Database Info

Response to FCC complaint for VZW bootloader.

So in my frustration about the bootloader I filed a complaint with the FCC stating I believed they violated rules outlined regarding the new 700Mhz C band (I think that was the one I can't seem to find it again). I just got a call from Executive Relations today. Can't decide if I want to call them back or not. I just thought it might be a chance to voice some concerns from the community. Specifically things like, if VZW locked it for security and stability purposes, then why do they have other devices that are unlocked.
Anyone out there have any suggestions?

gumbi2400 said:
So in my frustration about the bootloader I filed a complaint with the FCC stating I believed they violated rules outlined regarding the new 700Mhz C band (I think that was the one I can't seem to find it again). I just got a call from Executive Relations today. Can't decide if I want to call them back or not. I just thought it might be a chance to voice some concerns from the community. Specifically things like, if VZW locked it for security and stability purposes, then why do they have other devices that are unlocked.
Anyone out there have any suggestions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Executive relations likes to talk a lot of **** without giving much in the way of real answers. Unless you have a simple problem, they are pretty useless.
You might call them back and share whatever info you have on the FCC guidelines for operating on the 700Mhz C band and let them know you intend to push forward with the FCC and escalate the situation with the backing of the online community to have them take action against Verizon.

bbeelzebub said:
Executive relations likes to talk a lot of **** without giving much in the way of real answers. Unless you have a simple problem, they are pretty useless.
You might call them back and share whatever info you have on the FCC guidelines for operating on the 700Mhz C band and let them know you intend to push forward with the FCC and escalate the situation with the backing of the online community to have them take action against Verizon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I'm not expecting much from them. The trick is I can't seem to find a copy of what I sent in originally. I think it was a modified copy/paste from an earlier post (buried somewhere in the bootloader unlock thread). I did a bit of research by reading the rules themselves and figured I would give it a go. I just can't seem to find which one it is! I'll have to do some research after I finish with work for the day.
Rest assured though, unless the answer from Verizon is "You're right we'll unlock it" I'm not giving this one up. Even if I am just being petty and want to make it a pain for them.

This link discusses the FCC complaint and the argument that Verizon would most likely use to defend their position of an encrypted/locked bootloader
http://www.extremetech.com/computin...tloader-and-why-does-verizon-want-them-locked

gumbi2400 said:
Specifically things like, if VZW locked it for security and stability purposes, then why do they have other devices that are unlocked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's very easy to prove they didn't do it for security or stability, if they had, then obviously they wouldn't allow the same exact phone (dev edition), not just other phones, with an unlocked bootloader, on the same network once they were done with all the pre-orders of this version. Also, if the unlocked bootloader posed any negative effect to network stability, then why would 4 other networks here, and the rest of the world, allow their versions of the same phone to be sold with unlocked bootloaders? I doubt other networks are aiming for network instability. In addition, you might mention that Verizon's customer service blamed the locked bootloader on Samsung at first (on twitter), when Samsung left the same phone unlocked for all other carriers in the world.
You should follow up with this if you have the opportunity. I'm sure everyone here will be behind you.

newuser134 said:
it's very easy to prove they didn't do it for security or stability, if they had, then obviously they wouldn't allow the same exact phone (dev edition), not just other phones, with an unlocked bootloader, on the same network once they were done with all the pre-orders of this version. Also, if the unlocked bootloader posed any negative effect to network stability, then why would 4 other networks here, and the rest of the world, allow their versions of the same phone to be sold with unlocked bootloaders? I doubt other networks are aiming for network instability. In addition, you might mention that Verizon's customer service blamed the locked bootloader on Samsung at first (on twitter), when Samsung left the same phone unlocked for all other carriers in the world.
You should follow up with this if you have the opportunity. I'm sure everyone here will be behind you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well they haven't allowed the dev handset on their network yet, it is presumed they will
PS. mentioning Twitter in the conversation will likely garner you some rolling of eyes and they may suddenly decide whomever they are speaking to is a kid wasting their time

Global Unlock for VZW GS3?

Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-

ahanecurren said:
Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a legitimate complaint to file with the FCC. On behalf of all those who own an S3, please contact them.

Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.

AlexDeGruven said:
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you by chance read the law?
You don't actually believe the "future update" crap do you?

ancashion said:
Have you by chance read the law?
You don't actually believe the "future update" crap do you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Edit: Even if you're in the "Screw Verizon" crowd, there is much more incentive for them to unlock the GSM capabilities than to not. It would allow them to say "Hey look! We have the best coverage in the US, AND you can use it all over the world!", which is fantastic marketing.
For them to say they're going to unlock that and to not do it is marketing suicide. And if Verizon does one thing right, it's their marketing.

ancashion said:
You have a legitimate complaint to file with the FCC. On behalf of all those who own an S3, please contact them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Legitimate complaint??
Are you kidding me, where do people come up with this BS??

AlexDeGruven said:
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon IS screwing us though, again! Look at our bootloader and everyone else's, the rest of the world. And if this phone is a world phone with gsm capabilities, why lock it to begin with then promise to unlock it soon "in the future"? Do you actually believe that crap?
Put in an AT&T or T-Mobile sim in your phone first BEFORE rooting, it'll ask you for a sim unlock code, enter 000000 or 123456, that should unlock it. If it doesn't ask for a code, don't worry about it, root the phone (at your own risk) using the "Root66" method on this forum. Then go to this thread, whether you were able to unlock it with those generic codes or not.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1775566
Read all the instructions. You should be able to get voice and SMS working for any gsm carrier, and you should be able to get 2G (maybe also 3G and HSPA+ on some gsm carriers) working, you'll have to find their APN settings and manually switch to those using the instruction in the linked page though. 2G has been confirmed working on AT&T and t-mobile, no one has been able to test 3G and HSPA+ on AT&T yet. Good luck.

AlexDeGruven said:
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Edit: Even if you're in the "Screw Verizon" crowd, there is much more incentive for them to unlock the GSM capabilities than to not. It would allow them to say "Hey look! We have the best coverage in the US, AND you can use it all over the world!", which is fantastic marketing.
For them to say they're going to unlock that and to not do it is marketing suicide. And if Verizon does one thing right, it's their marketing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jmorton10 said:
Legitimate complaint??
Are you kidding me, where do people come up with this BS??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AlexDeGruven said:
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BS, you say? Off base, you say?
Here's the regulations regarding any device sold by Verizon as a "4g capable" phone...
§ 27.16 Network access requirements for Block C in the 746-757 and 776-787
MHz bands.
(a) Applicability. This section shall apply only to the authorizations
for Block C in the 746-757 and 776-787 MHz bands assigned and only if
the results of the first auction in which licenses for such
authorizations are offered satisfied the applicable reserve price.
(b) Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on
spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the
ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their
choice on the licensee's C Block network, except:
(1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical
standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the
licensee's network, or
(2) As required to comply with statute or applicable government
regulation.
(c) Technical standards. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this
section:
(1) Standards shall include technical requirements reasonably necessary
for third parties to access a licensee's network via devices or
applications without causing objectionable interference to other
spectrum users or jeopardizing network security. The potential for
excessive bandwidth demand alone shall not constitute grounds for
denying, limiting or restricting access to the network.
(2) To the extent a licensee relies on standards established by an
independent standards-setting body which is open to participation by
representatives of service providers, equipment manufacturers,
application developers, consumer organizations, and other interested
parties, the standards will carry a presumption of reasonableness.
(3) A licensee shall publish its technical standards, which shall be
non-proprietary, no later than the time at which it makes such
standards available to any preferred vendors, so that the standards are
readily available to customers, equipment manufacturers, application
developers, and other parties interested in using or developing
products for use on a licensee's networks.
(d) Access requests. (1) Licensees shall establish and publish clear
and reasonable procedures for parties to seek approval to use devices
or applications on the licensees' networks. A licensee must also
provide to potential customers notice of the customers' rights to
request the attachment of a device or application to the licensee's
network, and notice of the licensee's process for customers to make
such requests, including the relevant network criteria.
(2) If a licensee determines that a request for access would violate
its technical standards or regulatory requirements, the licensee shall
expeditiously provide a written response to the requester specifying
the basis for denying access and providing an opportunity for the
requester to modify its request to satisfy the licensee's concerns.
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on
handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are
compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of
this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks.
(f) Burden of proof. Once a complainant sets forth a prima facie case
that the C Block licensee has refused to attach a device or application
in violation of the requirements adopted in this section, the licensee
shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it has adopted
reasonable network standards and reasonably applied those standards in
the complainant's case. Where the licensee bases its network
restrictions on industry-wide consensus standards, such restrictions
would be presumed reasonable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's too much to read, or too hard to comprehend, let me point out the specific part of those regulations...
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on
handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are
compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of
this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still too much.. let me make it a little clearer...
nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But Verizon says, and admits, no, you cannot have the unlock code to make your device available for use on other networks like they did for the OP.
But Verizon says, and will supposedly, release an "update" to allow this feature. Mind you- a feature it was required by the above regulation to come with out of the box. So exactly when, will Verizon comply with the Regs? When someone complains loudly enough, that's when.
I'm open to discuss this, and it's meaning and how the FCC will interpret it but from where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear. The OP does, infact, have a legitimate complaint. I ain't full of **** nor off base.
How many other devices has Verizon released that do not comply with the above regulations? It isn't just the S3, that's for sure. It won't end here either unless we petition the powers that be to force them to comply, or, give up the block C frequencies for re-auction to a company who will comply.
Frankly, I'm disgusted with the pro-Verizon rhetoric that's invaded XDA recently. Are they astroturfing for Verizon? How does anyone find Verizon's business practices acceptable? I like Verizon for the pipe it offers me, not for meddling with my phones and rendering the software on my phone obsolete because it's locked out third party developers and the powers that be decide it "isn't worth putting the newest OS on" is a good enough excuse to scam you into purchasing a new phone.

newuser134 said:
Put in an AT&T or T-Mobile sim in your phone first BEFORE rooting, it'll ask you for a sim unlock code, enter 000000 or 123456.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?

roachkv said:
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't work the other way around.

roachkv said:
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not as simple as just switching the sim card on Verizon. Unlike the GSM networks, Verizon only allows devices that already have their ESN/MEID in the system.

Yes, should be working with proper steps..
ahanecurren said:
Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1775566&page=10 has a lot of information. My post #95 details the steps that I have taken, and I can confirm that I was able to get it to work with a T-Mobile card. I am heading to Russia and will test it there in GSM mode with a local card. I have an HTC Incredible 2 world phone as backup which I know works.
The key is that you must use HiAPN to be able to edit/change the internal APN setting to allow for other Sim cards. ALso load Phone Info to change the radio setting. I've already loaded APN's for three different Russian companies and hope that I can just pop them in, change the APN, change the radio and be good to go.
Hope this helps.

Great Post!
My friend do you hang out in the irc channels too?
I have a question:
I am currently using the verizon samsung galaxy s3 (SCH-I535) and will be moving to Japan in September, what can you recommend me to do? I want to be able of use the s3 with either 3g, LTE oe 2g with any carrier in Japan. I know if I unlock the phone via root and unlock I can use the softbank (japan carrier) for call/text 2g not data plan though. But If that is the only thing I can do I will get a pocket wifi so I can have data wherever I go that way.
Any recommendations? I still can't understand about the global unlocking update coming to verizon s3 ?
Thank you in advance!
ancashion said:
BS, you say? Off base, you say?
Here's the regulations regarding any device sold by Verizon as a "4g capable" phone...
If that's too much to read, or too hard to comprehend, let me point out the specific part of those regulations...
Still too much.. let me make it a little clearer...
But Verizon says, and admits, no, you cannot have the unlock code to make your device available for use on other networks like they did for the OP.
But Verizon says, and will supposedly, release an "update" to allow this feature. Mind you- a feature it was required by the above regulation to come with out of the box. So exactly when, will Verizon comply with the Regs? When someone complains loudly enough, that's when.
I'm open to discuss this, and it's meaning and how the FCC will interpret it but from where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear. The OP does, infact, have a legitimate complaint. I ain't full of **** nor off base.
How many other devices has Verizon released that do not comply with the above regulations? It isn't just the S3, that's for sure. It won't end here either unless we petition the powers that be to force them to comply, or, give up the block C frequencies for re-auction to a company who will comply.
Frankly, I'm disgusted with the pro-Verizon rhetoric that's invaded XDA recently. Are they astroturfing for Verizon? How does anyone find Verizon's business practices acceptable? I like Verizon for the pipe it offers me, not for meddling with my phones and rendering the software on my phone obsolete because it's locked out third party developers and the powers that be decide it "isn't worth putting the newest OS on" is a good enough excuse to scam you into purchasing a new phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Verizon S3 Global Root Unlock
Can anyone tell me if i did this root and global unlock does that mean i can put a international verizon wireless plan and use it overseas or is this just to be able to use international SIM's?

I'm going to say it would be for local pre-paid SIMs only. If you call into Verizon and try to get international data on your line, it will throw up serious red flags for them. Verizon doesn't support (officially) this device to be used abroad yet. So if you call in saying you got it unlocked, you may get into a bit of a sticky situation.

ahanecurren said:
I'm going to say it would be for local pre-paid SIMs only. If you call into Verizon and try to get international data on your line, it will throw up serious red flags for them. Verizon doesn't support (officially) this device to be used abroad yet. So if you call in saying you got it unlocked, you may get into a bit of a sticky situation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alternatively, one could do it, get into this sticky situation with them and invite the FCC in on the conversation.
I would love to have VZW chew my ass for some **** that they agreed to not block, just to turn around and use their information against them.
Oh, wait.. that's what I did with my FCC complaint! :silly:

ancashion said:
Alternatively, one could do it, get into this sticky situation with them and invite the FCC in on the conversation.
I would love to have VZW chew my ass for some **** that they agreed to not block, just to turn around and use their information against them.
Oh, wait.. that's what I did with my FCC complaint! :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never read anything about a grace period in the block c regulations so I wonder how vzw can get away with dragging their feet with the damn global unlock? I don't get why it's taking them so long. You won't be able to use it on say at&t or T-Mobile when it gets unlocked will you?

Imatoasta said:
I never read anything about a grace period in the block c regulations so I wonder how vzw can get away with dragging their feet with the damn global unlock? I don't get why it's taking them so long. You won't be able to use it on say at&t or T-Mobile when it gets unlocked will you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should be able to provided your radio is compatible with the others network. That was the nature of block c's "openness" or the idea behind it anyways.
Vzw challenged the block c regs in court, after they made the purchase, and lost. I think they are being defiant on purpose.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

How to unlock and set up your SGS3 phone for world use.
I fyou have not yet seen this, go to this post: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1809314 and it will walk you through the steps that worked for me to use the Verizon Galaxy S3 overseas in GSM mode.
If it helps, give a thanks!

Unlocking to be illegal

So starting this Saturday, unlocking your phone without your carrier's permission is illegal now! What do you guys think?

source?

http://www.phonearena.com/news/It-may-become-illegal-to-unlock-your-phone-starting-Saturday_id39069
Does this mean carrier switching or rooting your phone? I bought my S3 in october and it was rooted then too. Will this bite me in the butt?

david_hume said:
So starting this Saturday, unlocking your phone without your carrier's permission is illegal now! What do you guys think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be clear you are referring to SIM card unlocking right?

It has to do with carrier switching, not rooting. Calm your tits...
Sent from my VZW SGS3 rockin' Jelly 'Beans' Build 8 using Tapatalk 2

So how many people will take any notice. I certainly won't
Sent from my EndeavorU using xda app-developers app

This is referring to SIM-unlocking. The article clearly discusses jailbreaking and rooting as being allowed, as they pertain to software only, which we own. Jailbreaking and rooting of course referring to gaining superuser access over the entire system, in iOS and Android respectively. Unlocking, in this instance, refers to SIM-unlocking, allowing you to use your phone's hardware on another carrier with compatible bands. As the article mentions, most Verizon LTE phones, including ours, are not SIM-locked in the first place, so this doesn't even affect us. But as the article is written, it mentions that rooting remains legal, and unlocking refers to the SIM (hardware level), as opposed to the bootloader, which simply affects what software can be booted on the device.
So while we should push to keep SIM-unlocking legal as well, as it will certainly be used against us on future devices as all the carriers develop their LTE networks and devices, this does not affect our current devices, and there should be no reason for concern.

Cruiserdude said:
This is referring to SIM-unlocking. The article clearly discusses jailbreaking and rooting as being allowed, as they pertain to software only, which we own. Jailbreaking and rooting of course referring to gaining superuser access over the entire system, in iOS and Android respectively. Unlocking, in this instance, refers to SIM-unlocking, allowing you to use your phone's hardware on another carrier with compatible bands. As the article mentions, most Verizon LTE phones, including ours, are not SIM-locked in the first place, so this doesn't even affect us. But as the article is written, it mentions that rooting remains legal, and unlocking refers to the SIM (hardware level), as opposed to the bootloader, which simply affects what software can be booted on the device.
So while we should push to keep SIM-unlocking legal as well, as it will certainly be used against us on future devices as all the carriers develop their LTE networks and devices, this does not affect our current devices, and there should be no reason for concern.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Jesus I shat my pants when I read the post title. Thanks for adding this explanation. Now I can get to cleaning my pants.

" you can only drive your car on OUR roads WAH WAH WAH" - the carriers

Back to the same BS of you don't own a product you purchase as another company can still tell you what you can and can't do with it.
Imagine if you bought a brand XYZ computer and it ONLY worked with one brand router and changing the computer to work on different routers was illegal.
:banghead:
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app

Big government in bed with big business. Fascism some call it
iSheep... iSheep... Meowww that's Apple VZW GSIII

nosympathy said:
Back to the same BS of you don't own a product you purchase as another company can still tell you what you can and can't do with it.
Imagine if you bought a brand XYZ computer and it ONLY worked with one brand router and changing the computer to work on different routers was illegal.
:banghead:
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's crazy the amount of entitlement the wireless carriers have. I can do anything I want with my computer and home connection but for some greed filled reason on my phone I have to run their approved OS that's been stuffed with unremovable bloat and barfed on by Samsung, can't unlock the boot loader (legally), can't use it on a different network, and can't have full control of the device I paid $600 for. It's makes me want to get rid of my smartphone.

nosympathy said:
Back to the same BS of you don't own a product you purchase as another company can still tell you what you can and can't do with it.
Imagine if you bought a brand XYZ computer and it ONLY worked with one brand router and changing the computer to work on different routers was illegal.
:banghead:
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like Apple...
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium

GreenMunky said:
It has to do with carrier switching, not rooting. Calm your tits...
Sent from my VZW SGS3 rockin' Jelly 'Beans' Build 8 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for clarifying

Cruiserdude said:
This is referring to SIM-unlocking. The article clearly discusses jailbreaking and rooting as being allowed, as they pertain to software only, which we own. Jailbreaking and rooting of course referring to gaining superuser access over the entire system, in iOS and Android respectively. Unlocking, in this instance, refers to SIM-unlocking, allowing you to use your phone's hardware on another carrier with compatible bands. As the article mentions, most Verizon LTE phones, including ours, are not SIM-locked in the first place, so this doesn't even affect us. But as the article is written, it mentions that rooting remains legal, and unlocking refers to the SIM (hardware level), as opposed to the bootloader, which simply affects what software can be booted on the device.
So while we should push to keep SIM-unlocking legal as well, as it will certainly be used against us on future devices as all the carriers develop their LTE networks and devices, this does not affect our current devices, and there should be no reason for concern.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason for unlocked sim's on Verizon LTE devices is due to FCC network access requirements for Block C, the 700 Mhz spectrum Verizon Wireless uses for LTE. The FCC states that:
"Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of such handsets on other providers' networks."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Here's a direct link to the petition...
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium

RBarnett09 said:
Here's a direct link to the petition...
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Make sure to make an account if you want to sign!
sent from my delicious Galaxy S III with Jelly flavored goodness.

Is this at all related to the $15 monthly fee attached to the Motorola droid x rumour? $15 for an unlocked boot loader bug has vzw ever gotten the terminology right? $15 monthly fee if you didn't buy the phones from them (an unlocked phone?) You'll be able to buy the phone from Google play unlocked or vzw subsidized.
Thinking out of my butt..
my tapatalk signature sucks more than yours

This was really only a benefit if you had a GSM phone in my opinion. Verizon won't accept Sprint and Sprint won't accept Verizon phones so really that was mute for me. What I am planning on doing is likely buying international and unlocked phone next time when I move to AT&T. None of this US based crap.

RaptorMD said:
This was really only a benefit if you had a GSM phone in my opinion. Verizon won't accept Sprint and Sprint won't accept Verizon phones so really that was mute for me. What I am planning on doing is likely buying international and unlocked phone next time when I move to AT&T. None of this US based crap.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you.
Its a great thing for doing to the S3... not so much for many others.
But if we bought these phones, we should have a right to do whatever we want with it regardless. It is our property, not theirs. If they are going to be this way about it, they should supply our phones to us for free just for using their service.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium

Unlocking soon to be require on all US carriers

This is possibly AMAZINGLY good news for those of us here on xda who like to tinker (I think that's like...98%):
http://www.androidcentral.com/obama-administration-petitions-fcc-require-carriers-unlock-phones
Of course, this could just be SIM unlocked and not bootloader unlocked...have to wait and see.

It's carrier unlocking during the subsidization period or until the contract is settled and has nothing to do with the bootloader.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

Yeah, we have the word "unlock" with two different meanings on Android phones.

Basically doesn't mean much if the devices you have can't be used on other carriers anyway.

Also doesn't really help Verizon or Sprint customers since they are not required to accept the others phones which I feel they should. Both are CMDA and while they have differing LTE bands they have refused for years and years to allow it.

Of course the government wants devices unlocked. Systemically easier to spy

RaptorMD said:
Also doesn't really help Verizon or Sprint customers since they are not required to accept the others phones which I feel they should. Both are CMDA and while they have differing LTE bands they have refused for years and years to allow it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They will not work on the others network that's why they don't accept them
Sent from my GT-N7100 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

Sim unlock. Not bootloader unlock.

Poll: Would Verizon changing their bootloader policies make you return to them?

I'm writing a paper on Android bootloaders and security, profitability, and network performance and would like to get some of the enthusiast community's opinion.
The paper is framed as an internal proposal to Verizon Wireless management proposing further investigation into their current policies. Part of the paper involves investigating if Verizon Wireless (or ATT even) changing their locked bootloader policies and generally being more dev friendly would encourage those of us who have left them to return. This could provide a profit incentive by gaining new customers. While this would certainly not be a scientific poll, it should do for the purposes of a college paper.
So, again, the question is, would Verizon Wireless changing their locked bootloader policies cause those of you who left to return?
Please clarify your response below, and tell me if there's another option you'd like added to the poll.

JesusFreak316 said:
So, again, the question is, would Verizon Wireless changing their locked bootloader policies cause those of you who left to return?
Please clarify your response below, and tell me if there's another option you'd like added to the poll.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me to return to Verizon they would have to:
Allow bootloader unlocking.
Allow carrier unlocked phones on their network.
Allow their phones to be carrier unlocked to work on other networks.
Not charge so damn much.
Honestly, I don't think that your proposal would make any difference in profits. You could ask 100 random smartphone owners about the bootloader on their phone and maybe one or 2 could even have a clue what the bootloader is/does, and what an unlocked one means vs a locked one.

Planterz said:
For me to return to Verizon they would have to:
Allow bootloader unlocking.
Allow carrier unlocked phones on their network.
Allow their phones to be carrier unlocked to work on other networks.
Not charge so damn much.
Honestly, I don't think that your proposal would make any difference in profits. You could ask 100 random smartphone owners about the bootloader on their phone and maybe one or 2 could even have a clue what the bootloader is/does, and what an unlocked one means vs a locked one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your input.
Hopefully carrier unlocked phones will happen with VoLTE only phones, but that's still speculating now as to whether the FCC band 13 restrictions apply to other services and not just data.
Little known fact, but Verizon is the only carrier that has to have all their LTE devices be carrier unlocked due to the aforementioned FCC rules.
Heh, that last reason is mostly what I meant by other reasons in the poll.
Certainly, I know the enthusiast community is barely a drop in the bucket compared to everyone else, but what I'm wondering is if they are not only missing out on revenue, but are also spending money on extra locks for the devices that don't really protect the network, as nothing on XDA can touch the modem. It's a case of why not, with possibly good publicity in the influential tech community.
Sent from my VS985 4G using XDA Free mobile app