| Unlocking is illegal |
sorry, wasn't very funny)
|
Originally posted by F.Ruehl I'm no attorney but to my knowledge the fact that you mustn't unlock the phone needn't be explicitly mentioned in the contract. The fact that the provider has implemented technical measures (i.e. the lock) to keep you from using other providers with the subsidized phone is enough. You knew it, you knew the provider's intention, you agreed to it, and now you're bound to it. If you have a locked phone but no contract then of course you can do whatever you want with your phone. However, I never heard of locked phones sold without a contract. This makes no sense. I have no idea if it's illegal if you unlock your phone AND stay bound to the contract. But in this case unlocking makes no sense anyway. If a contract has ended then usually you can call your provider and get the unlocking code for free (at least here in Germany). If you want to unlock earlier (i.e. while the contract is still valid) then you have to pay about 90$ to recompensate the operator for the lost subsidy. (This rule underlines what I said before about the financial damage inflicted on providers!) BTW: I hope you recognize that I know pretty well what I'm talking about. |
|
Originally posted by F.Ruehl I'm no attorney but to my knowledge the fact that you mustn't unlock the phone needn't be explicitly mentioned in the contract. The fact that the provider has implemented technical measures (i.e. the lock) to keep you from using other providers with the subsidized phone is enough. You knew it, you knew the provider's intention, you agreed to it, and now you're bound to it. If you have a locked phone but no contract then of course you can do whatever you want with your phone. However, I never heard of locked phones sold without a contract. This makes no sense. I have no idea if it's illegal if you unlock your phone AND stay bound to the contract. But in this case unlocking makes no sense anyway. If a contract has ended then usually you can call your provider and get the unlocking code for free (at least here in Germany). If you want to unlock earlier (i.e. while the contract is still valid) then you have to pay about 90$ to recompensate the operator for the lost subsidy. (This rule underlines what I said before about the financial damage inflicted on providers!) BTW: I hope you recognize that I know pretty well what I'm talking about. |
|
Originally posted by skaquixotic and i don't think u understand the meaning of 'subsidy'...a provider buys any phone at wholesale price...nokia or ericsson or siemens or whoever...does not give the provider a subsidy. how it works is that the provider themselves reduce the price of the phone to sell with a contract as like i said before, they make a crap load more money on the service than on the phone. so a provider does not in effect 'lose' a subsidy. i have quite a few friends who work at different providers here, and they tell me that any money that the company lost selling you the phone is made up in the first 4-6 months of your contract. which is why in MANY cases there is a stipulation in the contract saying that u MUST use the service for at least 3months. That's exactly what I mean. So if you unlock the phone *before* the period mentioned in the contract is over the provider loses its subsidy. When it is effectively made up is not relevant. and what u are saying about changing the software in the phone...i don't think u understand that either...what that means is you are not allowed to hack the software so as to use it in a manner that was not intended. you change phone software and pc software ALL the time...can u say, FIRMWARE UPGRADE?? or...SERVICE PACK? or PATCH? or UPDATE?? that is all changing the software in some manner...and seeing as locking/unlocking the phone is not hacking and it is a built in function of the phone this is therefore not illegal from this perspective either. an example of illegal software change? how about flashing the phone so it can be used for wiretapping other ppls conversations?!?!? i know it can be done as i have seen it first hand on somebody's phone. funny as hell...but also very VERY illegal. The software changes you are talking about (updates/patches etc.) are *intended* by the manufacturer/author. Unlocking is *not* intended, thus not allowed and a violation of copyright. Everywhere in the world. i have no idea how it works in Germany but over here in north america, you don't have police bustin people for unlocking phones. why?? because it is not illegal. if you breach your contract by say, breaking off early, or not paying it or whatever then ya u might get into a lil trouble. The reason why police doesn't bust people for unlocking phones is that it's hard to find out and hard to prove. And providers don't want to make loopholes public. It is illegal nonetheless. |
|
Originally posted by F.Ruehl I did some more research and found out the following (relvant for Germany only): - At first glance you can do with your purchased phone whatever you like. But you are generally not allowed to change the software (any locks included) since this violates the manufacturer's copyright. Like any PC software you are entitled to use it but not to change it. This needn't be expressly mentioned in the contract. - There are other laws of penal code applicable that prohibit unauthorized change or deletion of data. - As a result the provider can demand recompensation and that the lock be reinstalled. However, there have been very few relevant cases in court so far, making these findings subject to possible change. Another word concerning moriality and ethics: I personally find it immoral and unethical to steal a provider's subsidy of a locked phone. This is not only a simple question of legality. |
|
Originally posted by skaquixotic when the subsidy is made up IS relavent as it would be hard to show damages on the part of the provider if they started making money on you. It is not. Legally relevant is only the end of the contract. what are u talking about? locking/unlocking IS intended use of the phone. otherwise why would it be an option BUILT into ALL firmware in ANY phone? it might not be intended by the provider, but since they have no claim to the patents/copyrights or any legal claim whatsoever to the actual hardware, and since it is not stated in the contract, it is not illegal. it would be different if you are 'renting' the phone, but since this is not the case... It is not intended by the provider that *you* unlock the phone against the terms of the contract. It is an unauthorized change, thus violating copyright. when you buy a subsidized phone, you OWN it. 1st day of contract, or first yr of contract...does not matter you OWN the phone. As I said before: You never own the software of a phone like you never own you PC software. You're only entitled to use it, not to change it. There are legal changes possible (official updates). you want proof? tell me if u lose your phone on the same day you buy it, do u have to pay any compensation to the provider for losing the phone??? no. why? because they do not have ownership and therefore could not ask for compensation, subsidy or not. Losing the locked phone is different from using it with another provider. The first case is the provider's business risk (which he calculates in his charges), the second case is fraud. sure it might be hard to prove the individual who unlocks the phone...but what about the person/company who is doing the unlocking????? those aren't exactly difficult to find...go to any azn all in north america and any cell phone kiosk be it for face plates/leds or whatever they will do the unlocking for a fee. and since i have never heard of them EVER being shut down for other reasons than financial... I don't know the provider's intentions. In my opinion they could take action if they wanted to. personally i have no problems with getting phones unlocked. the way i see it, everybody is happy. so why not? i am happy cuz i can use my phone with other sims...the provider is happy cuz, they have made money off of me anyways. The provider is surely not happy if you take away the subsidy of the phone. for MOST cases it is not worth it to buy a 1yr contract w/ a subsidized phone only to unlock the phone and buy out the contract. lets say u buy a 500 (retail) dollar phone for 200 dollars on a 1yr contract. now since the phone only cost the provider 300 dollars, and you pay at least 20dollars x months left in contract to buy it out, so lets say you break it off early. so 220 dollars, plus early buy out fee ~50 dollars. that's 270, plus the original 200 you paied for the phone, makes 470. so all this work and BS just to save 30 dollars?? and this does not include a fee that u paid some guy to unlock your phone. or in the other case the cables/software to do it yourself. i don't know about u, but i would rather buy the unlocked phone from the start, which is why the rule of thumb is to NEVER buy a phone from a provider. this is just example, but 90% of cases result in similar conclusions. I think no example can serve as an excuse. Without you breaking off early the provider would make more money of you, so there's a financial damage again. also another flaw in your argument...you say it's fine to do it if you are not bound to a contract (either never had one, or have already finished your minimum term), but it is illegal if you are still bound by one? does anybody else see the problem in this?? OK, I have to specify: After the contract is over you don't inflict a financial damage on the provider by unlocking. So he can't sue you. But it is nonetheless illegal to unlock without the prior consent of the provider. But this is not a problem since you usually get the code for free at the end of the contract. In this case unlocking is intended by the provider so it's perfectly legal. as i stated before the provider has NO claim whatsoever to the phone itself, but rather you and the provider have signed a service agreement. This is not correct. The manufacturer has the copyright on the phone software and internal data (e.g. locking codes, not e.g. address book entries). and often times when you buy a phone from a provider w/o buying a contract, they will sell you an locked phone, for the unlocked price (or even MORE than the unlocked price). so tell me how THAT is right??? No, it is of course not. Return the phone and get your money back. |
|
Originally posted by spear Hey F.Ruehl i see you are finally agree with my words. You are wrote: "- ... you are generally not allowed to change the software (any locks included) since this violates the manufacturer's copyright" Yes. Flashing the phone, editing eeprom contents is copyright. I offered here unlock code. After you enter it the flash is not changed, eeprom fields are same ...all is same. The result is same like you enter *#06# to see your imei. This is just a 8 digits code which unlock your phone. After this unlock with code the phone keep the original software version, date of manufacturing etc...nothing is changed and nobody can prove that you are made any changes. OK, so you don't change data. I agree that maybe you don't violate copyright. But you still help others take away the locked phone's subsidy which is fraud. Everybody should know this. |
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008
- Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser