Major US carriers announce principles for unlocking devices

http://www.techhive.com/article/2079405/all-five-major-us-carriers-agree-to-let-you-unlock-your-phone-anytime-you-want.html

by shawndumas • 13 years ago

77 49 13 years ago

techhive.com

ars• 13 years ago

This title and article are not accurate.

It's not whenever you want - just are just clearly documenting when they will let you. For the actual info read here:

http://www.ctia.org/docs/default-source/fcc-filings/ctia-let...

In short:

Prepaid: 1 year.

Postpaid: When your contact is up.

Military: Upon deployment.

MrZongle2• 13 years ago

I also love this part, in the attachment:

"Carriers reserve the right to charge non-customers/non-former-customers a reasonable fee for unlocking requests".

crazygringo• 13 years ago

Who buys a phone "prepaid", that is locked?

I bought my iPhone straight from Apple, unlocked, to avoid it. Are there phones you pay for in full, up-front, that are still only available locked?

Poiesis• 13 years ago

The only carrier I have found with decent coverage at my house is Verizon, who (as far as I can tell) charges me the same amount for a plan whether the phone is subsidized or not, on or off contract. Why shouldn't I get a subsidized plan?

simcop2387• 13 years ago

Prepaid in this context i think is one of the cheap phones with no contract that you can grab in some places like walmart or gas stations. So you've got to have been using it for a year before you can unlock.

stanleydrew• 13 years ago

My mom ended up with a locked AT&T Moto X that she bought "off-contract" from the Moto Maker website. She was pretty pissed when she found out she couldn't put it on T-Mobile.

gtr32x• 13 years ago

In Canada the situation used to be same that you have to wait until after your contract is over then you can unlock your phone for a petty fee. Fido has just changed their policies early this year to allow unlocking for $50 within half a year of starting a contract. Not sure about other carriers, but can't say how glad I was to see this change as I come to US every few months.

Of course, still unfortunate that I have to pay the fee, though I'd rather have this than in states where you still have to wait until your contract is up.

ThatGeoGuy• 13 years ago

This is likely due to the CRTC releasing a new wireless code back in June, where they specified that "[c]arriers must offer consumers the ability to unlock unsubsidized devices (ie. devices purchased at full price) at any time." [1]

I'm not sure why you paid specifically $50 (as the cost should be specified at the time of contract), as the policy was supposed to be 100% in effect as of December 3rd. Unless of course I'm mistaken and Fido changed their policies before this was introduced. Thankfully though, you can get your device unlocked in Canada after up to 90 days, at your carrier's discretion [1]. (Though really, forcing a 90 day wait won't really affect much in the long run if consumers start using this clause, so I expect most will just be willing to unlock the phone fairly quickly as time goes on)

[1] http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6862/125/

mikestew3• 13 years ago

"If you've bought something you should be able to do whatever you want with it, whether it’s modifying it, or unlocking it. You shouldn't need a massive corporation's permission."

If you think $200 buys you an iPhone, you're sadly deluded. "$200 with 2 year contract" means you haven't bought anything, you're still paying the mortgage with every phone bill. If you want to buy something and "do whatever you want with it", Apple, Google, and a host of others will sell you an unlocked phone. And it will cost a bit more than $200 (though the Nexus 5at $349 isn't too far off).

On the other hand, if you're fed up with your carrier and would like to switch, you're free to do so. I just did it with AT&T. Walked into a T-Mobile store, asked them to transfer our numbers. The next day I called AT&T and asked, "how much do I owe for the ETF?" I paid the $225/phone (that's how fed up with AT&T I was) over the phone with AT&T. Wait a few days for their accounting system to catch up, go to the web page and enter the IMEI for both phones, and two days later the phones are unlocked. Slapped the T-Mobile SIMs into the iPhones and we were on the air.

I just don't get the sentiment of "unlock my free-with-contract phone two months into my contract, you bastards!" It's not your phone. Now, if Verizon, Sprint, or $YOUR_CARRIER don't as readily unlock your phone as AT&T after you pay the ETF or your contract is up, I'll stand with you in your complaint. Otherwise, I don't see the issue.

joebadmo• 13 years ago

I would agree with you if all the carriers offered transparent plans that charge you just the monthly plan amount without the phone subsidy if you bring your own phone. Only T-Mobile does at the moment. As it is, I can bring my own unlocked phone, but I'll still get charged the subsidy.

fpgeek3• 13 years ago

AT&T just announced their own lineup of no-subsidy plans as well: http://www.zdnet.com/at-and-t-announces-new-mobile-share-val...

To me, this just underlines how the GSM carriers are playing in a very different field than the CDMA carriers (especially after the T-Mobile refarm added 1900 MHz HSPA+ to their network and since new AT&T and T-Mobile phones both support LTE band 4).

mikestew3• 13 years ago

I think that's a fair argument, and one of the reasons I switched to T-Mobile. With AT&T, et. al., if you don't get a new phone in the same month that your contract ends you're getting screwed on your next bill.

chimeracoder• 13 years ago

I just don't get the sentiment of "unlock my free-with-contract phone two months into my contract, you bastards!" It's not your phone.

Sure it is. You received a discount on the phone on the condition that you sign a separate contract which obligates you to pay the carrier a certain amount of money for the next 2 years, but that's a separate matter.

If you've bought a phone, you can do what you want with it. Separately, you may have to pay a penalty for breaking a contract (and that penalty would include the cost of the discount that you initially received), but that doesn't mean that the phone isn't yours.

guelo• 13 years ago

Exactly. If I'm allowed to smash the phone with a hammer than I should be allowed to twiddle the electronic bits inside. Anyway, it sounds like the carriers finally agree.

liyanage• 13 years ago

I just don't get the sentiment of "unlock my free-with-contract phone two months into my contract, you bastards!"

This is a reasonable thing to want if you travel overseas and want to pop in a cheap local SIM card for the duration of your trip, instead of paying the absurd roaming charges.

StavrosK• 13 years ago

So when you get a car loan and buy a car, the bank can dictate where and how you can drive and service it? I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a sentiment.

The carrier lends you the money, you agree to pay it back, that's as far as their involvement goes. This is standard practice in Europe. You get a phone for cheap, you agree to pay monthly installments, you can throw the phone off a cliff or install BeOS on it, for all the carrier cares.

smtddr3• 13 years ago

The difference here is that with a car loan, even if you drive off the car lot and right into the ocean and leave it there you still legally owe the full price of the car to the bank and they can come after you if need be. Cellphone companies make money off of you from the 2 years of data/voice plan service. If I go sign up with AT&T for a $200 iPhone5 then unlock it and go to T-Mobile the next day, AT&T got screwed. Maybe smartphones should just be sold at full price and you either pay it in full or get a bank loan, like cars & houses. But we know if we did that, a whole bunch of people suddenly wouldn't be able to afford the phones and the whole market around cellphones would have to change dramatically.

fpgeek3• 13 years ago

So when you get a car loan and buy a car, the bank can dictate where and how you can drive and service it?

Last I heard, they usually demand that you purchase certain insurance coverages... And insurers usually have their own rules about what you an and can't do with your car (if you want your insurance to be affordable anyway).

jamesaguilar• 13 years ago

Even if your mortgage isn't paid off, you can still live in your house and modify it as you see fit. Granted there are some conditions (have to maintain insurance, etc.), but phones represent a smaller possible loss, and thus should probably be less restrictive with what you do with the collateral (also, phones aren't secured loans, so they can come after you for other assets, unlike houses).

001sky• 13 years ago

If you think $200 buys you an iPhone, you're sadly deluded.

At a typical retail markup, perhaps ~$400 is about right.

For those interested> Teardown Shows iPhone 5S Costs at Least $199 to Build, $173 for the 5C

http://allthingsd.com/20130924/teardown-analysis-shows-iphon...

stevenwei2• 13 years ago

I think you need to differentiate between unlocking the phone and breaking the service contract. Just because you want the former doesn't necessarily mean you want the latter.

For example, you might want to make sure your phone is unlocked so when you take a week trip overseas you can pop in another sim card to use in another country, but you might keep your existing contract with AT&T active because you'll keep using it when you come home.

I don't really see any logical reason why having a service contract with a cell company should prevent you from doing this.

salient3• 13 years ago

I think you're confusing 2 issues here:

1) unlocking the phone

2) killing the contract with AT&T

Until now to "unlock your phone", you had to kill your contract with AT&T, and then move over to T-Mobile. But now you'll be able to unlock the phone for free - while maintaining the contract with AT&T - and still be able to use T-mobile. So you'll be paying both contracts (if for some reason you want to use both - like say you have family on AT&T's network, etc).

This is very common in Europe. People use 2 networks on the same phone all the time, by switching the SIMs. And I think in Asia, too, because in both these regions dual-SIM phones are on the rise.

tikhonj• 13 years ago

Paying the contract and using the phone are two different things. As long as you continue paying for your contract, why should the carrier get any say on how you use your subsidized phone?

There are plenty of great uses to unlock your phone even if you still want to keep the primary contract, like travelling abroad or maintaining multiple SIMs on a single phone.

goggles99• 13 years ago

Is this how you get to the top of a HN comment thread? by posting something totally ignorant?

Why is the text in your post not completely faded away yet? There must me more of your type around here than I thought.

Where was it said that if you unlock your subsidized phone that you no longer had to pay for it? The fact that it is subsidized means that you are under contract for it. Break the contract and what happens? You pay for the rest of the phone plus more in early termination fees. It's YOUR PHONE once you sign the contract and you are going to pay for it one way or another. Stop paying and you are going to have collection agencies stalking you, won't be able to register your car or get any type of credit, and your wages garnished.

Don't ever have pin stripes painted on that sports car you are paying off. Don't ever replace the flooring on the home you are mortgaging. Try logic sometime.

DanBC2• 13 years ago

If you think $200 buys you an iPhone, you're sadly deluded. "$200 with 2 year contract" means you haven't bought anything, you're still paying the mortgage with every phone bill. If you want to buy something and "do whatever you want with it", Apple, Google, and a host of others will sell you an unlocked phone. And it will cost a bit more than $200 (though the Nexus 5at $349 isn't too far off).

Assume that's true, for the moment.

That doesn't mean they get to use unrelated laws in weird ways to stop unlocking. Either they lobby to get a law introduced, or they improve their locking technology, or they stop selling phones like they are.

But abusing copy-right protection and anti-piracy laws is sub-optimal.

sans_seraph2• 13 years ago

How about instead of writing new legislation against cell phone unlocking we enforce the anti trust laws we already have?

eropple2• 13 years ago

Would you mind explaining how you think antitrust laws have any bearing on this issue?

sans_seraph2• 13 years ago

Sim locking is purposely breaking the normal functionality of a device in order to limit competition.

I wouldn't care so much if there were plenty of other affordable ways to get a phone and coverage, but sim locking is so prevalent in the US that it's unavoidable in many cases, and most phones you can get unlocked are incredibly expensive.

shmerl2• 13 years ago

You need to fix the garbage like DMCA 1201 which causes this thing to begin with.

shmerl2• 13 years ago

So, what's going on with repealing DMCA 1201 altogether? This development shouldn't be used as an excuse not to fix the root of the problem.

nachteilig• 13 years ago

Does this mean that an out-of-contract Verizon iPhone that's unlocked "internationally" but doesn't work on T-Mobile, etc. domestically can now be fully unlocked to work with other domestic carriers? I know it has the proper radios, so I've always assumed it wasn't fully unlocked.

Major US carriers announce principles for unlocking devices

Related Stories