Related
Hello everyone.
i just got my s3 and i am in love with it. the only thing i hate is paying 100 a month for sprint service. i have the s2 also from sprint but its flashed to verizon and want to do the same with my s3. can someone please give me sum info or a place that has step by step instruction for noobs plus what software to use and where to get it.
please im broke and i want to do this b4 my next sprint bill comes in. ty all
First of all, I'm not sure if what you're asking is legal since you're likely going to be cheating Verizon out of money on their plan for the S3. Besides that, AFAIK QPST for the US GS3 isn't working yet, and that is a necessity for flashing to other carriers.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
I have the Samsung s3 t-mobile and Im able to connect and read the phone using cdma workshop .... I'm sure this phone is possible
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app
OP is referring to esn cloning, which is illegal and barred from discussion here on these boards.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
rdwing said:
OP is referring to esn cloning, which is illegal and barred from discussion here on these boards.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flashing is not illegal ... he means over to pageplus
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app
rdwing said:
OP is referring to esn cloning, which is illegal and barred from discussion here on these boards.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are so lame.
To be honest, I don't quite understand why a person cannot use his/her phone, which they bought for $600 outright, on a network of their choice.
You can do that with GSM phones. Why not with CDMA?
rdwing is right. Although the FCC law is vague when it comes to what exactly “ESN cloning" is and what sort of flashing is illegal, it IS illegal to flash to Verizon and not pay for the plan you should be paying for; for example, paying for a non-data plan but using the GS3 on that plan. That is absolutely fraud and is prohibited from discussion here.
IMHO I don't believe flashing to a carrier such as Virgin Mobile, which allows you to use any plan for any phone, is wrong or illegal. However, Verizon's large number of plans for specific types of phones makes it impossible for us to know whether or not you'll be using the phone on the proper plan.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
elfhater said:
rdwing is right. Although the FCC law is vague when it comes to what exactly “ESN cloning" is and what sort of flashing is illegal, it IS illegal to flash to Verizon and not pay for the plan you should be paying for; for example, paying for a non-data plan but using the GS3 on that plan. That is absolutely fraud and is prohibited from discussion here.
IMHO I don't believe flashing to a carrier such as Virgin Mobile, which allows you to use any plan for any phone, is wrong or illegal. However, Verizon's large number of plans for specific types of phones makes it impossible for us to know whether or not you'll be using the phone on the proper plan.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
O'RLY? because here is a thread explicitly coaching members on how to misrepresent their smartphones as dumbphones and rape the ATT data plan that is specifically meant for non-smartphones, even though the ATT ToS calls out SIM swapping specifically. It has been allowed to prosper despite being brought to their attention because "if ATT didn't want people using the loophole they would close it" I was told. I suppose it's a fine line they have to walk, to allow or not, what's technically legal or illegal.....but I get the feeling that the admins turn a blind eye to activities as long as they are crimes against a large corporation, but if you were to do the same thing to an individual developer they would be all over it.
Hey, I'm all for getting the most for my money, but I try not to condone intentionally screwing them over even if they are a huge corporation. Admittedly it's not always easy to ride that line.....but I personally think there is something about taking advantage and being opportunistic that lends itself to expose the real moral compass of people. Most people who would make good life decisions won't intentionally go out of their way to screw anyone, company or not. Not all, but most I think. It just reflects poorly on people that do such things. We all struggle with easy opportunities.
jamesnmandy said:
O'RLY? because here is a thread explicitly coaching members on how to misrepresent their smartphones as dumbphones and rape the ATT data plan that is specifically meant for non-smartphones, even though the ATT ToS calls out SIM swapping specifically. It has been allowed to prosper despite being brought to their attention because "if ATT didn't want people using the loophole they would close it" I was told. I suppose it's a fine line they have to walk, to allow or not, what's technically legal or illegal.....but I get the feeling that the admins turn a blind eye to activities as long as they are crimes against a large corporation, but if you were to do the same thing to an individual developer they would be all over it.
Hey, I'm all for getting the most for my money, but I try not to condone intentionally screwing them over even if they are a huge corporation. Admittedly it's not always easy to ride that line.....but I personally think there is something about taking advantage and being opportunistic that lends itself to expose the real moral compass of people. Most people who would make good life decisions won't intentionally go out of their way to screw anyone, company or not. Not all, but most I think. It just reflects poorly on people that do such things. We all struggle with easy opportunities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what I'm saying, the smartphone plans for companies like Virgin Mobile or Boost Mobile are universal across all smartphones, making it impossible (AFAIK) to actually “cheat" the carrier out of money. I am also aware that Virgin Mobile DOES prohibit other carriers' phones in their ToS, however breaching a non-contact ToS is not illegal, it's only a way for a company to deny you service if you beach it. I'm not so sure about contact carriers like Verizon or AT&T, though...
I don't believe any of these companies deserve to be cheated out of money, I was just pointing out the fact that it is wrong to pay for a cheaper plan than what you should actually be paying for on that carrier and I was saying that the issue is non-existent on VM.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Only way it will happen is the phone IMEI has to be activated on Verizons network. You can call them and ask them to activate the phone on the network. They may say yes but will most likely say no.
As for the rest of the talks. Using an international version of a phone will come across on the US networks as unknown. This has been the case for a while but soon will be stopping as the carriers are starting to work together to prevent non network phones on their plans.
IMEI changing is illegal and will not be talked about.
Sent for a corner cell in Arkham
zelendel said:
Only way it will happen is the phone IMEI has to be activated on Verizons network. You can call them and ask them to activate the phone on the network. They may say yes but will most likely say no.
As for the rest of the talks. Using an international version of a phone will come across on the US networks as unknown. This has been the case for a while but soon will be stopping as the carriers are starting to work together to prevent non network phones on their plans.
IMEI changing is illegal and will not be talked about.
Sent for a corner cell in Arkham
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CDMA providers don't use IMEI; Verizon and Sprint only use it for LTE (a GSM technology), and considering that the OP would not be able to use the LTE anyway because Sprint and Verizon use different LTE bands, this seems a non-issue (as he would not need to change his IMEI).
He would, however, need to change his ESN, and as I stated earlier, the legality of it is questionable but unlikely if he is switching his phone to Verizon.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
elfhater said:
CDMA providers don't use IMEI; Verizon and Sprint only use it for LTE (a GSM technology), and considering that the OP would not be able to use the LTE anyway because Sprint and Verizon use different LTE bands, this seems a non-issue (as he would not need to change his IMEI).
He would, however, need to change his ESN, and as I stated earlier, the legality of it is questionable but unlikely if he is switching his phone to Verizon.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
right, how is this any different than changing the SIM card and activating it on a network that is explicitly excluded from that use per the ToS? IMEI, ESN, or SIM......it's all semantics......if misrepresenting one is not ok, the others cannot be either as the end product is the same
Originally Posted by elfhater
CDMA providers don't use IMEI; Verizon and Sprint only use it for LTE (a GSM technology), and considering that the OP would not be able to use the LTE anyway because Sprint and Verizon use different LTE bands, this seems a non-issue (as he would not need to change his IMEI).
He would, however, need to change his ESN, and as I stated earlier, the legality of it is questionable but unlikely if he is switching his phone to Verizon.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
right, how is this any different than changing the SIM card and activating it on a network that is explicitly excluded from that use per the ToS? IMEI, ESN, or SIM......it's all semantics......if misrepresenting one is not ok, the others cannot be either as the end product is the same
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, but I'm saying that if the OP would like to change his phone to Verizon then that's his choice; he takes on the risk of being caught, the knowledge that what he's doing is potentially illegal, and knowing that he is acting immorally. I don't agree with what the OP is doing and I won't provide help.
And the point about the ToS that I was saying was that it's one thing to breach a ToS, but it's a very different thing to breach a contact. Breaching a non-contact ToS is not necessarily immoral because the only agreement you make with the carrier is that you understand that they can deny you service if you breach their ToS.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
elfhater said:
I agree, but I'm saying that if the OP would like to change his phone to Verizon then that's his choice; he takes on the risk of being caught, the knowledge that what he's doing is potentially illegal, and knowing that he is acting immorally. I don't agree with what the OP is doing and I won't provide help.
And the point about the ToS that I was saying was that it's one thing to breach a ToS, but it's a very different thing to breach a contact. Breaching a non-contact ToS is not necessarily immoral because the only agreement you make with the carrier is that you understand that they can deny you service if you breach their ToS.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
elfhater said:
I agree, but I'm saying that if the OP would like to change his phone to Verizon then that's his choice; he takes on the risk of being caught, the knowledge that what he's doing is potentially illegal, and knowing that he is acting immorally. I don't agree with what the OP is doing and I won't provide help.
And the point about the ToS that I was saying was that it's one thing to breach a ToS, but it's a very different thing to breach a contact. Breaching a non-contact ToS is not necessarily immoral because the only agreement you make with the carrier is that you understand that they can deny you service if you breach their ToS.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
see i disagree on that last part....it's their network, not your's or anyone else's, it belongs to ATT for instance, and access to that network is not an entitlement in which one can choose to follow the rules or not at a whim......by using the network you accept the ToS by default...so accessing that network by misrepresenting and explicitly breaking the ToS is pretty cut and dry.......it's just wrong. Choosing to do the wrong thing is immoral if you will. Not that it's fair to equate cell service with morality and life.....but at the root of it, people who choose to be opportunistic will many times choose to do the same in other aspects of life......
this thread isn't about morality so i digress........but there is really no way to justify the breaking of the ToS when one is on their network to begin with in my opinion
jamesnmandy said:
see i disagree on that last part....it's their network, not your's or anyone else's, it belongs to ATT for instance, and access to that network is not an entitlement in which one can choose to follow the rules or not at a whim......by using the network you accept the ToS by default...so accessing that network by misrepresenting and explicitly breaking the ToS is pretty cut and dry.......it's just wrong. Choosing to do the wrong thing is immoral if you will. Not that it's fair to equate cell service with morality and life.....but at the root of it, people who choose to be opportunistic will many times choose to do the same in other aspects of life......
this thread isn't about morality so i digress........but there is really no way to justify the breaking of the ToS when one is on their network to begin with in my opinion
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, but by agreeing to only a ToS (VM, Boost, etc) you are allowed to use their network with the knowledge that you can be denied service if you choose to breach those terms and the carrier decides to terminate your service.
A contact on the other hand (Verizon, etc) is a binding agreement in which you basically promise that you will abide by the terms set forth in the contact and therefore MUST abide.
I can see we're getting off topic but I can agree to disagree lol.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
elfhater said:
I know, but by agreeing to only a ToS (VM, Boost, etc) you are allowed to use their network with the knowledge that you can be denied service if you choose to breach those terms and the carrier decides to terminate your service.
A contact on the other hand (Verizon, etc) is a binding agreement in which you basically promise that you will abide by the terms set forth in the contact and therefore MUST abide.
I can see we're getting off topic but I can agree to disagree lol.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no this is good stuff...
you do agree that they can boot you off, but before that you agree to use the service per the ToS in the first place, by simply connecting you agree to use it as they say......it doesn't say "go ahead and connect any way you like but we can disconnect you". It says in order to connect you have to agree to connect per the ToS.
So the first transgression is the act of connecting in a mischievous or by way of misrepresentation. At least from what I can see. Contract or not. The contract really has no bearing other than cost and features for the cost. You pay for a set of features for a price, they agree to give you those features for that length of time per the contract. This can exist separately from the actual act of connecting to the service.
nabbed said:
To be honest, I don't quite understand why a person cannot use his/her phone, which they bought for $600 outright, on a network of their choice.
You can do that with GSM phones. Why not with CDMA?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because american companies are generally greedy just look at apple.
jamesnmandy said:
no this is good stuff...
you do agree that they can boot you off, but before that you agree to use the service per the ToS in the first place, by simply connecting you agree to use it as they say......it doesn't say "go ahead and connect any way you like but we can disconnect you". It says in order to connect you have to agree to connect per the ToS.
So the first transgression is the act of connecting in a mischievous or by way of misrepresentation. At least from what I can see. Contract or not. The contract really has no bearing other than cost and features for the cost. You pay for a set of features for a price, they agree to give you those features for that length of time per the contract. This can exist separately from the actual act of connecting to the service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see what you're saying, TBH I didn't consider that you were agreeing to abide by the terms in order to connect, as opposed to agreeing to the terms with the knowledge that you can be denied service once you breach those terms. Also I haven't read (for example's sake) VM's ToS in full, just the parts pertaining to using a phone from another carrier.
And with the contact, you are legally bound to abide by the terms set forth (I think that usually includes an agreement that you will abide by the ToS), whereas there is no legal agreement if you are only agreeing to a ToS. Whether it's morally wrong to break a ToS alone I can't really say, but if the carrier is not adversely affected in any way, shape, or form and the consumer can use a phone that he or she wants that that carrier may not offer, I don't really see a problem (as long as the consumer didn't sign a contract which involved promising to abide by the ToS).
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
If you guys don't know T-Mobile has started blacklisting IMEIs of devices with unpaid accounts, stolen devices etc
I've seen a few threads with people saying their phone randomly stopped working one day, the SIM wouldn't pick up signal. There is a few things that could have happened, since SIM cards do go bad. But if it's a phone you bought on Craigslist/eBay/BST forum etc beware you can get screwed down the road. If someone gets a phone on one of the new value plans and decides to cancel service after selling the device and it goes unpaid you will have a brick. If they don't cancel service and sell the phone, then report it stolen, you will have a brick. There is MANY scenarios, people things oh hey this phone is $200, I can sell it for $450 and cancel the line and I've made $250...well the end user will now have a no longer working phone. that's just the start of it.
Just beware when buying phones online, this has always been the case for Sprint/Verizon...but now T-Mobile has started doing the same. not sure about AT&T since I don't have personal experience with them about blacklisting IMEI.
I don't see how this would affect say an att user. They can just sim unlocked the phone and use it
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
I might be wrong here, but isn't the signal sent to the SIM? If the IMEI is never actually attached to your line (in the system) theoretically it still wouldn't matter. i.e. I found a Blackberry and decided I would try the $50 TMO prepaid deal. I stopped by the store and bought a SIM but didn't have the phone with me. He said no problem, activated the SIM and sent me on my way and the BB worked.
is this even legal? aren't the phones on contract technically provided as a 'free gift' and therefore property of the buyer from day one?
lawrence750 said:
is this even legal? aren't the phones on contract technically provided as a 'free gift' and therefore property of the buyer from day one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe it is legal. You first have to realize there is no such thing as a 'free' or 'subsidized' phone. You either pay full price upfront or in payments via the monthly service charge. One way or another, providers are gonna get the phone paid for. T-Mobile is the only major US provider that offers cheaper rates if you own your phone.
But...if you get a phone 'free' or 'subsidized' you have to think of it as similar to financing a car. You get to use the car but the bank has a financial interest in it - actually contractually owns it - until you pay it off. That's why they can legally repossess it if you fail to pay. Similarly, until you fulfill your service contract or pay the exit fee the provider has a financial interest in the phone, and by contract, certain legal rights.
Not a perfect analogy but I hope it makes things clearer.
Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
chibixzero said:
I don't see how this would affect say an att user. They can just sim unlocked the phone and use it
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think the SIM will work if the imei is blocked. sIm lock Is totally dIfferent to ImeI block. Imei is how the phone gets it signal. It identifies the handset(not the SIM).
If an imei is blocked in UK then it will not work on any network in UK, but it will work on networks in other countries as there is not an international imei data base there are only national one at the minute. It is not 100% certain to work in another country but it would more than likely work. But for instance O2 in UK is owned by Spanish company Telefonica so an o2 phone blocked by imei may not work in Spain and vice versa.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
It is possible to change the imei number of a phone, but I know in the UK it IS ILLEGAL to do this.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Very informative
It's unfortunate that sometimes people are dishonest or unethical even more so when selling anonymously through the internet.
As always in purchasing toys, do your homework and if a deal seems to good to be true..... it probably is.
Thebeast715 said:
It's unfortunate that sometimes people are dishonest or unethical even more so when selling anonymously through the internet.
As always in purchasing toys, do your homework and if a deal seems to good to be true..... it probably is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very very true:thumbup:
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
gavmac said:
It is possible to change the imei number of a phone, but I know in the UK it IS ILLEGAL to do this.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is in the states as well
Sent from my Inspire 4G using Tapatalk 2
Wow,so att the one company that doesnt practice this
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Must of you have seen this I'm sure, but fire those who haven't be careful!
http://www.google.com/m/search?q=un...s&sa=X&ei=kIQCUcPmJ6Xw0gGZjoGYDQ&ved=0CCsQqAI
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda app-developers app
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/01/24/unlocking-cellphones-becomes-illegal-saturday/
Read this article.
only when the phone is new after you get a replacement phone it can be unlocked by the carrier still.
You can also still purchase unlocked phones directly too.
tjsooley said:
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/01/24/unlocking-cellphones-becomes-illegal-saturday/
Read this article.
only when the phone is new after you get a replacement phone it can be unlocked by the carrier still.
You can also still purchase unlocked phones directly too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That still is too restrictive look how at&to has been about unlock codes for the skyrocket. The government is catering to big businesses again mainly because of their lack of understanding. You may be OK with it but once I own a device who the **** are you to tell me what I can and can't do to a device its just like cars man.
Sent from my refrigerator
mtdew said:
That still is too restrictive look how at&to has been about unlock codes for the skyrocket. The government is catering to big businesses again mainly because of their lack of understanding. You may be OK with it but once I own a device who the **** are you to tell me what I can and can't do to a device its just like cars man.
Sent from my refrigerator
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I will never be purchasing a carrier phone anymore.
I just spoke to at&t Rep yesterday and they were not knowing anything about this.
Has anyone else talked with their carriers?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
---------- Post added at 02:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:53 PM ----------
tjsooley said:
I agree. I will never be purchasing a carrier phone anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's hard at times to shell out 400 or 500 dollars initially although overall you'll be spending more on carrier plan.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
My thing is if you enact this law then carriers should be forced to offer the unlock code if bought outright at full price or after the price of the phone has been paid through your bills allowing people the option to terminate their service.
Sent from my refrigerator
mtdew said:
My thing is if you enact this law then carriers should be forced to offer the unlock code if bought outright at full price or after the price of the phone has been paid through your bills allowing people the option to terminate their service.
Sent from my refrigerator
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much agreed....
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
---------- Post added at 09:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 PM ----------
Bit of clarification, unlocking without carrier permission is illegal. Unlocking by the carrier is not.
I guess the carriers would like to make more money and hold you hostage for the 2 yr contract. It's unfortunate, but this is reality of capitalism and big businesses.
I have a newer outlook on this now and I would have to agree to purchase unlocked device... Rather then buying phones that are discounted.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
Wow. This totally sucks. I guess I better buy all my phones unlocked now.
Since my job requires for me to travel to many different countries, I guess Nexus will be my next phone. I will be missing 4G speed whenever I go back in home.
White House Petition
There is a White House petition asking the Librarian of Congress to rescind the decision.
petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
7,853 signed and 92,147 signatures needed by February 23rd for the White House to respond.
Signed, and shared for all 3 of my Facebook friends to sign.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
Signed
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda app-developers app
Holy sh!t!
This is some major bulsh!t!
Thank heavens i don't live in your dictature!
who cares anyway its only for new phones and they cant track us
Signed and shared to my Facebook with a little description to provide insight for the ones who don't understand the big picture.
intelxtreme said:
who cares anyway its only for new phones and they cant track us
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and only new phones that are carrier subsidized. If you pay full price for a carrier phone off contract they will still legally give you the unlock code or once you upgrade your phone after the 2 year mark. this also still doesn't effect factory unlocked phones like the SGS3 international and nexus 4 directly from google.
...all the while here in Canada it's just the opposite. Just read the news yesterday that CRTC is pushing for a new code for carriers, with more provisions for customer protection. And the carriers "are cooperating". Among the things to be included are requirements to clearly spell out unlocking fees in advance, and make it a rule to unlock phones on contract after 30 days. But the most interesting thing is that carriers will be required to unlock phones not on contract at no charge. Meaning that if you buy a locked phone off someone, the carrier will have to unlock it for you for free.
Glad I live in Canada...
re: unlocking can have a 5yr prison term and 1/2 million dollar fine
does any1 know what/who dafuk is the "Librarian of Congress", and do they have that kind of power
so i can buy a miltary style gun w/out a background check, but damn me if i unlock my phone, well not me as i dont live in the u.s.
damn those unlockers, they are a menace in the us
vincom said:
re: unlocking can have a 5yr prison term and 1/2 million dollar fine
does any1 know what/who dafuk is the "Librarian of Congress", and do they have that kind of power
so i can buy a miltary style gun w/out a background check, but damn me if i unlock my phone, well not me as i dont live in the u.s.
damn those unlockers, they are a menace in the us
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't bring in ar's because you know good and well that's all cosmetic there's nothing military about it.
Sent from my refrigerator
vincom said:
re: unlocking can have a 5yr prison term and 1/2 million dollar fine
does any1 know what/who dafuk is the "Librarian of Congress", and do they have that kind of power
so i can buy a miltary style gun w/out a background check, but damn me if i unlock my phone, well not me as i dont live in the u.s.
damn those unlockers, they are a menace in the us
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's not do this again.. LOL
Here's some bad news for us. Unlocking new phones now banned under DMCA, but carriers are in the clear. I wonder what all this actually means for us.
More government restrictions that just bites.
It applies only to carrier lock circumvention. It has nothing to do with rooting or bootloader unlocks. Those are specifically protected.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2
Well that's good to know. I wouldn't want to change carriers. Even though I don't like Verizon much it's still better than the others.
Update: It still sucks that the government wants to stick their nose in. The more control you try to exert the more criminals you have to deal with.
Sent from my SCH - I510 on Tweaked 3.2 + Lazarus + dSlice Tweaks
I don't know the full repercussions of the DCMA exemption expiration, but Verizon seems to be moving towards SIM-unlocked phones anyway.
xdadevnube said:
I don't know the full repercussions of the DCMA exemption expiration, but Verizon seems to be moving towards SIM-unlocked phones anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless that's just Apple's power over Verizon
It basically only affects GSM carriers. CDMA is pretty carrier locked just by the nature of the tech. Both major GSM carriers now have ways you can get the phones unlocked through official means as long as the phone supports it and you are no longer under contract. AT&T is even unlocking the iPhone by default now if you pay full (unsubsidized) price for it, and they are unlocked straight from Apple when you buy it unsubsidized through them. None of that is illegal. The illegal part is circumventing it yourself to get around the sanctioned ways.
You gotta remember, the carriers are selling phones at a loss when you commit to a contract, knowing they're going to make it up over the life of the contract. The lock is another way they enforce that. You are legally contracted to be with them for the life of the contract to get the discount, and doing anything to circumvent that could be considered breach of contract. In my view this is more a case of the DMCA not invalidating contract law.
shrike1978 said:
It basically only affects GSM carriers. CDMA is pretty carrier locked just by the nature of the tech. Both major GSM carriers now have ways you can get the phones unlocked through official means as long as the phone supports it and you are no longer under contract. AT&T is even unlocking the iPhone by default now if you pay full (unsubsidized) price for it, and they are unlocked straight from Apple when you buy it unsubsidized through them. None of that is illegal. The illegal part is circumventing it yourself to get around the sanctioned ways.
You gotta remember, the carriers are selling phones at a loss when you commit to a contract, knowing they're going to make it up over the life of the contract. The lock is another way they enforce that. You are legally contracted to be with them for the life of the contract to get the discount, and doing anything to circumvent that could be considered breach of contract. In my view this is more a case of the DMCA not invalidating contract law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see a problem, as you have to still pay for the service or pay ETF.
The DMCA has actually helped in more ways than it's restricted.
Not too many people unlock their phones by 3rd party means, anyways.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda premium
look Canada is making them unlock their phones
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2013/01/28/tech-wireless-code-of-conduct-draft-crtc.html
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda premium
Yup, it's true.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Sent from Spaceball One.
Before anyone panics, this is only if the phone is still under contract. It's not illegal if the person is out of contract and calls the phone company to ask for the unlock code. At least, that's the way I've understood this. Most people can still unlock their phones, it just makes things more complicated. The funny and sad part is that they're doing this to prevent "fraud" (people making contracts and bailing on them but keeping the phones and reselling them) but all this really does is throw us at the mercy of the carriers. T-mobile is a lot more chill about this but AT&T users will find it more complicated to unlock.
Anyways, it's best to be careful how one treads with this. On one hand, they can't tell how your phone was unlocked, most carriers can't even identify a competitor's phone on their network BUT it may be more risky now to buy unlock codes and I assume the same thing that happened to megaupload will happen to those that provide unlocking services.
It hardly changes anything when you really look at it. Carriers are still selling unlocked phones. Makers are still selling unlocked phones. Once subsidiaries go away, the unlocked phones will cost the same as the carrier ones.
Sent from my MyTouch 4G Slide using xda premium
How would anyone find out and who reports that type of stuff?
Sent from my OverDosed Slide 4g
So simplemobile is out of luck....
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda app-developers app
Only thing this makes me worry about is how hard it will make it to get unlock codes for us who aren't within the US. And what happens when someone needs to travel out of the country and needs to use a different carrier service while there?
It's irrelevant for this device. You have your unlock code, it's already on the phone you just have to look it up.
its irrelevant for any device purchased before jan, xx 2013 (forget exact date) and if tmobile or whoever wants to freely give you the code they can. or just always buy factory unlocked phones! personally hate paying extra money through a carrier to get a cheap phone when i save far more in the long run buying elsewhere and having a cheaper plan