Related
Updated 09/6/12 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=31190482&postcount=81
This is a combined log of my attempt to get answers from Verizon and Samsung regarding the encrypted bootloader. I currently have a ticket with level III tech support at Samsung. It took a huge dog and pony show to get this far and I have had several forum members contact me asking to pass along info and ask questions when I finally get a hold of the right people.
I posted most of this in another thread, but it not where it should have been so I am moving it for a mod so we can keep that other development thread clean. Its 8am EST and Samsung Level III should be open in three hours as they are not staffed 24/7 like Level II/I.
For the record Samsungs Tech Support phone number is 800-726-7864
Just remember the rep you talk to regardless of what their position in the company is had no say in the encrypting of the bootloader. Its not their fault Verizon screwed us, please keep that in mind if you call. Using 5c technical words will get you past Level I but level II seemed to be on point. It took some manipulative games to get the guy to admit there was even a level III department; at first he told me level II was the highest I could go in tech support. Will update with more info when I have something.
I am also considering contacting the firm that handled the Motorola V710 lawsuit against Verizon years ago. We won that one and anyone who wanted got to trade in their phone and accessories for a full refund, no ETF, and if they wanted could also get a new device w/o extending their contract. I hate lawyers and would rather cut off my pinky finger then deal with them but it may be the only option in the end. Its like Verizon delivered us cake, then shot our dog and walked away. So mentally exhausted dealing with this crap.
Lastly, I was able to get a hold of Verizon corporate and had a low level executive call me back. This was before the device was released and we knew the bootloader was encrypted. She told me to save her number, and I am glad I did because once we found out about the lockdown I called her back and left VM. Should hear back from her Monday.
Verizon's Corporate Contact Info.
Verizon Corporate Office Headquarters:
140 West Street
New York, NY 10007
Corporate Phone Number: 1-212-395-1000
Corporate Fax Number: 1-212-571-1897
Original Post:
Ok, just an update. Level III Samsung tech support is not 24/7 like Level II/I. I have a ticket in the system regarding the issue and its been forwarded to Level III.
They will be in tomorrow (Saturday) from 8am (PST) to 7pm (PST) and I have to call back to get a hold of someone in the Level III department. I will keep dragging this up the chain of command till I can get some answers. Level II once again confirmed what we already know, Verizon did mess with the phone. Level II said don't bother with Fastboot because were not getting in that way. I don't know if he was lying but he seemed to know exactly what I was talking about when I mentioned the odin/fastboot switch.
One more thing to note, I am not sure I believe him but he said that they sent the phones to Verizon, and its Verizon that did the messing around not Samsung. I find it hard to believe Verizon was able to do this without Samsung support.
I don't have high hopes of getting anything that will be able to help us out of Level III but I will try. They have also lodged a my customer complaint and supposedly I am going to be getting a call back from someone from their corporate office in consumer relations.
I wish I could help more on the technical side but my experience only takes me to the point where everyone else has gotten with fastboot. I am however quite the people person when it comes to making noise with corporations and will keep up the good fight with Verizon / Samsung Corporate.
If there is anything specific you want me to ask Level III send me a PM by tomorrow morning and I will address it with them when I call. I know enough that I should be able to at least hold a conversation with them on the subject but more ammo would be great. I would also be willing to conference call with a repeatable dev/mod when I call them so that you don't have to jump through the two hours of crap I just did to get this escalated.
Post 2: (A reply to a forum member asking for an update)
I asked them if there is a reason I can't get into fastboot and the guy said because Verizon has locked down the device. I asked him "how" and "why" but he was unable to provide me with an answer to both questions. He then referred me to Level III as he said they were the ones who could discuss how it was done. I asked him if there was a way around it through odin using .ops he went silent for a while and said he had no information to provide on the subject and just reiterated that Verizon has made changes to the device software and I would have to refer to them regarding those changes.
With regard to the "why" question he simply said that Samsung could not comment on carrier practices only that Verizon requested the lockdown and that the phones were sent to them first to have it applied. He made it sound like Samsung told them to go take a flying leap and Verizon went ahead and did it anyway. Again, were talking about a rep here so take it with a grain of salt.
I talked about the FCC's Block C agreement regarding carriers not locking devices but the rep said he did not have a comment on the subject as he was just tech support. Block C is probably the only legal course of action we have but despite the FCC saying they were going to enforce the rule, we all know how the FCC could give a crap.
I am going to flat out ask Level III to do the right thing and leak a file for us to fix the issue. I may be nuts but I am not delusional and have no real expectoration they will help. I am however going to do my best to get them to slip something that may help a dev find a solution. If I can get at least a small puzzle piece out of Level III it might be the crack in the dam we need to blow open the floodgates.
07/11/12 Samsung Level III blew me off yesterday as well saying they were still looking into the matter. I called again today and finally received an official reply. Samsung says they have no information exactly what Verizon has done to the phone, they do not know exactly what is and is not signed/encrypted, and they have no further information. I have submitted a complaint to the president of Samsung USA but thats as far as I could go with Samsung. They have closed my case and can not provide further information. I asked if they had an original system image before Verizon gimped the phone and they said "yes but we can not provide that to our customers per carrier agreement."
Lastly I was told that there is going to be a Verizon "Developer Edition" that you can buy directly from Samsung in the coming weeks. This is in "direct response to complaints filed by customers" according to Samsung and will be distributed and supported by Samsung directly. It will cost $600+ and basically be the same phone but w/o an signed/encrypted bootloader.
Off the record information from an unnamed outside source: Verizon is releasing a OTA update to patch the root exploit in the coming days. This OTA will break and prevent re-root as well as try and stop people from using the image off of the "Developer Edition" to mess with the "normal" Verizon Galaxy S3. I don't have specific details; sorry. Do not OTA unless you want to loose root and probably not get it back. Verizon is fk'ing pissed; I mean really pissed that we have root.
From what I am hearing, Verizon's "top %5 data abusers" are all typically rooted/romed. The whole point of locking this phone down was to mess with these unlimited data customers. Verizon started this war; let us end it and make them loath the day they decided to fk with the dev community.
Again, my case Support case has been closed with Samsung. We will get nothing further from them nor any direct help. My case with Verizon corporate is also closed; they said Samsung will offer a Developer model directly and if I wanted that kind of access I needed to talk to them not Verizon.
The lawyers still have not called me back. No shock.
Up until this point I have been angry; now I am pissed. This isn't over; not by a long shot.
Will update when I have more information.
07/17/12
Samsung "Office of the President" -
Phone 877-268-2121
eMail [email protected]
FYI Samsung records phone conversations between the 4th minute and the 18th minute. Anything you say after minute 4 and before minute 18 "MAY" be recorded. I know that sounds like a strange window of recording, but its straight out of the mouth of a sympathetic to the cause tech support rep. Just had a great conversation with a guy, nothing is fixed of course but needless to say, there are people in Samsung that have been hearing rumors that the company is tired of carrier's crap and with in the next few years will be offering all Samsung headsets for a subsidized price, directly through Samsung. There will probably be trade-in specials, loyalty discounts, etc. I can't wait not to buy my devices directly through Verizon! Secondly, as of now (Verizon lies again) anything software related with this phone is coming from, programmed by, and completely influenced by Verizon. Samsung manufacturing does not touch the device or support updates after its in the hands of Verizon. The developer model is not Verizon approved, nor is Verizon happy its going to be sold [from what I am told] however per FCC open network regulations Verizon has to allow the device on the network. Updates for the developer model will be directly from Samsung.
I was able to get the Samsung Apps (store) sideloaded on my device BTW. Verizon requested it be removed which is why its not on the device pre-installed. S-Suggest is NOT the same thing as Samsung Apps. Will Write something up here on XDA later when I get a chance.
07/24/12
The Electronic Frontier Foundation called me back and said they need more info on Block C. I am out of town until next Monday and let them know I would get back to them in a few days. They also are finding a lawyer who will do it pro bono. Looks like this may actually make it to court.
So we have root but we are still locked down unlike all other carriers. Basically this is going to turn into a Droid X situation and for those who know what I am talking about you know how bad this still sucks.
I am tired of this crap guys, and think with the amount of SG3 phones sold in the US and specifically Verizon, this is the time to strike back against all encrypted devices not just the GS3. We have dealt with this garbage long enough and now its time to end nonsense.
Kirtland and Packard, (310) 536-1000, 2361 Rosecrans Ave Ste 450, El Segundo, CA 90245
That's the law firm that won the huge case against Verizon over the Motorola v710 BT lockdown. I have left them a message asking if they will take this case too. In reality this one is going to vastly larger then the Moto case because of the number of users that have this device.
Please call them and let them know on the main VM that you too have been effected by this lockdown, or any lockdown in the US on any carrier. The more people who call the more likely they will take the case. Lots of people calling is how the guys over at Howard Forums were able to get the ball rolling on the v710, so let history repeat itself for the sake of every dev, phone enthusiast, and civil rights advocate.
ROM developers usually work off of donations and by encrypting this and other devices Verizon is stealing from these developers who's livelihood is phone software development. Software developers who want an open platform also have to deal with the hassle that Verizon and other carriers have put them through by locking down devices. If the personal computer was locked down like this when it was first created and sold to people we would never be where we were today technology wise. The crippling of our mobile devices needs to stop, and it needs to stop now.
Its time to take the fight to Verizon and hopefully end the lockdowns once and for all. If the lawfirm takes the case this is going to be winner takes all. This may be our best shot to end device lockdowns in the US once and for all.
I think the push we will make is going to be Block C. Normally Verizon could argue that they locked the device [against the FCC Block C mandate] because of network security. This is going to be hard for them to argue though when every other carrier in the US and internationally has not encrypted the device. It's a long shot, and its going to be up hill, but as far as I see it this is our best chance and the time to strike on this issue is now.
Samsung Level III opens in 30 min. Will update again soon.
Level III is not in on the weekends, so I was just told by the automated message I got when the guy transferred me to that department. ok... Not what they told me yesterday but ok.
So Monday at 8am PST it is, and that's also when Verizon corporate will be calling me back too as the past two calls they have made to me have been the ass crack of dawn. If I time it right I can conference the two in and let them try and point the finger at the other one, to each others faces. No more "That's what the manufacture wanted, go talk to them" vs "That's what the carrier wanted, talk to them" runaround bull****.
Anyway, no updates till Monday then. That gives me time to root.
i'll be the first to say it but thank you
going above and beyond especially considering nobody asked you to do this. great work and i hope it leads to some results
chill145 said:
i'll be the first to say it but thank you
going above and beyond especially considering nobody asked you to do this. great work and i hope it leads to some results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes thank you 100%, we are all in this together.
Also please file FCC Consumer Complaints against Verizon for potentially violating the openness requirements of the Block C spectrum purchasing agreement.
https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/form2000.action?form_type=2000F
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/it-is-illegal-for-verizon-to-lock-some-bootloaders/
It's a long shot, but maybe worth it.
Have filed complaint with FCC and BBB, posted poor review on both Blue and White versons on VZW website, wall post ripping them apart on VZW facebook, poor reviews on every device site that will let me do so that I know of, personal contact with VZW reps filing complaints.
Any other avenues we can take?
Here's what I wrote in my FCC complaint:
The new Samsung Galaxy SIII on Verizon Wireless has a locked and encrypted bootloader, which appears to violate the openness requirements that Verizon agreed to when it purchased Block C, pursuant to § 27.16 (b) of 47 CFR Ch. I (10–1–10 Edition) available here-- http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2010-title47-vol2/pdf/CFR-2010-title47-vol2-sec27-16.pdf
§ 27.16 (e) clearly states "Handset locking prohibited" except under certain circumstances previously delineated. The anti-consumer actions taken by Verizon impinge upon the free of use of devices by consumers, and potentially harms the livelihoods of developers, who may not be able to do their work on the device of their choice.
I would appreciate the FCC investigating and clarifying this situation.
Thank you,
Thinking further about it, with how prominent devices are in today's world, would various news providers not want to run this story as well?
I recommend tipping off any local newspaper and news station you have access to. Lets get this story out there~!
Thalinor said:
So we have root but we are still locked down unlike all other carriers. Basically this is going to turn into a Droid X situation and for those who know what I am talking about you know how bad this still sucks.
I am tired of this crap guys, and think with the amount of SG3 phones sold in the US and specifically Verizon, this is the time to strike back against all encrypted devices not just the GS3. We have dealt with this garbage long enough and now its time to end nonsense.
Kirtland and Packard, (310) 536-1000, 2361 Rosecrans Ave Ste 450, El Segundo, CA 90245
That's the law firm that won the huge case against Verizon over the Motorola v710 BT lockdown. I have left them a message asking if they will take this case too. In reality this one is going to vastly larger then the Moto case because of the number of users that have this device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that the dev's are working there rear ends off, and I appreciate all their efforts. I am truly pulling for them and hope that they can get the bootloader figured out. I'm not an expert, but in my opinion the ROMs on the DX didn't compare to a fully unlocked device and I'd prefer not to have to suffer through 2+ years of touchwiz.
Thalinor,
I agree that this maybe turning into the Droid X. As a droid x owner, waiting and watching for 18 months to see VZW and Motorola dump on us, I don't think we'll get anywhere with them. There was a huge effort on the DX with petitions, phone calls, emails, twitter, and FB posts.
Just a thought, but what about petitioning the law firm to take up this case. We are not going to get anywhere from VZW's or Samsung's pity for us. If this bootloader is truly encrypted, and if it is anything like the DX, the only way we will get this device completely unlocked is through a legal obligation on VZW's part. I think our energy would be better spent with the Attorneys who stand to profit from this case rather than burning our energy on VZW and Samsung who probably don't give a crap. I would think that the law-firm would have some interest in this (maybe?):
File with the FCC:
http://www.fcc.gov/complaints/
Talk about the Block C complaints. Don't attack them.
Post on VZW's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/verizon
Talk about how dissatisfied you are and how you're looking to switch. Don't attack them.
Post on Samsung Mobile's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/SamsungMobile
Don't attack them. Talk about how you will reconsider purchasing their devices in the future. They don't want to have to lock bootloaders, Verizon is almost certainly making them do it.
File with the BBB:
http://www.bbb.org/us/verizon-wireless/
Talk about how anti-competitive their practices are and how dissatisfied you are as a customer. Require an answer.
Complain to Verizon Wireless' Site:
https://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/contact/email.jsp
Don't attack them. Keep in mind you're talking to an employee, they didn't choose to lock down the bootloader. Be respectful but make your concern noted.
The problem lies with Verizon Wireless. They believe that there are not enough people concerned about this to affect their profit margin. You need to show that you will vote with your dollar and move somewhere else if this complaint is not answered. Also, bring up the Block C agreement. There are potential legal repercussions-- meaning that the FCC may be the best place to direct your complaints. Be respectful, I know we're upset, but being pissed off won't get you anywhere.
I just filled out a complaint with the FCC basically asking them to enforce the Block C agreement from Verizon.
I'll phone the lawyers posted on the first page when I get a chance at work tomorrow.
amt897 said:
File with the FCC:
http://www.fcc.gov/complaints/
Talk about the Block C complaints. Don't attack them.
Post on VZW's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/verizon
Talk about how dissatisfied you are and how you're looking to switch. Don't attack them.
Post on Samsung Mobile's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/SamsungMobile
Don't attack them. Talk about how you will reconsider purchasing their devices in the future. They don't want to have to lock bootloaders, Verizon is almost certainly making them do it.
File with the BBB:
http://www.bbb.org/us/verizon-wireless/
Talk about how anti-competitive their practices are and how dissatisfied you are as a customer. Require an answer.
Complain to Verizon Wireless' Site:
https://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/contact/email.jsp
Don't attack them. Keep in mind you're talking to an employee, they didn't choose to lock down the bootloader. Be respectful but make your concern noted.
The problem lies with Verizon Wireless. They believe that there are not enough people concerned about this to affect their profit margin. You need to show that you will vote with your dollar and move somewhere else if this complaint is not answered. Also, bring up the Block C agreement. There are potential legal repercussions-- meaning that the FCC may be the best place to direct your complaints. Be respectful, I know we're upset, but being pissed off won't get you anywhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't even own an S3, nor am I on Verizon, but damn't...I'm doing every one of things and calling just out of principle. I'm glad I left Verizon a long time ago, but they still tried to get more for money for almost 2 years. Damn near ruined my credit...assholes are going down.
Sent from my SGH-I727 using xda premium
I'd love to see this in major media:
"The Samsung S3 is a excellent smartphone, but Verizon's software modifications have made it unlikely to be upgraded and supported long term. If that's important to you, we recommend you consider another carrier."
My girlfriend used to work for the local news, I'll talk to her about contacting her friends at the station and see if I can get a face to face, or at least an email contact. I'll have to dig up all the info I can on the block C stuff and locked/encrypted bootloaders to take to them first.
Sent from my Droid X until I get my SGS3
block c
The Block C issue relates more toward unlocked devices like the nexus on the play store than unlocked bootloaders. You may be able to press the unlocked bootloader issue under the 'open applications' provision, but obviously that did a ton of good for Google Wallet. Of course, I can't find a single device you can use on Verizon's network that isn't held in verizon's death grip, so even the open device provision seems to be being ignored. The worst part is that verizon filed suits against these provisions and LOST. But true to form, if you have enough money and pull, and are willing to screw your customers as every turn (share everything plans are such a great deal right?) you can break the law over and over in broad daylight, and no one with power will bat an eye. Also, I'm not sure why the 'open application' provision was never really used as a battering ram when in came to things like tethering applications.
I think this type of work is very important. Thanks so much. Very much looking forward to hearing more from the companies themselves about why they make these types of decisions. Can't wait for an update here.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda app-developers app
Complained with the FCC, here is my complaint for anyone looking for somewhat of a template.
Recently, after preordering a Samsung Galaxy s3 handset from Verizon, I learned that they have violated the openness requirements of the Block C spectrum purchasing agreement by encrypting my device. This directly impacts my ability to enjoy my phone, and take advantage of the spectrum which Verizon owns. While I understand that the purchasing agreement gives Verizon leeway in regards to "reasonable" protection of the network, no other carrier in the United States (or the world), has done this, leading me to believe that this action is indeed unreasonable. It is unfair and anti-competitive for a company to misuse frequencies they own in this way.
I appreciate your time, and would appreciate a response in this matter.
Thank you,
With Verizon Twitter claiming it was Samsung, I'm curious what both companies said.
skennelly said:
I know that the dev's are working there rear ends off, and I appreciate all their efforts. I am truly pulling for them and hope that they can get the bootloader figured out. I'm not an expert, but in my opinion the ROMs on the DX didn't compare to a fully unlocked device and I'd prefer not to have to suffer through 2+ years of touchwiz.
Thalinor,
Just a thought, but what about petitioning the law firm to take up this case. We are not going to get anywhere from VZW's or Samsung's pity for us. If this bootloader is truly encrypted, and if it is anything like the DX, the only way we will get this device completely unlocked is through a legal obligation on VZW's part. I think our energy would be better spent with the Attorneys who stand to profit from this case rather than burning our energy on VZW and Samsung who probably don't give a crap. I would think that the law-firm would have some interest in this (maybe?):
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the whole point! I certainly don't have the money to go up against Verizon and do not want to make a dime out of this; that's not the point at all. I want Verizon to once and for all agree to stop ****ing with our phones. Phones should be sold locked not signed/encrypted.
Locked protects Verizon or the manufacture from having to eat the costs of a new phone when an end user breaks their device doing something irresponsible. I don't want Verizon paying for people's screwed up devices because eventually it will lead to MY bill going up. Its not my fault if someone screw's up their device. On the other hand by encrypting the bootloader Verizon is forcing people to do things that may lead to breaking your phone. If the manufacture offered a phone number for unlocking, where you would agree that unless it was something hardware defective, if you unlock and your device breaks, its not under warranty. Problem solved for everyone; no encrypted bootloader needed.
I am going after Verizon but this is really about every carrier who gimps cell phones. Smartphones have become pocket computers. They are no longer PDA's, or "like" pocket computers, they ARE pocket computers. Hell, my SG3 is got better hardware specs than the **** netbooks people waited in line for last black Friday at Walmart. If we consider netbooks in that they come giving the buyer full administrative access over the device and yet still give the end user the option to hook it up to Wi-Fi. One way or another my devices are hooking up to a company who I pay for data and/or voice service. My rights should be universal and now that the device in my pocket has evolved into a full blown computer, my access rights should evolve as well. Whether its a computer in your pocket or a computer on your desk, it can be used in accordance with your providers service agreement, or it can be abused.
Prejudging your entire customer base to abuse your network and handing down sentence as judge, jury, and executioner like Verizon has done, before people have even had the chance to make the decision to do right or wrong; to me that just violates every ideal set forth in this countries constitution. I am ****ing sick of corporate america ****ting on this countries citizens, and the whole god damn world for that matter. It needs to stop. While I despise lawyers to the core, I sincerely hope they take on this case and prove there are still people in the field who remember why their profession exists (Hint: Its NOT to make money) and that there is some justice left in this country.
/end rant
Update: Talked to Verizon Exec, they have passed info on to the lawyers to look over and may or may not get back to me; at this point its out of her hands.
Update: I have not heard back from the lawyers above, but another user here on XDA PM'd me and said they were able to talk to someone today who told them that the legal team was looking into the case and make a decision after getting more information. They have my number, if they want to call me they can; if not I could care less who spear heads this as long as the battle is fought and won.
Update: I called Samsung, talked to Level I, they tried to transfer me to level III, I was put on told and Level I came back and said they would call me back later. The call never came. I will try them again more vigorously tomorrow.
MichaelVash7886 said:
With Verizon Twitter claiming it was Samsung, I'm curious what both companies said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LMFAO @ Verizon's blatant bull**** lies. Why would Samsung decide, at their own free will and expense, to sign-encrypt ONLY Verizon's Galaxy S3, and not one other carrier in the world? Verizon is full of **** and the fact they think the line "Its the other guys fault" is actually going to work, is flat out ****ing insulting.
Screenshot that and post it here please. I do not use social networking; if they really need to spy on me they have my smartphone information, and know where to find me.
Hey guys, instead of only filling complaints with the FCC/Verizon, we should also be pursuing Samsung. I already went ahead and sent out a message on their contact site. It isn't a direct letter to a CEO or anything like that, but, one would believe that enough attention will get a letter slipped through the cracks.
Remember, use tact, type grammatically correct, and be extremely respectful. They may "work for us", and we may "own the product", but without them directly breaking a law, we have no reason to get out of line.
For those of you who have yet to file a complaint with the FCC, might as well spend the time doing that as well in the same sitting.
Here is the letter I sent, as well as the link to their form.
https://contactus.samsung.com/custo...MailQuestionProduct.jsp?SITE_ID=1&titleCode=1
Sir or Ma'am,
I am writing today in regards to the issue with the locked bootloader on the Verizon SCH-i535. In many regards this is one of the greatest phones I have ever used, I also have the Verizon Nexus device. My issue, along with thousands of other Verizon subscribers, is that we would like the capability to unlock the device for free use.
Verizon was just recently fined for not allowing certain apps like tethering to be used on the network by the FCC. I know this doesn't hold any relevance much to the bootloader, however, it seems as if with Verizon being the only network requiring such locks that there must be some other underlying decision. Manufacturers like HTC have taken measures to allow unlocking of their devices on Verizon with their HTC Developers portal. This may only be a personal, or small community opinion, but I believe the device would sell significantly better, at least among the knowledgeable developers/modders, if it was unlocked, or unlock-able.
There have been several petitions past around, as well as dozens of e-mails, tweets, and the like to try and understand why we are being forced to be locked down unlike the other carriers. It doesn't seem appropriate that the Galaxy Nexus should be capable of being unlocked, while this device cannot. How does locking one device prevent harming the "integrity" of the network? If this were truly an issue, I would assume any and every device would be locked before they were even introduced to the network, as well, other carriers would follow suit.
In a side note, many willing customers have been awaiting the "Developer Edition" device. We are all aware that there really is not difference between this device and ours, aside from being capable of unlocking. So, how can there be 2 of the same devices on the same network, yet the device we hold cannot be unlocked? It really seems as if you guys are trying to work FOR us, the customer, while Verizon is working against all of us.
In the end, really I am just another loyal customer curious as to if/when we could see a utility that would give us the capability of unlocking out device to use at our liking? We are all well aware that it may void our warranty, but in our eyes the benefit outweighs the risk.
I would like to ask politely if my concern be passed along to all of those that may be concerned, specifically Samsung Mobile US CEO and such.
Thank you all for your time, I look forward to a response.
Respectfully,
Andrew Lemacks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will do the same with your template. Thank you sir
No problem. This tactic has worked on HTC devices, I would assume Samsung should follow suit. Although, Samsung has less to lose.
Very nice letter, hopefully you can get a response or have your letter be passed along to somebody who can say something that doesn't sound like automated message.
Will do. Thank you!
Sent mine.
JetBlue said:
Very nice letter, hopefully you can get a response or have your letter be passed along to somebody who can say something that doesn't sound like automated message.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Realized auto-correct isn't automatically correct after re-reading it, lol. *out* instead of *our*
duxup said:
Will do. Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
detta123 said:
Sent mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awesome, the more the better.
Anyone who hasn't seen, you may want to follow up with using EDNYLaw's template for filing your complaint in about the best manner possible. He couldn't make it any easier! When they FCC gets flooded with complaints like that, it's a lot harder to look the other way as you shred what look like "legal" documents. Take the time people. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1820634&page=8
Good luck!
No need for luck.
Already sent the FCC complaint, not just did this as well.
Awesome, let's continue the push everyone!
Edit: tapatalk thinks I'm on a nexus, lol.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Looks like I got my reply.
Code:
Dear Chris,
Thank you for your inquiry about your Samsung Galaxy S® III (Verizon)(SCH-I535) and we understand that you're having concern with the locked bootloader of the phone.
We also understand that you're requesting to have the option to unlocked the bootloader of the phone, instead of purchasing a Verizon's Developers Edition Galaxy S3 phone.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you. We appreciate hearing from our customers, as your comments are vital for us to continue improving our products, as well as our business.
There is no configurable option on the handset to unlock the Bootloader, as this may affect the software of the phone and also can cause unstable performace. The phone was designed manufactured to the specifications of Verizon Wireless for whom they are produced. We will forward your feedback request to the appropriate parties for further review and consideration.
Do you have more questions regarding Samsung Mobile Phones and Accessories? For 24 hour information and assistance, we offer our new FAQ/ARS System - Automated Response System at http://www.samsung.com/support.
Thank you for your continued interest in Samsung products.
Sincerely,
Victor
Technical Support
I haven't even received a standard reply yet. I didn't even get an automated response stating they got my inquiry. I may need to resubmit, unless this means they are actually reading what we say and replying in kind.
ddggttff3 said:
Looks like I got my reply.
Code:
Dear Chris,
Thank you for your inquiry about your Samsung Galaxy S® III (Verizon)(SCH-I535) and we understand that you're having concern with the locked bootloader of the phone.
We also understand that you're requesting to have the option to unlocked the bootloader of the phone, instead of purchasing a Verizon's Developers Edition Galaxy S3 phone.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you. We appreciate hearing from our customers, as your comments are vital for us to continue improving our products, as well as our business.
There is no configurable option on the handset to unlock the Bootloader, as this may affect the software of the phone and also can cause unstable performace. The phone was designed manufactured to the specifications of Verizon Wireless for whom they are produced. We will forward your feedback request to the appropriate parties for further review and consideration.
Do you have more questions regarding Samsung Mobile Phones and Accessories? For 24 hour information and assistance, we offer our new FAQ/ARS System - Automated Response System at http://www.samsung.com/support.
Thank you for your continued interest in Samsung products.
Sincerely,
Victor
Technical Support
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AtLemacks said:
I haven't even received a standard reply yet. I didn't even get an automated response stating they got my inquiry. I may need to resubmit, unless this means they are actually reading what we say and replying in kind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never got a confirmation email from sending the message, but that showed up in my inbox today, so im guessing they are reading them one by one.
ddggttff3 said:
I never got a confirmation email from sending the message, but that showed up in my inbox today, so im guessing they are reading them one by one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that is a good sign! Here's to hoping I get something good this weekend!
AtLemacks said:
Remember, use tact, type grammatically correct, and be extremely respectful. They may "work for us", and we may "own the product", but without them directly breaking a law, we have no reason to get out of line.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. This! 1,000 times this!
The fastest way to get any communication to a company round-filed is to be disrespectful, to not meticulously grammar-check your writing (seriously, have at least one other person check it for you before sending), and to resort to foul language of any sort (even milder stuff like "damn", "hell", etc can give your letter an offputting tone).
As AtLemacks said, they're not breaking the law, and they've done this under the direction of Verizon. As crappy as Samsung can be in the software arena, they are not ultimately to blame for this (though they could bear some culpability for not pushing back).
So please, check your writing, have someone else read it, read it again, put it down and go to bed for the night, then read it again when you get up in the morning before you send it out.
I got a response from Samsung today and I just had to post it here. My emotions as I initially saw that I had this but then started, and completed, reading it: :victory: -> ->:rofl: -> :crying:. I have not altered ANY of this email including the names. As you read it, keep in mind my letter was extremely polite and grammatically correct...and my name is NOT Rick.
Dear Rick,
Thank you for your inquiry. I see that that you have question of unlock the bootloader so you can customize the phone.
As of now We still do not have updates about that, and as of now verizon lock the bootloader.But if we have update about unlocking the bootloader will be posting it to the website so please do visit our website(www.samsung.com/us).
At your earliest convenience, please call Samsung Customer Support by phone at our toll free number 1-800-726-7864. Please choose the following options by pressing 1 – Customer, 2 – Tablet, and then 3 – Wi-Fi Galaxy Tablet.
We appreciate your continued interest in Samsung products.
Sincerely,
Claire
Technical Support
I got the good ole generic reply back too, that it has been forwarded. Now, if there is any weight to the statement, lets keep the push going and fill up a few e-mail inbox's!
Hey guys and gals, there's a petition floating around that everyone needs to sign. If you value the ability to unlock your device, you need to sign this. Let your voice be heard and keep this AOSP. XDA is a strong vast community of devs and noons alike. Don't let them take our rights.
http://www.androidauthority.com/mobile-phone-unlocking-petition-150925/
Thank You all very much:laugh:
I SIGNED
jbats said:
Hey guys and gals, there's a petition floating around that everyone needs to sign. If you value the ability to unlock your device, you need to sign this. Let your voice be heard and keep this AOSP. XDA is a strong vast community of devs and noons alike. Don't let them take our rights.
http://www.androidauthority.com/mobile-phone-unlocking-petition-150925/
Thank You all very much:laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i signed it man hope it helps we need to get this out more on different forums and such anything i can do to help
soldier1184 said:
i signed it man hope it helps we need to get this out more on different forums and such anything i can do to help
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Repost to your social networks, start other threads, pass it along. If you don't voice your opinion, you can't moan when they get locked down. Look what Verizon just did with there recent update. Luckily we have Adam Outler in our arsenal of devs.
jbats said:
Hey guys and gals, there's a petition floating around that everyone needs to sign. If you value the ability to unlock your device, you need to sign this. Let your voice be heard and keep this AOSP. XDA is a strong vast community of devs and noons alike. Don't let them take our rights.
http://www.androidauthority.com/mobile-phone-unlocking-petition-150925/
Thank You all very much:laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Signed it a few minutes ago
Sent from my GT-P3110 using xda app-developers app
I just wanted to give my two cents on this issue. I'm not a nay-sayer and am not trying to say you shouldn't take action if you believe action is warranted.
My opinions on this issue are as follows.
1. Has anyone read any of the official 'white house' responses from other petitions? It's like they pay someone (not sure who but I would bet they make minimum wage) to give a 2 or 3 line comment to whatever you submit. So say this petition gets an additional 82,000 signatures... what's the official response going to be? "Thank you for your concern in this matter, however, the administration's official position is that modifying an item that you do not fully own adds a burden and cost to businesses when those modifications result in failure of said item. We will continue to evaluate this issue" or some BS.
2. This law isn't enforceable. You can't physically 'go after' people for their cell phones and prosecute them. There's just no manpower to do so. Next time you get pulled over for speeding is the cop going to see your cell phone in your car and ask to see it? How's he/she going to know it's unlocked without permission (or unlocked at all)?
3. Let this law stand... see where it goes... Imagine the fallout if carriers started sending warning texts to people who have supposedly illegally unlocked their phones! Imagine the lawsuits/bad publicity that would spawn against carriers for monitoring people's cell phones without their consent or knowledge! I guarantee there's nothing in anyone's cell contracts that would allow T-Mobile, AT&T, etc. the right to track and monitor usage of the device throughout the duration of your contract to insure the device isn't being tampered with or unlocked.
4. This is just political figures throwing their campaign contributor 'a bone' and another sad sign of just how bloated government is here. This law is no different than some of the other ridiculous digital copyright crap being spewed out.
5. Once your contract is up you are allowed to do whatever you wish to your phone. You can also get permission to have your device unlocked from your carrier at any time. I know of a few people that travel abroad and for them it was as simple as asking to be able to use another sim when they travel. If you have a good long standing account with your carrier they are very likely to comply (else they risk losing business).
None of this applies to flashing custom roms or the like (which will always void any warranty, etc.), just with carrier unlocking the phone.
anactoraaron said:
None of this applies to flashing custom roms or the like (which will always void any warranty, etc.), just with carrier unlocking the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your right and I totally agree. I just recently got an i777 unlocked by simply calling the carrier(ATnT) and requesting it so I could use it with a prepaid network. The account was in good standing, all previous balance had been paid off.Voila
Trick was driving 45 mins to get a sim, because I told the carrier it was my phone(idiot), but my friend was happy.
Hi,
I need to Sim unlock AT&T Samsung Galaxy S4 Active SGH-I537. Is there anyone who could help me in this.
I need the tested results only .
Thank you
XDA-newbb said:
Hi,
I need to Sim unlock AT&T Samsung Galaxy S4 Active SGH-I537. Is there anyone who could help me in this.
I need the tested results only .
Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You must call A&TT to get an unlock code .
With rooting your phone , you could get some applications who can help you too .
Gaby4430
-+-Galaxy Nexus-+-
Bootloader : Unlocked Freedom
ROM : CyanogenMod 10.1.2
Kernel : Fransisco Kernel
Recovery : TWRP 2.6.0
Root App : Superuser (CWM)
Gaby4430 said:
You must call A&TT to get an unlock code .
With rooting your phone , you could get some applications who can help you too .
Gaby4430
-+-Galaxy Nexus-+-
Bootloader : Unlocked Freedom
ROM : CyanogenMod 10.1.2
Kernel : Fransisco Kernel
Recovery : TWRP 2.6.0
Root App : Superuser (CWM)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply but it is on contract and why would they give me the code?
After a certain time , you can get this unlock code, it is the law. If you can't get the code from your current carrier , you can still get it on a specialized website.
Gaby4430
-+-Galaxy Nexus-+-
Bootloader : Unlocked Freedom
ROM : CyanogenMod 10.1.2
Kernel : Fransisco Kernel
Recovery : TWRP 2.6.0
Root App : Superuser (CWM)
Gaby4430 said:
After a certain time , you can get this unlock code, it is the law. If you can't get the code from your current carrier , you can still get it on a specialized website.
Gaby4430
-+-Galaxy Nexus-+-
Bootloader : Unlocked Freedom
ROM : CyanogenMod 10.1.2
Kernel : Fransisco Kernel
Recovery : TWRP 2.6.0
Root App : Superuser (CWM)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sim-unlock.net purchased from there and it works perfectly.
http://sim-unlock.net/simlock/Samsung/SGH_i537/
You're lucky man.
Have fun with a SIM unlocked device
Gaby4430
-+-Galaxy Nexus-+-
Stock ROM (before) : Yakjuxw --'
Bootloader : Unlocked
ROM (now) : Nightlies CM 10.1
Kernel : Fransisco Kernel
Recovery : TWRP 2.6
Root App : Superuser (CWM)
-+-Future Nexus 7 ?-+-
Bootloader : Unlocked
let me know
XDA-newbb said:
Hi,
I need to Sim unlock AT&T Samsung Galaxy S4 Active SGH-I537. Is there anyone who could help me in this.
I need the tested results only .
Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
please let me know if you have any luck man because nothing seems to work,and att acts like your tryna get the code to fort knox when u call
my results after 1 month of digging
I have spent a month trying to find anyway around paying for an unlock code.
I want to use the rooted ATT i537 on TMob but I bought from a 3rd party who did not know the previous owner.
ATT only allows the registered IMEI owner to request the unlock code. See: ATT.com/unlockdevice
Unlock via Programming panel is deactivated on the i537 Gs4A
A code is the only way. The code can be created by a generator program connected to an ATT database but I am not finding a hackers guide to obtaining this mostly because the community approves of protecting all those who are doing it for profit on eBay etc.
Surely some rebel hack out there reading this will PM me soon with the solution. pleeaassee I am about to send the phone back to the seller and just buy another one at the same price which is unlocked or set up for tMobile if I do not get a reply in a week or 2.
thanks
Gaby4430 said:
After a certain time , you can get this unlock code, it is the law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What law, exactly?
unlocking my s4 active att
ive tried the codes but when I type 1 in the key input it does nothing I do not have phone control menu anyone know why
Steev43230 said:
What law, exactly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2 years but this may be according to your country, too
LS.xD said:
2 years but this may be according to your country, too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was suggesting that the poster identify what law he or she was referring to. "2 years" does not identify a law, i.e. a statute. So, I ask again: What law?
XDA-newbb said:
Hi,
I need to Sim unlock AT&T Samsung Galaxy S4 Active SGH-I537. Is there anyone who could help me in this.
I need the tested results only .
Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you ever get this done?
About "The Law"
Steev43230 said:
I was suggesting that the poster identify what law he or she was referring to. "2 years" does not identify a law, i.e. a statute. So, I ask again: What law?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Steve, I don't think you are going to get the reply you are looking\hoping for. There is no law forcing the vendor to provide you with an unlock code, ever. All those types of considerations and protections for both the vendor and their customers are provided for by the contract you and the vendor enter into when you two come to an agreement and sign that contract at the beginning of your relationship. The vendor promises to provide services for a period of time and you promise to provide Valuable Consideration "money" for these services. There are LEGAL recourses provided for in the fine print for each of you should either party fail to comply with their promises to the other party. The signing of the contract is what I think the original poster meant by "it's the law". It's not the law but, the contract makes all of the agreements and promises stated within it legally binding. The law is simple contract law. Signing the contract may also limit or eliminate any legal recourse you have against the vendor, so read it carefully as you can sign away any rights you may have had. Now the vendor will usually provide you with an unlock code after your contract ends because they have recovered any loss they took by providing you with a discounted or free phone, That is all they are trying to do and they are entitled to that. They will make provisions for active duty military service members who will be deployed or transferred to somewhere their service is unavailable. If you wish to have your phone unlocked before that amount of time you can pay for that service from thousands of vendors all over the internet or at your local mall. They are everywhere! The phone vendor has no interest in helping you to unlock before the contract ends as your intentions are usually to switch services and default on your contract in which case they will sue you for what you would have had to pay them plus all the legal fees, late charges, interest on the unpaid balance, etc etc etc. So, I hope this fully answers your questions and I can't imagine that it wouldn't as I got long winded as to cover all the bases with all the reasons "why?". I do this to try to avoid all of the "but why...?" responses that can turn a simple posting into a life's work. I also hope this satisfies the moderator's responsibilities to make sure that this site doesn't appear to be just another hackers site with the cover of a legitimate developers forum. I'm a very new member of this site and this is only my second posting. I provide tech assistance on several sites for programming and provide assistance when application or system failures occur and the consumer sends in one of those "OH S**T!! HELP ME!!!" requests and I'll walk him\her through the problem to the solution which usually is read the instructions or learn the language you are attempting to write code in . With all the flavors of linux out there. Good luck Steve and try to remember that when someone says "it's the law", at least 95% of the time they really don't know what they are talking about and that "the law" is what they think it is or want it to be. NuclearDave "David".
Yes, I do get you. I am a lawyer, and I get a bit frustrated when people say this is the law or that is the law without really knowing. I did not really expect them to be able to quote me anything, but hope does spring eternal.
Steev43230 said:
Yes, I do get you. I am a lawyer, and I get a bit frustrated when people say this is the law or that is the law without really knowing. I did not really expect them to be able to quote me anything, but hope does spring eternal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't expect a response from someone in the biz and in your case, I broke it down a little much. Unfortunately, the masses would have required even more simplification. This site's members on average are a smarter bunch. I'm not involved in the biz as at the end of my legal training, the military took a hold of my heart and sole and I spent a bunch of my adult life fighting for peoples rights to be any kind of person or idiot they wanted to be. Sometimes I wonder if I did the right thing. I do consulting for friends in the biz from time-to-time. Civilian only as the present administration and I don't agree on much. I've met and shook the hand of four presidents and I just thank god I left the service before our current president came into power. Once again I'm long winded. "So this is what a courtroom looks like..." I met him "The attorney played by Tom Cruise" while stationed in Virginia. Every time I saw him I quoted that line & we always laughed. PS; If I was incorrect in any way in my initial response to you, Please let me know.
Sincerely,
Nuclear Dave
Hey fellow Devs and Users in the Development Community,
I am debating on whether or not to file a Class Action Lawsuit against possibly BOTH Google and Verizon Wireless for not printing on the Manufactures Box that the BOOTLOADER CANNOT EVER BE UNLOCKED whether or NOT You CARRIER UNLOCK the Device after the (60) Days of purchase. This is something that should be either printed on the Box by Google or VZW should put a sticker on the Boxes before sale, letting us in the Development Community know before we purchase or are able to return the device within the 14 day return policy incase you missed the Fine Print that should be on said Box or the Sticker that VZW should put before Point-of-Sale.
The fact that you ask the Representative you purchase your device from, thinks you are talking about Carrier Unlock and dont know what a Bootloader even is, they state that "IT" can be Unlocked, meaning Carrier Unlocked. I have tried (2) devices BOTH Carrier Unlocked and neither will highlight OEM UNLOCKING in Developer Settings. I have seen many with screenshots of messages from VZW Reps saying that the Bootloader can be Unlocked Once the device is Carrier Unlocked. It has been confirmed in an email from a "Floor Manager" that the VZW Varient of the Pixels CANNOT EVER BE OEM UNLOCKED even after being CARRIER UNLOCKED in the following message, which will be escalated to a Department Supervisor next:
Hi Thomas,
Thank you for contacting the Google Support Team.
My name is Wilson H. and I am the Floor Manager here.
I have reviewed your case and understand that you are facing issues with the OEM unlocking of your Pixel device.
At Google, customer satisfaction is something we take very seriously and anything less than ensuring you are completely happy is unacceptable. In regards to your concern, after checking with all the resources and product specialists, I want to keep you informed that the Verizon locked pixel device's bootloader menu cannot be unlocked even if the sim unlock is enabled.
I also read your email in which you have mentioned that previously you are able to get it unlocked however, as of the new updates and services regulatory, it can not be unlocked from the boot loader menu. The device is functioning as intended.
I also came to know that you are looking for a replacement device which has an unlocked bootloader menu. I understand how important this feature must be for you however, we will not be able to provide you a replacement of an unlocked device as the devices can only be replaced with the same make & model and specifications.
I apologize but we will not be able to proceed in this term to help you with a replacement and request you to please reach out to the Verizon team again for further clarification regarding the same.
In case of any further queries or concerns, you can reach out to us.
Thanks!
WH
The Google Support Team
So if you have a Google Pixel 7 or 7 Pro or an earlier model that is FULLY Up to Date, You Can be apart of a Class Action Lawsuit against Google and/or Verizon Wireless for Misinforming us, the Unsatisfied Customers stuck with a VZW Model that can NEVER be OEM UNLOCKED Unless an Exploit is found, Sunshine DOES NOT WORK!
Please pass this on to other Verizon Wireless Pixel owners and either post your name or screen name so i can get a head count...
AndroidAddict420 said:
Hey fellow Devs and Users in the Development Community,
I am debating on whether or not to file a Class Action Lawsuit against possibly BOTH Google and Verizon Wireless for not printing on the Manufactures Box that the BOOTLOADER CANNOT EVER BE UNLOCKED whether or NOT You CARRIER UNLOCK the Device after the (60) Days of purchase. This is something that should be either printed on the Box by Google or VZW should put a sticker on the Boxes before sale, letting us in the Development Community know before we purchase or are able to return the device within the 14 day return policy incase you missed the Fine Print that should be on said Box or the Sticker that VZW should put before Point-of-Sale.
The fact that you ask the Representative you purchase your device from, thinks you are talking about Carrier Unlock and dont know what a Bootloader even is, they state that "IT" can be Unlocked, meaning Carrier Unlocked. I have tried (2) devices BOTH Carrier Unlocked and neither will highlight OEM UNLOCKING in Developer Settings. I have seen many with screenshots of messages from VZW Reps saying that the Bootloader can be Unlocked Once the device is Carrier Unlocked. It has been confirmed in an email from a "Floor Manager" that the VZW Varient of the Pixels CANNOT EVER BE OEM UNLOCKED even after being CARRIER UNLOCKED in the following message, which will be escalated to a Department Supervisor next:
Hi Thomas,
Thank you for contacting the Google Support Team.
My name is Wilson H. and I am the Floor Manager here.
I have reviewed your case and understand that you are facing issues with the OEM unlocking of your Pixel device.
At Google, customer satisfaction is something we take very seriously and anything less than ensuring you are completely happy is unacceptable. In regards to your concern, after checking with all the resources and product specialists, I want to keep you informed that the Verizon locked pixel device's bootloader menu cannot be unlocked even if the sim unlock is enabled.
I also read your email in which you have mentioned that previously you are able to get it unlocked however, as of the new updates and services regulatory, it can not be unlocked from the boot loader menu. The device is functioning as intended.
I also came to know that you are looking for a replacement device which has an unlocked bootloader menu. I understand how important this feature must be for you however, we will not be able to provide you a replacement of an unlocked device as the devices can only be replaced with the same make & model and specifications.
I apologize but we will not be able to proceed in this term to help you with a replacement and request you to please reach out to the Verizon team again for further clarification regarding the same.
In case of any further queries or concerns, you can reach out to us.
Thanks!
WH
The Google Support Team
So if you have a Google Pixel 7 or 7 Pro or an earlier model that is FULLY Up to Date, You Can be apart of a Class Action Lawsuit against Google and/or Verizon Wireless for Misinforming us, the Unsatisfied Customers stuck with a VZW Model that can NEVER be OEM UNLOCKED Unless an Exploit is found, Sunshine DOES NOT WORK!
Please pass this on to other Verizon Wireless Pixel owners and either post your name or screen name so i can get a head count...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're just going to let you unlock the bootloader, no one tries to push this even though it is federally illegal. But, you won't get anything but hate from this forum. In a few minutes you're going to have multiple "Recognized Developers" telling you it's impossible. Which only shows the level of talent on this platform. Anything is hackable, if you know what you are doing.
mavssubs said:
They're just going to let you unlock the bootloader, no one tries to push this even though it is federally illegal. But, you won't get anything but hate from this forum. In a few minutes you're going to have multiple "Recognized Developers" telling you it's impossible. Which only shows the level of talent on this platform. Anything is hackable, if you know what you are doing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If anything is hackable and someone can do it, the developers here would have done it by now. "The level of talent"? Please tell me of another website that has the level of talent that the developers on this site have, and also surpasses it. If it was hackable, someone on this site or another would have done it by now. If this site has a substandard level of talent, point me to a website where they have been able to hack into Verizon's unlock policy. No level of talent here? Then where is the talent to do this? It doesn't exist. There's no way. If there was you'd be able to provide a link to it.
Meanwhile, nobody on any website anywhere at all has been able to bypass it. I guess the "lack of talent" is world wide, not just on this site smh
xunholyx said:
If anything is hackable and someone can do it, the developers here would have done it by now. "The level of talent"? Please tell me of another website that has the level of talent that the developers on this site have, and also surpasses it. If it was hackable, someone on this site or another would have done it by now. If this site has a substandard level of talent, point me to a website where they have been able to hack into Verizon's unlock policy. No level of talent here? Then where is the talent to do this? It doesn't exist. There's no way. If there was you'd be able to provide a link to it.
Meanwhile, nobody on any website anywhere at all has been able to bypass it. I guess the "lack of talent" is world wide, not just on this site sm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, the original exploit was patched obviously. You are missing the point of this thread. Do you want to be included or not is the question?
mavssubs said:
They're just going to let you unlock the bootloader, no one tries to push this even though it is federally illegal. But, you won't get anything but hate from this forum. In a few minutes you're going to have multiple "Recognized Developers" telling you it's impossible. Which only shows the level of talent on this platform. Anything is hackable, if you know what you are doing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not asking about whether or not it is hackable but the original exploit was patched from every Pixel from 3 or 4 and up. Do you want in or no?
AndroidAddict420 said:
Yea, the original exploit was patched obviously. You are missing the point of this thread. Do you want to be included or not is the question?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no way. The post I replied to said the devs here are weak. So I asked for a link to where the devs are better than here. There should be an exploit but there isn't. If there was we'd know about it by now, either on this site or another. There's no way as of now. Saying the talent here is lacking is an incorrect statement.
AndroidAddict420 said:
Not asking about whether or not it is hackable but the original exploit was patched from every Pixel from 3 or 4 and up. Do you want in or no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not in. I don't have a Verizon model. I'm just responding to his declaration
mavssubs said:
They're just going to let you unlock the bootloader, no one tries to push this even though it is federally illegal. But, you won't get anything but hate from this forum. In a few minutes you're going to have multiple "Recognized Developers" telling you it's impossible...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It sort of already happened when OP brought this subject up in THIS THREAD...
But @AndroidAddict420, I'd like to put forth questions; All previous Pixel owners and most users who have done the least bit research on the subject know that Verizon will not have a device (in this case, any Pixel past, present, or future) that have its bootloader unlocked (I wonder if Google would need to be included in the "lawsuit" as they are just being complaint to Verizon as a carrier as well as they even set aside a whole variant just for VZW, and outside of that Google doesn't really care to lock the bootloader down as severely as Verizon) -- therefore most of us have gone to merely ordering from the Google Store or unlocked variants from Amazon/Best Buy; the only upside buying from Verizon is being able to get on a payment plan attached to your existing cell bill, which you can also achieve and pay in the same rate if you qualify for Google Financing (worst downside buying from Verizon, outside of locked bootloader, is all the bloatware) ~~ So why should/would anyone go through the trouble of this class action lawsuit (when the circumstance has long been established [7 years]) instead of just merely purchasing from Google Store or elsewhere outside of VZW? I mean, I understand the lawsuit would potentially get Verizon to change the practice and the change would be nice for Verizon customers (purchasing the device on their payment plan to be on their cell bill), but considering it has been a long standing, established, relatively well-known practice, all these facts standing against it, what realistic hope is there for this class action lawsuit?
Wait, VZW Locks the Bootloaders down?
Who knew!!!???
AndroidAddict420 said:
Yea, the original exploit was patched obviously. You are missing the point of this thread. Do you want to be included or not is the question?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Man, just sell the device and get it straight from Google. You claimed in the other thread that you are not new to smart phones, however it has been common knowledge that Verizon locks down all of their bootloaders. This has been going on for at least 10 years now, with a couple of exceptions that required an exploit.
You are wasting your time and energy with a petition or a class action (which will never get anywhere). All Verizon has to say is it ensures safety on their network and customers.
When I see some of the replies in this and other forums (looking at you FlyerTalk) I have to wonder if some of you are corporate shills on their payroll.
Most people know nothing about bootloaders and not everyone that does knows that some are unlockable. Ask the typical cell phone store salesperson or eBay seller if the phone can be unlocked and they'll assure you it can be completely unlocked for any carrier. Some might be lying, most probably don't know. Putting aside whether lying by omission is a lie.
What happens a few years down the road when I learn about alternate firmware? Or maybe I don't and just want to sell the phone - sorry, it's worthless, no more security updates. Bootloader locking affects more than just us hobbyists.
Security and safety? Don't unlock the bootloader! It should be your choice. They give you plenty of warnings while you're unlocking and every time you reboot.
Not to mention that Verizon lets you use pretty much any device on their network these days. What are they protecting?
Would such a class action succeed? Would it change anything? I guess that works depend on your lawyers and what judge they can get the case in front of.
All that said, I can't join your class since I've haven't bought a Verizon device since the Kyocera 6035.
I think it's important to clarify some things....
Verizon is not a public utility. They might be a publicly traded company, and a carrier under the protections of Section 230, but they are not obligated to provide universal access to anyone who wants it, nor are they required to permit unlocking bootloaders of devices on their network. As to why they would want to restrict bootloader unlocking, this would most likely be due to their impressions of network and consumer security; to a company such as Verizon (or any other carrier) a bootloader unlocked device is considered compromised.
They aren't "required" to allow the end user to unlock the bootloader, nor is Google, by any federal law. Sure, you can point to things like the Magnussen Moss Warranty Act, but there's a reason why there are massive ongoing lawsuits over the "right to repair" and "free access". Out here in the agricultural country of Kansas, there are millions of farmers who would much rather be able to fix their own tractors, but John Deere has made a point of preventing unauthorized repairs by anyone who isn't a Deere certified technician, using Deere proprietary tools, to the point where the tractor will "brick" if a non-OEM part is used.
So, it's my opinion that there aren't grounds for a lawsuit. I'd strongly advise anyone considering doing so to talk to an attorney first, to determine what your options are. Ultimately for a class action suit such as this, you have to claim injury of some kind, and it's unlikely that a court would conclude that your case has merit.
Further, I would strongly advise using absolute terms like claiming basis in federal law or case law, unless you can cite the specific statute and/or case.
Just be smart, that's all.
A lawsuit, class action or otherwise, would go nowhere. I don't see a cause of action. I don't see a prima facie case. I don't see any federal law, rule or regulation which would require a warning label on the box.
The best hope to have OEMs allowing their bootloaders to be unlocked would be through Right-To-Repair, or similar, legislation. I don't live in the EU and do not follow their proposed legislations, but I understand there have been some legislations proposed as part of a Right-To-Repair/European Green Deal that may require OEMs to allow bootloader unlocking at the end of warranty or the end of life to allow greater sustainability of these devices.
justDave said:
Most people know nothing about bootloaders and not everyone that does knows that some are unlockable. Ask the typical cell phone store salesperson or eBay seller if the phone can be unlocked and they'll assure you it can be completely unlocked for any carrier. Some might be lying, most probably don't know. Putting aside whether lying by omission is a lie.
What happens a few years down the road when I learn about alternate firmware?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe most people/not everyone would know offhand, but surely a simple internet search or smallest amount of research would easily answer the subject or re-affirm/reconfirm what may be advertised by said salesperson or Ebay seller... literally google "verizon" "pixel/device" "can bootloader be unlocked/rooted", right? Especially if most of those same people are planning on doing rather (more) advanced things to their device, they would be planning on research and/or information searching on how to unlock bootloader/root anyways, right?
Lughnasadh said:
A lawsuit, class action or otherwise, would go nowhere. I don't see a cause of action. I don't see a prima facie case. I don't see any federal law, rule or regulation which would require a warning label on the box.
The best hope to have OEMs allowing their bootloaders to be unlocked would be through Right-To-Repair, or similar, legislation. I don't live in the EU and do not follow their proposed legislations, but I understand there have been some legislations proposed as part of a Right-To-Repair/European Green Deal that may require OEMs to allow bootloader unlocking at the end of warranty or the end of life to allow greater sustainability of these devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have my doubts on right to repair anyway. This would ostensibly mean that they would have to make their own proprietary tools publicly available, such as they would use for things like QFIL...and while that would be a boon for us, I don't think anyone would be willing to compromise their intellectual property that way.
V0latyle said:
I have my doubts on right to repair anyway. This would ostensibly mean that they would have to make their own proprietary tools publicly available, such as they would use for things like QFIL...and while that would be a boon for us, I don't think anyone would be willing to compromise their intellectual property that way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You wouldn't have to force them to make any proprietary tools available to the public. Manufacturers could simply allow bootloader unlocking from their end in some manner. And it doesn't have to fall under the realm of "Right-To-Repair" as we know it in the U.S. (supplying parts, tools, etc.). The EU "environmental/sustainability" approach could be used to support such legislation.
That being said, I think we are a long way off from that here in the U.S.. A long way off...
Lughnasadh said:
You wouldn't have to force them to make any proprietary tools available to the public. Manufacturers could simply allow bootloader unlocking from their end in some manner. And it doesn't have to fall under the realm of "Right-To-Repair" as we know it in the U.S. (supplying parts, tools, etc.). The EU "environmental/sustainability" approach could be used to support such legislation.
That being said, I think we are a long way off from that here in the U.S.. A long way off...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point was, unbricking falls under the category of "repair", therefore a low level reflash as performed via QUSB would qualify
V0latyle said:
My point was, unbricking falls under the category of "repair", therefore a low level reflash as performed via QUSB would qualify
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, ok. Didn't realize you were specifically talking about unbricking.
V0latyle said:
I think it's important to clarify some things....
Verizon is not a public utility. They might be a publicly traded company, and a carrier under the protections of Section 230, but they are not obligated to provide universal access to anyone who wants it, nor are they required to permit unlocking bootloaders of devices on their network. As to why they would want to restrict bootloader unlocking, this would most likely be due to their impressions of network and consumer security; to a company such as Verizon (or any other carrier) a bootloader unlocked device is considered compromised.
They aren't "required" to allow the end user to unlock the bootloader, nor is Google, by any federal law. Sure, you can point to things like the Magnussen Moss Warranty Act, but there's a reason why there are massive ongoing lawsuits over the "right to repair" and "free access". Out here in the agricultural country of Kansas, there are millions of farmers who would much rather be able to fix their own tractors, but John Deere has made a point of preventing unauthorized repairs by anyone who isn't a Deere certified technician, using Deere proprietary tools, to the point where the tractor will "brick" if a non-OEM part is used.
So, it's my opinion that there aren't grounds for a lawsuit. I'd strongly advise anyone considering doing so to talk to an attorney first, to determine what your options are. Ultimately for a class action suit such as this, you have to claim injury of some kind, and it's unlikely that a court would conclude that your case has merit.
Further, I would strongly advise using absolute terms like claiming basis in federal law or case law, unless you can cite the specific statute and/or case.
Just be smart, that's all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except that the *issue* isn't whether or not they are obligated legally to unlock it, it is that they LIED and claimed that it could be unlocked, when in fact it cannot.
That kind of issue doesn't lend itself to class action unless it can be demonstrated that they systemically lie about this fact.
96carboard said:
Except that the *issue* isn't whether or not they are obligated legally to unlock it, it is that they LIED and claimed that it could be unlocked, when in fact it cannot.
That kind of issue doesn't lend itself to class action unless it can be demonstrated that they systemically lie about this fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lied about what, though?
Verizon Pixels can be used on other networks once they're carrier unlocked. Carrier lock =/= bootloader lock, and 99% of the time when a device is advertised as "unlocked" this is what it means.
They didn't lie about anything, and you can't hold a company legally liable for something a technically illiterate CSR said.
Neither Google nor Verizon advertises ANY device as specifically "bootloader unlockable". This case wouldn't see a hearing, much less a jury. Plus, any case against a large corporation only works when there's some formidable legal firepower behind it. No lawyer will touch this without a sizeable retainer. Attorneys rarely care about who wins, they only care about getting paid, and class action lawsuits generally means there's significant potential for a very large settlement.
I'm not defending Verizon or Google here, I'm just being realistic. There's a lot of ideas flying around here, but these are the requirements that have to be met:
There has to be evidence of deception or other wrongdoing
The alleged fault has to have caused measurable injury
The claimant(s) have to have competent legal representation who are willing to go up against billionaire corporate lawyers
None of these are satisfied by "I think Google lied because they said their device is unlockable and I meant bootloader when they really meant carrier".
I'm not a defeatist, again I'm just a realist. OP won't be able to get any competent law firm to take this case, especially not pro bono, so it's not going to go anywhere.