is install the right APN and MMS settings and the carrier's PRL. Then just flash the carrier's ROM onto the phone (I'm simplifying it; it varies by phone).
CHANGING, NOT CLONING, ESNs is ok. It's the equivalent of swapping SIM cards. In the US, the only national CDMA carrier that offers less-than-unlimited plans is Verizon. So what if I want to use my Blackberry Bold with a 150MB data plan? Is that really a crime? I can STILL opt for the unlimited, even if I put a dumbphone's ESN on the Blackberry. Why am I forced to have these plan options on my account? Why can we bring our own phones with GSM carriers, but not CDMA carriers? It IS possible for GSM carriers to block phones not sold from their network from getting service. All they would have to do is block the IMEI numbers not from phones they've sold. But they don't do this. Why can't CDMA carriers just activate these phones? MetroPCS does it in some locations, officially (aka MetroFlash). They warn you that only Calls and SMS will work, but that's fixable on your own, AND you're able to use your own phone from any carrier.
CDMA carriers need to start activating off-network phones. It's just not fair, especially when many of the phones are the same on both networks.

Product F(RED) said:
CDMA carriers need to start activating off-network phones. It's just not fair, especially when many of the phones are the same on both networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow. It does not work this way over there in US? You can use whatever CDMA device here, you just tell the ESN to the carrier so that it gets activated on their network. You guys are weird there.

Money hungry politicians and corporations.
however I have yet to see a court case setting precedence. Until that day, I will consider ESN repair and or swapping a completely legitimate practice.

Well ESN swaps are one thing--but what I'd really like is to clone onto an old handset simply so I can have TWO IN THE HOUSE--nothing illicit here, it's just a pain in the ass to have to go find the thing, since I don't own a landline. In that connection, people have multiple receivers on landlines for this very purpose--because cell phones work great as cell phones, but not so great as HOUSE phones....
But given the 10-year prison sentence (though I don't think I'd be prosecuted) methinks I'll steer clear of actually trying to clone...

People tend to make the VIN comparison.
Although you CAN (and I have) apply for a new vin in certain circumstances.
It's like wanting to have multiple honda accords with the same vin.
Even if you don't want to defraud an insurance company, you technically could if you wrecked one.
Now, though I agree with you and thing you SHOULD be able to clone your own esn. The FCC is very clear about cloneing.
What they aren't clear about is swapping without cloning.
The bulk of the argument resides around the words "intent to defraud"

willpower102 said:
Money hungry politicians and corporations.
however I have yet to see a court case setting precedence. Until that day, I will consider ESN repair and or swapping a completely legitimate practice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/06/carterfone-40-years.ars
Happy reading.
(If you want the actual decision, then here you are: http://www.uiowa.edu/~cyberlaw/FCCOps/1968/13F2-420.html)
Old? You bet. Applicable? I'd argue it

Product F(RED) said:
Not in every case. Like maybe if you want to use the smartphone without paying for data service (because you don't want data service).
See, with GSM carriers, they can see what phone you're using IF it's in their database. And the phone will only be in their database IF and ONLY IF it is branded by them. So if I'm on T-Mobile and I pop my SIM card into an unlocked AT&T phone/totally unbranded straight-from-manufacturer phone, they don't see what phone I'm using. Want proof? Do that and log in to your account online. Normally, the website will tell you what phone you're using. Instead, this time it'll show you a generic icon/question mark. So if you want to use an iPhone on T-Mobile without a data plan, you can do that. If you want to use a Blackberry on AT&T without a data plan? Also not a problem. As long as they don't know you're using a smartphone, a data plan won't automatically be forced onto your account. GSM gives you choice and freedom.
With CDMA carriers, we have to go through great lengths just so that we can use the phone we want, or just so that we can use a phone we already paid for. If I'm on Verizon with a Blackberry Bold and I want to jump on Sprint, why should I have to pay for the same exact phone AGAIN? It's really not hard to reprovision a CDMA phone to work on another carrier. All you need to do is install the right APN and MMS settings and the carrier's PRL. Then just flash the carrier's ROM onto the phone (I'm simplifying it; it varies by phone).
CHANGING, NOT CLONING, ESNs is ok. It's the equivalent of swapping SIM cards. In the US, the only national CDMA carrier that offers less-than-unlimited plans is Verizon. So what if I want to use my Blackberry Bold with a 150MB data plan? Is that really a crime? I can STILL opt for the unlimited, even if I put a dumbphone's ESN on the Blackberry. Why am I forced to have these plan options on my account? Why can we bring our own phones with GSM carriers, but not CDMA carriers? It IS possible for GSM carriers to block phones not sold from their network from getting service. All they would have to do is block the IMEI numbers not from phones they've sold. But they don't do this. Why can't CDMA carriers just activate these phones? MetroPCS does it in some locations, officially (aka MetroFlash). They warn you that only Calls and SMS will work, but that's fixable on your own, AND you're able to use your own phone from any carrier.
CDMA carriers need to start activating off-network phones. It's just not fair, especially when many of the phones are the same on both networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe with Verizon but try to do that with sprint and see what happens if you get caught.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App

Haha, bad news I'm guessing!
It's ok, I just scored a free Airave anyway (which is apparently immediately eligible for a $150 discount on an "upgrade" to a phone?!? Lolz).

SoberGuy said:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/06/carterfone-40-years.ars
Happy reading.
(If you want the actual decision, then here you are: http://www.uiowa.edu/~cyberlaw/FCCOps/1968/13F2-420.html)
Old? You bet. Applicable? I'd argue it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! This is not what I was expecting... In fact this gives even more credence to the practice.
If I had enough money, I would try to indite myself just to fight it. But I don't have the sort of money to fight that legal battle.

willpower102 said:
Thanks! This is not what I was expecting... In fact this gives even more credence to the practice.
If I had enough money, I would try to indite myself just to fight it. But I don't have the sort of money to fight that legal battle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think from that perspective it's a losing battle. Saying "Judge, the big TelCo is doing something illegal, so I had to do something the FCC deems illegal" is not exactly the best idea. Having that same TelCo refuse you service with a different phone, being forced to buy one of theirs, and then suing them to recover the costs....different story all together.
I'm really, really surprised that this hasn't been challenged at all. I came across that Carterfone decision several years ago (most likely by chance) and immediately thought of the CDMA carriers here. But, I rock GSM, so it doesn't matter too much to me

T-Mobile offers phones without data plans
I recently purchased a Samsung Vibrant on craigslist walked into a T-Mobile store bought a sim card, signed up for a month to month plan for $29.00 and have a smart phone with out paying for data or texting. I wish the other carriers were decent enough to allow this. What scares me most about the T-mobile and Att Merger talk is this consumer friendly company may be shut down.

It's interesting because the federal statutes (i.e., passed by Congress) are vague enough for wiggle room, but the FCC regulations don't seem to be. Following the Chevron decision, courts would be very likely to give the FCC reading of the federal statute deference---i.e., you'd likely lose the case and spend 10 years in jail (IF prosecution ever happened, which for the private in-home purposes of cloning I've been discussing is IMHO a big IF).

panamaniac said:
It's interesting because the federal statutes (i.e., passed by Congress) are vague enough for wiggle room, but the FCC regulations don't seem to be. Following the Chevron decision, courts would be very likely to give the FCC reading of the federal statute deference---i.e., you'd likely lose the case and spend 10 years in jail (IF prosecution ever happened, which for the private in-home purposes of cloning I've been discussing is IMHO a big IF).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chevron implements a two-step analysis. Neither, in this scenario, would allow for deference to the FCC on the SOLE issue of a CDMA carrier refusing to activate a CDMA device not purchased from said carrier. Would deference be given to changing or cloning ESNs? Quite possibly, but if the case even remotely touched on the aforementioned "ban", the court would address that matter in favor of the consumer.

For the last time, we're talking about
SWAPPING

ESN Cloning vs Flashing

I've looked but cant' find a good answer.. Why is it legal to change/flash one phone to work on another carrier's network and not legal to change one phone's esn to another's within the same network? Isn't the process the same?
I'm asking because I've been looking into buying an Evo and copying over MY broken Touch pro 2's info onto it (cloning/esn change), so I can use the Evo on my Sprint Sero plan... I can find plenty of information on flashing but nothing on how I might go about doing what I'm trying to do..

bump... anyone?

The legality issue started with hacker's cloning esn's to make fraudulent calls. Understanding this one can read the law... which clearly states cloning as illegal. The "grey" area is that the FCC's law, which defined it even further (and made all this activity illegal), got rolled-back so to speak when our government wanted more wire tap capability.. So now its dummy phone.. guilty, misrepresentation.. guilty, and this is the kicker.. intent to commit fraud.. kinda grey. Honestly not a judge so I can't tell you this makes it ok...
But one must prove another guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on all three counts.. Fraud is a grey area and if one were to prosecute rest assured cell phone carriers would lend their best legal team to help (the prosecution).. but I suppose if you have no "intent to commit fraud" and could adequately defend yourself, one can switch esn's... Oh yeah, if they can prove fraud.. it's up to 10 yrs each count.. so a "switch" could be considered 2 counts... Not meaning to scare you.. just laying out all I've read on subject matter.
Sidenote.. even if not "illegal," it is almost always a violation of a carrier's terms of service.. which means they could can your account and refuse future service. They are more or less who I blame for locking (cdma) users in.
Hope that helps.
Rob
Edit: As to original question.. most carriers will allow you to change devices (without upsetting/changing esn). If this change would mean you had to pay a bit more (ie for an Android plan or whatnot) avoiding the charge could be construed as fraud (if one were to change esn's)... Not too sure about differences between Sero and the phone your wanting to switch to.. but if you call in to customer service and these phones are both Sprint's.. they will typically work with you.
Sent from my HTC_A510c using Tapatalk

[Q] GSM Acivation Precautions

Hi,
I am considering buying one of two used Galaxy Notes off craigslist for use with a T-Mobile SIM. One is AT&T and one is an international one.
From some of the research I've done, if buying the ATT one, I should run the IMEI by ATT to make sure it's clean, then make the seller sign a document stating that he's transferring ownership of the phone and IMEI to me to prevent him from reporting it stolen in the future, resulting in the blacklisting my IMEI, right? Also, how do I confirm he's the original owner? Will running the IMEI by ATT tell me that info?
Is it safer to pay more and go with a used international one? In other words do carriers tend to ever blacklist IMEIs of phones not sold by them?
Thanks

Good luck getting some random person from Craigslist to sign that kind of thing (which would have tenuous legal bearing, anyway).
I prefer to buy on eBay so that instead of having to deal with the police / legal system, eBay will handle it if they state something false about what they're selling.
Even if you run the IMEI by ATT, it can take some time for it to have entered their database - and that's assuming the seller already reported it stolen or defaulted on it. Most people trying to do that are smart enough to wait until you have the working phone, then report it - that way your phone works for a while and by the time it doesn't - what... you have a piece of paper they signed ? That's great, but then you have to either get the phone company to believe you or enter a legal dispute with this seller - with a document that's likely not notarized, from a person you probably have no idea where they can even be found - who might have given you a fake name and ID.
Plenty of people take the chance and it turns out okay. Some get burned - taking the chance is up to you. I prefer to go through eBay or a friend - because I know where friends live and generally they're actually friends and don't want to screw me over.

Hi Pennycake,
Thank you for taking the time to reply. The signed document was a suggestion I received from an ATT rep, who said it would show I was the owner and she would unblacklist it for me, and worst case scenario I have something instead of nothing if police are involved. Also both sellers have agreed to sign the documents, but thanks for the good luck
So again, my original questions: how do I identify the original owner of a phone sold by ATT, and secondly, do carriers ever blacklist IMEIs of international phones not sold by them?
Thanks in advance

I'm not sure if ATT and T-Mobile use the same company to manage blacklisting - that it's actually the same list (ie - if you're removed from the ATT list, will you be removed from T-Mobile's list or would they need to do it separately) . So you might have to convince T-Mobile reps - who by and large aren't that well (or at all) trained about the blacklist. I've never dealt with ATT reps, but they sound a whole lot better than the ones at T-Mobile when it comes to the IMEI blacklist (I've had great customer service from T-Mobile, but their training concerning the IMEI blacklist was sub-par, at least when I was on the market a few months ago).
I don't think T-Mobile will personally blacklist international phones. I know that USA carriers are starting to work together more and more - but I don't know about international.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app

The largest GSM carriers in America, T-Mobile and AT&T, are collaborating on efforts in maintaining a national IMEI blacklist for GSM phones to help stop thefts, and began implementing policy beginning last month. This is why I am extra cautious as I have never been over the purchase of a used GSM phone. Which led me to a new question I would never have thought to ask, which was, again, "Do US carriers blacklist IMEIs of international phones not sold by them?"
So an example is if an ATT customer activated an int'l phone sold by Samsung, not ATT, and defaulted on payments. The relevancy of this, if the IMEI was blacklisted, would be that T-Mobile would not activate the phone. Carriers have had incentive to blacklist phones sold by themselves to protect against their investment in subsidizing the phones, but I am unclear on phones not sold by them. Anyone with little or great information would be very helpful in posting.
Thanks
Edit: I feel I may have been unclear, but this is the question I'm mainly trying to get answered: "Do US carriers blacklist IMEIs of international phones not sold by them?" I'm not seeking advice on how to be unblacklisted if my phone is reported stolen or where I should buy my phones from, I am seeking those with experience buying international phones, such as an unlocked iPhone from an Apple Store, for instance, and have defaulted on payments. These phones would never be blacklisted for being reported stolen as they weren't sold by carriers, but have the potential to be blacklisted for a bad account. If the potential is not there then this would be the path I would choose from here into the future when purchasing used GSM phones. If the potential is there then there would be no added benefit of choosing int'l over carrier-sold used phones. Thanks again and I apologize for any ambiguity

I know that, the problem is that if ATT and T-Mobile aren't using the same IMEI blacklist, they would have to each remove the number individually. They could maintain a national list, but still input those values into separate systems.
I'm not really sure where you're going with the example of, "So an example is if an ATT customer activated an int'l phone sold by Samsung, not ATT, and defaulted on payments. The relevancy of this, if the IMEI was blacklisted, would be that T-Mobile would not activate the phone."
Why would they blacklist that phone ? That phone must have already been paid for, to Samsung. If you buy an international phone outright, there shouldn't be any "payments" to default on - sure, maybe you bought it with a credit card, but in that case it was still fully paid for - and if you stop paying the card, they're going to send you to collections and trash your credit score. The phone is your property even if you stop paying for the service it's connected to. If they ARE doing this, it strikes me a slightly illegal unless you sign away property rights under contract or something.
I'd be more worried about the hypothetical international phone's IMEI being reported stolen - since it looks like the FCC efforts are concerned primarily with theft, not with where the phone was purchased - like if you report a car stolen. Their efforts are motivated by preventing phone theft and related crimes - not on carrier subsidies or carriers making money (because, really, carriers stand to lose money by blocking stolen phones).
"T-Mobile USA prevents use of stolen devices internal to its network, and has established connectivity to the GSMA Global IMEI database that is ready for use by other carriers as recommended in the GSMA-NA Report (entitled “Analysis and Recommendations for Stolen Mobile Device Issue in the United States”), and as set forth in the Industry/FCC Agreement"
So I imagine that in the future, if not already, T-Mobile will have the capacity to block stolen international phones.
So, I agree - there's probably no added benefit since IMEI blacklists are on the path to converge with the focus on theft as the goal, not subsidy.

They are using the same blacklist. When they run the IMEI and it's on the list shared by both companies, they don't activate the phone.
Can anyone else please chime in with knowledge and experience with international phones? Thank you much.

[Q] IMEI Issues

Could somebody point me to an actual law that says it is illegal in the USA and and that it could be, for example, up to 20 years imprisonment or a $5,000 fine, if I changed my IMEI from my broken Verizon device to my unbroken Straighttalk device?
This is a debate that a friend of mine have been going through, and well I can't seem to find the correct answer, not even on here. Everybody is saying it is illegal on XDA, but nobody has actually posted a link to an actual law, just this bill that was submitted into congress, which is not really the answer, it's a bill, where is it shown that it has been already passed along with the penalty?
Here is an example of my isue, just recently bought a phone from Irulu, Chinese phone. It has no IMEI number but when I dial #66# says to write IMEI number. Now everybody is saying it is ilegal to change your IMEI number, but how do you get an IMEI munber if you don't have one? Do I call, for example, T-Mobile and they will give me one? SOme companies even want the serial number along with the IMEI number, well my serial number is something like "0123456789ABCDEF", now how does that fly with a company?
Also, everybody is saying it is illegal to change the IMEI number according to this bill, which is a bill introduced by to congress that, unless somebody point me in the right direction, has not been submitted into a actual law yet.
Also the bill says "This Act may be cited as the `Mobile Device Theft Deterrence Act of 2012". Okay, well my phone is not stolen and if you look closely at this part of the "Bill":
`(1) the term `manufacturer' means a person who has lawfully obtained the right to assign a mobile device identification number to a mobile device before the initial sale of the mobile device;
and then here:
`(d) Exception- Subsection (b) shall not apply to the manufacturer of a mobile device or a person who repairs or refurbishes a mobile device unless the manufacturer or person knows that the mobile device or part involved is stolen.'.
Okay now, I have two verizon phones and two AT&T phones, that I own, that are not stolen, all are broken, then I have a a ZTE merit phone that works just fine, but I do not want to go with straight talk because I live hour away from walmart, which is the only place to purchase minutes, unless you have a credit card, which I do not and I am not going to pay an extra $5 a month for a reloadable card just to put minutes on my phone.
So my question is, according to those two lines, I am refurbishing my phone, it is not stolen and I just want to transfer one IMEI number to another phone so that I can keep using the same service without going through the hassle of ordering another sim card or buying another phone when I have two here that work and four that do not.
I have seen a few closed threads with people getting really upset about this being brought up, pointing to this bill and assuming the person is asking because, if you read that bill, they want to do this with a stolen phone.

Well, as long as you realize that changing the IMEI of a cellphone is "Patriot Act" material (and you are fine with it), I doubt you will find any law (anywhere) where it will clearly state IMEI.
Maybe the 18 U.S. Code § 1028 may apply (do remember the FCC is an authority and that an identification registered by that authority), or the 18 U.S. Code § 1029 if intent can be proven, but then again... if any trouble arises firstly you wont be charged with any of that, you'll get the "Patriot Act" treatment from the get-go.

enapah said:
Well, as long as you realize that changing the IMEI of a cellphone is "Patriot Act" material (and you are fine with it), I doubt you will find any law (anywhere) where it will clearly state IMEI.
Maybe the 18 U.S. Code § 1028 may apply (do remember the FCC is an authority and that an identification registered by that authority), or the 18 U.S. Code § 1029 if intent can be proven, but then again... if any trouble arises firstly you wont be charged with any of that, you'll get the "Patriot Act" treatment from the get-go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is just it, stolen, the term stolen is loosely used in this bill, which as far as I can see, hasn't even been passed.
Schumer Introduces Bill to Make Cell Phone ID Tampering a Crime
By Damon Poeter
May 24, 2013 02:03pm EST
3 Comments
The NY Democrat aims to criminalize tampering with mobile device identification numbers as part of an ongoing effort to crack down on the black market for stolen cell phones.
Like I stated in my question, it is my phone, I paid for the phone, went to Walmart, bought the phone and activated it under my name. Discontinued the service, still have the phone. Bought a cheap AT&T phone, used it for a month, ran out of minutes, never got around to buying more minutes, was just a cheap pay as you go phone for emergency, now the number is gone and AT&T has some annoying thing where you have to buy a new sim card. Now using the AT&T phone to charge the battery from the Verizon phone because the Verizon phone's charger port broke, and the battery works in the Verizon phone but the Verizon battery doesn't work in the AT&T phone.
When the term "stolen" comes up, makes me think it means, somebody stole my cell phone or I stole somebody else's cellphone. Not the case, these are my broken or inactive phones, paid for through a manufacturer, not off the street.
As for the patriot act, well lets just say, if that made sense and the US congress did fully understand it, wouldn't rooting or installing new ROM from one service provider to another service provider's phone be an issue as well?
It just seems pretty lame that people are coming in and saying that you will go to jail, then post a bill that isn't even in law that is so vague, without a reasonable explanation or knowledge about what the bill or law actually is, then just closes the thread.
I'm in the US, not the UK.

[Q]Does German Vodafone lock Note 4

Hello everyone!
I'm planning to buy a Note 4 from a guy who is coming from Germany with a phone bougth from vodafone germany. He is telling me that vodafone sells samsung devices unlocked. Is there any sim lock and bootloader?
Btw here is the reciept he sent me. It's looks tike it has a contract: https://www.dropbox.com/s/66hqg2zr3nwbd1g/IMG-20141224-WA0000.jpg?dl=0
Should I buy this or not? Thank you.

In the EU it is legally forbidden to SIMlock devices to a specific provider. Even on a contract.
However Samsung has a Region Lock on their devices. You can't use an EU device with a non-EU SIM without first unlocking it with a local SIM by calling, internetting and texting for 5 minutes each.

Sewrizer said:
I don't know about Germany, but I live in the EU and all carriers here give you SIM Locked phones if you buy them on contract. In point of fact, I have seen a lot of iPhones locked by carriers from France and England. The fact that there are so many "companies" that Sim unlock them via IMEI is proof that there is demand for such services.
The problem with them is that they are significantly more expensive to unlock than devices that run Android. The only way (that I am aware of ) of getting a SIM Unlocked phone from a carrier is to buy it without contract.
Edit: I must add that I am not aware of the law you mention, but in practice the situation is different. I would like to read that law, if you could quote it.
Blog: http://applesndroids.wordpress.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would appear those laws on SIMlocking were not actually enforced, just guidelines to which new local laws must adhere. Until countries review their laws, they need not change. (And there we have the explanation why local laws are all so outdated..)
Those 'companies' are money sucking leeches praying on ignorant customers. Here's why:
"The Directorate-General for Competition (DG IV) has written to GSM/DCS1800
handset manufacturers and network operators in the EEA limiting the use of
the "SIM Lock" feature in mobile phone handsets: the feature effectively
ties the customer to one GSM operator or service provider. The handset must
be able to be unlocked upon demand by the consumer. This will prevent the
anti-competitive effects of the feature vis-à-vis existing or new operators,
and avoid a reinforcement of the division of the mobile phone market along
national lines.
[...]
The practical effect of this will be that consumers will no longer be
charged what were often significant amounts of money for the privilege of
linking their own handset to the services of another operator / service
provider."
They must be unlocked upon request by the service provider, free of charge. Going to a paid 3rd party is sheer stupidity.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-96-791_en.htm
Sadly, many customers are not aware of these laws, and in many countries the courts rule in favour of the mobile operators for less than honest reasons (which they ofcourse always deny, because it has nothing to do with the ungodly amount of ex-politicians in the boards of directors..)
The only thing providers are allowed to do is put a timestamps on how long it takes for you to be allowed to unlock it, usually the time your contract lasts. By doing this, they can charge fees if you want it unlocked earlier.
The problem with Apple is that Apple itself locks the firmware to a carrier, and requires an update from Apple itself to unlock. (Like they also do with 4G for every separate provider.) The bastards have never cared for laws: The EU has laws that every charging port must be a MicroUSB since 2011. Apple ignored that, and with Obama backing Apple and holding the chains on the trade agreements, the EU can't do much more than impose petty fines that are small change to Apple.