Jail Terms For Unlocking Cellphones Shows The True Black Heart Of The Copyright Monopoly

[dixiegrrrrl]

The article is discussing the fact there is a bill introduced in Congress that makes it LEGAL to unlock our own cell phones.

And underneath the issue is this most important statememt:

The copyright monopoly is dividing the population into a corporate class who gets to control what objects may be used for what purpose,
and a subservient consumer class that don’t get to buy or own anything – they just get to think they own things that can only be used in a predefined way, for a steep, monopolized, fixed price, or risk having the police sent after them.

The whole article is good and worth the read.
http://torrentfreak.com/jail-terms-for-unlocking-cellphones-130512/

[sibelian]

1. They HAVE to be hideous.

They have to find new ways of making money and they're running out of them. The CEOs of these companies know that they can't carry on competing just be making the same stuff over and over again, they have to change the nature of the market and the consumer. There aren't enough degrees of freedom left in the system to gain the upper hand by straightforward means anymore so they have to do all this twisted, senseless, inhuman stuff.

The CEOs of these companies MUST behave in this way. It's in their contract! They have to make the money, it's their job! They are beholden to their shareholders!

It's disgusting, yes, but I think perhaps the more significant observation is that it's *built in*. The corporate landscape can't change itself for the better, it's ideologically programmed not to!

Leave a system by itself to simply evolve and you end up with digger wasps, leeches, strangler figs, sharks and lampreys...

[leftyohiolib]

2. check credo mobile out they put their profits to good use

[silverweb]

5. +1000

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I've had CREDO since October and love them!

[Duer 157099]

3. The problem is that the service providers subsidize the cost of the phones

If they let the free market actually decide the value of the phone and the service, things might be ok.

But they have to practically give their phones away to entice people to use their service. Therein lies the problem.

Chairs don't have an equivalent situation where the consumer must pay someone down the line for their chair to function in a meaningful way. Woe unto us if that ever does become reality! Chair service providers. Crap, I shouldn't have said anything, now they'll start doing that.

[SlipperySlope]

4. The Personal Computer was a deeply disruptive device

I've been involved with personal computers since the earliest days. Electronic computers are basically a technology that was originally designed for corporations and governments. Due to the enthusiasm, perseverance, and foresight of the founders of the personal computer industry we were all blessed with access to an amazing technology: the general purpose computer.

I bet most people haven't thought about how deeply disruptive this technology was. It is an electronic device that can basically do anything. You can install any software you want on your PC. If the software you want doesn't exist, and you have sufficient knowledge, you can create the software yourself. Every person who owns a PC owns an amazing piece of technology that would have been nearly unimaginable to millenniums of philosophers and scientists.

A modern cell phone isn't really a "phone" anymore. It is a general purpose computer that happens to have a phone built in. A Sony Playstation or Microsoft Xbox isn't really a game machine, it is a general purpose computer that happens to specialize in video games.

It has escaped the interest of much of the general public, but the "hacker" and hobbyist world is deeply aware that the freedom to do what we want with our computers is rapidly being taken away from us. Governments and corporations don't want us to have a general purpose device that we can run whatever we want on, or program to do whatever we bid. All around us computing platforms are being locked down so that the company who manufacturers them has the final say over how they can be used, and governments are passing laws further enabling this lock down.

Unlocking cell phones, jailbreaking iPads, rooting Android devices, hacking video game boxes; all this is the natural response to having our "freedom to compute" taken away. The justifications are many but the end result is the same.

Even the basic PC, the last bastion of unrestricted computing, is barely a few steps away from Microsoft having final say over what software is allowed to run on it.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. Fortunately, there are alternatives to Mircrosoft

plus some very interesting things in the pipeline for a whole new paradigm of "computer".

[SlipperySlope]

8. Secure Boot

Microsoft controls the UEFI signature keys, which is a pretty scary fact.

[Recursion]

24. Only for their own hardware

That wouldn't work for commodity PCs, luckily. But yeah, UEFI is a nightmare

[SlipperySlope]

45. Not many options...

There are basically three ways to boot an OS on a secure boot system:

1: Disable secure boot.
2: Have the computer maker recognize your key.
3: Have microsoft sign your bootloader.

If you cannot disable secure boot then you are locked out from booting your OS unless the PC maker or Microsoft approve.

Microsoft already prohibits disabling secure boot on ARM PCs as part of the Win8 licensing agreement.

We are one step away from being locked out completely. If Microsoft (or some other force) compels PC makers to force secure boot then it is game over.

[Recursion]

47. Secure boot is only possible on unchanging hardware

If you can add a PCI card, you can disable secure boot.

[Phillip McCleod]

56. i don't think it'll be game over.. but it'll be a changed world, for sure..

..we had a nice long run in the 'PC era' and i think it's not entirely over. what is over is probably being able to go buy a machine and install whatever OS will run on the hardware.

i expect, as a result, a resurgence of homemade PCs.

also.. this is playing right into linux's hands since it's a great OS for extending PC life anyway these i7's will be in service for years to come.. giving linux even more time to take over everything.

[woo me with science]

16. Great post.

Worthy of being an OP.

Thank you.

[KamaAina]

22. It saddens me that PCs have not come preloaded with a programming environment for many years

without it, they're basically just appliances. (Mac people call them "toasters". ) Powerful appliances, to be sure -- but without Basic or something like it, you're not really in control of it. And where is the next generation going to learn how to program?

[Occulus]

52. Linux PCs do.

They all include g++ as a matter of course. You can code from day one if you like.

[closeupready]

42. Bringing OS's and hi tech into the realm of the surveillance state -

don't you think that was part of what that big White House luncheon with Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg a couple years ago was about?

[silverweb]

6. Enter FairPhone!

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I'm on their mailing list and can't wait to see the product when it's available.

http://www.fairphone.com

[dixiegrrrrl]

10. Thank you so much for posting that.

I showed it to Mr. Dixie and he is jazzed about the idea.

[silverweb]

11. Glad to spread the word!

[Phillip McCleod]

57. i want one.. but i just just bought my first smartphone..

..so i guess i won't pre-order.

[brooklynite]

61. Whose OS and apps?

[Phillip McCleod]

63. from their site android default but it's your phone soo..

..your choice of is too.

[silverweb]

65. Check their site.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]n/t

[snagglepuss]

9. If people are outraged about this (and rightly so) they should also be

outraged with e-books and boycott them since e-books aren't the forever possession of purchasers.

[silverweb]

12. That choice can be split, though.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Tablets and readers are great for library books, newspapers, magazines, etc -- things you don't necessarily want a "forever copy" of.

I read a lot of library books on my tablet and if I find one that I simply must own, then I buy the physical book.

Pretty simple, really.

[snagglepuss]

13. Actually they are worse for libraries because of their high cost something

like $1000 per book which will have to be re-purchased at set intervals..

[silverweb]

14. I'd need to see that documented.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]They save precious physical space for libraries, as do digital audio books, and that's a really big deal for them. I know e-books are more expensive, but from what I've seen, "something like $1000" is a really gross exaggeration.

There are plenty of pro-and-con opinions on e-books and, as usual, the truth is a blend of those features.

[snagglepuss]

15. I heard a radio discussion so no link however doing some quick searching

I believe the $1000 relates to the cost of a popular book - libraries pay 20-30 per ebook and as stated by HarperCollins, libraries have to repurchase every 26 checkouts.

[silverweb]

18. Time to negotiate.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I'm sure there are all kinds of rules and regulations about how libraries make their purchases. It sounds like library associations need to negotiate better contracts.

[HiPointDem]

29. hard to 'negotiate' with monopolists who don't want you to exist anyway.

[Incitatus]

26. That depends.

On how familiar they are with DRM removal or accessing massive volumes of books with the DRM already removed on torrent sites.

[woo me with science]

17. K&R

[Recursion]

19. Why not just buy a factory unlocked one?

That's the bit I still don't get about this.

[dixiegrrrrl]

20. Apparently millions of folks prefer to buy from telecom companies

which only sell locked ones, is what I was told.
That may or may not be correct info, dunno.
I do not have a cell phone.

[silverweb]

21. Freebies.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]A free or steeply discounted cell or smartphone with a service contract is a pretty big deal for a lot of people, me included.

[Recursion]

23. But the issue here is not your right to screw AT&T

That's what disappoints me about this compared to other freedom to hack issues.

[silverweb]

25. I'm not really invested in this argument.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I've willingly selected a free or discounted locked phone from my service provider because I've decided to use that company. It was AT&T for a while and when that contract ran out, I switched to Credo. I don't have any reason at all to want to unlock my phone.

When FairPhone comes out with their product, I'd like to buy one as soon as I can afford it and stay with Credo -- not because it's "unlocked," but because it's a FairPhone.

I really don't understand the fuss if people want to change service providers and keep the same phone. It shouldn't be a complicated thing.

[defacto7]

27. Most things technical

really are very simple. Corporations make them complicated simply to make money on complication. Exit the corporate controls and everything... EVERYTHING would be simple and logical and advancements in technology would come much quicker.

[Recursion]

30. So buy a factory unlocked phone retail

This corporate control is what makes smart phones affordable.

[defacto7]

38. Not really. It's only the appearance of affordability.

In the long run is cost us all in both lost production, lost/slower advancement, jobs and political freedom. I'm not saying business should not have some protections but what we have now has far surpassed protection and has become monopolization and fixed advancement neither of which are conducive to the welfare of the general public. It only advances power over the public and profit of the few. In reality, it's the basis of much of our economic ills.

[brooklynite]

34. Except it's not free...

....you're post-paying the full cost of the phone over the contract period in your monthly service fees.

[silverweb]

40. Except that makes no sense.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]If it were true, then my phone bill should drop noticeably when the contract expires, provided I keep using the same phone and don't upgrade.

[brooklynite]

41. Sorry, you lose...

After two years, they entice you with another new phone and the cycle starts again. And since you got your phone for "free", you don't think to question your carrier.

[silverweb]

43. No one HAS to upgrade.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I've refused a number of upgrades when I was eligible and my phone bill never changed.

Yes, I'm sure the carriers cover the expense of their selected, bulk-bought "free" and discounted phones somewhere in their accounting (likely under promotions/cost of doing business).

However, the fact is that no one who takes a free phone attached to a new contract is actually paying more on their bill than someone with the identical service who didn't take a free phone.

[brooklynite]

46. And nobody HAS to remain with a carrier that charges them too much...

If you didn't ask for a reduction, and threaten to leave if they didn't give t to you, you have nobody to blame but yourself.

[silverweb]

48. I'm very happy with my service.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I feel the price I agreed to pay is fair, and I don't feel even the least little bit bitter that Credo is able to make a profit that benefits progressive groups. Kthxbai.

[brooklynite]

49. More power to you...

...but you're not paying any less than AT&T (which is definitely embedding phone purchase costs into the rates) and they're not letting you bring in an outside phone.

[silverweb]

50. You're shouting into the wind.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I wish all corporations were ethical, honest, treated their employees well and fairly, and didn't gouge their customers.

Reality dictates that is far from always the case. We are still often forced to deal with unethical, dishonest, and unfair companies. Short of joining a mass boycott or other organized pressure group, or simply choosing to do without a product or service, the best we can do is make thoughtful choices.

- I choose not to forego the amazing function and convenience of a smartphone.
- I will purchase a FairPhone as soon as one is available that meets my needs that I can afford; meanwhile, I'll use the one provided by my telecom carrier.
- I choose to buy cell service from the most ethical provider I can find: Credo Mobile.
- I have chosen the most affordable service package that meets my needs.
- One reason for my choice is that a portion of my Credo bill supports progressive causes, not the RW agenda (like Verizon and AT&T do).

We have choices, and the responsibility is ours to choose as well as we can.

[uponit7771]

35. Cause some US carriers ILLEGALLY wont allow the phone on their network

[Recursion]

36. Which ones?

I've never had a problem (I always buy from the manufacturer anyways) with any of them, and I bought my newest one (Galaxy G3) since the law went into effect. T-Mobile was more than happy to take me as a customer.

[Phillip McCleod]

58. there's plenty of reasons to root a phone..

..besides screwing your carrier. i haven't yet (waiting for the 4.2 upgrade on my razr m) but will eventually root my verizon droid. not to switch carriers, but just because. for one thing, i'd like to load ubuntu on an SD chip and this phone will be capable when it comes out, and it's the phone i have.. so.. just because.

might want to back up my phone, too. can't do that without rooting it.

[Recursion]

64. Rooting a Droid does not unlock it, and is legal

That's two different things.

[HiPointDem]

28. kr

'This is not a free market. This is the opposite of a free market. The copyright monopoly stands in opposition to a free market, and in opposite to property as a concept.'

[dembotoz]

31. the phone is just a means to sell a service contract which is what the monopolies want

unlocking a phone loosens a finger from the hands around your throat.

folks don't call ATT the death star for nothing.....

and I do not mean to pick on att-my hatred of Verizon goes way beyond any dislike for the death star...

[Recursion]

32. So buy an unlocked phone from the manufacturer

It sounds like people are just mad that they can't get the subsidy on the phone and still go off contract.

[silverweb]

44. I think you've got something there.

[Occulus]

53. No, he doesn't

The people- all of them- who unlock their phones want to move to a different carrier and use the same phone. That is what the term 'unlock' means, and it's different from 'jailbreak', which is a way to gain root access to the device and install unapproved and third-party apps, or entirely different builds of the OS. You can't unlock a contact device and change carriers when you are still in the contract. You can unlock it, but are still held to your current carrier. You have to either end the contract and pay off the device itself, or wait for the contract to end on its own.

His dismissal of people complaining about possibly being sent to JAIL for using a device they own as they please as people who just want a cheap phone without personal responsibility (dog whistle!) is very, very telling, though.

[silverweb]

54. Key word: "contract."

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]What part of that is so difficult to understand?

I agree that once a contract has expired or been bought out, then the owner of the phone should be able to unlock it and do whatever they want with it. Until the contract is done, though, the whining should stop.

Don't want a locked phone? Then don't buy one.

[Occulus]

55. No, that's incorrect.

The contract only applies to the named carrier for the contract's term. For Android devices at least, the only penalty to an unlock or a root process per se is that the warranty is void. Even then, with some devices, it is possible to revert to the original state while leaving no evidence on the device that it was ever unlocked or rooted (or both). I have done exactly that with my own phone.

And it isn't whining. I have Sprint, it's the shittiest carrier in the country, period, and I very badly want to move to a carrier that 1) actually has the 4G service they promise to customers and 2) is actually supporting the network that powers the majority of their devices (in my case, I have Wimax, was just in a city that has excellent 4G service, but because it's 4G LTE and not 4G Wimax, I didn't have 4G, period... and rarely do anywhere).

This is not about whining; this is about customers getting the services they are paying for, and in my case, from Sprint, that doesn't happen at all ever. Since Sprint is so bad, I won't be renewing my contract, which means I can't use the upgrade I'm eligible for when I am eligible for an upgrade. That would start a new contract and I do not wish to remain with so bad a carrier as Sprint.

I will be unlocking this device, and I will be moving to a different carrier. Or, I will be getting a Boost phone or some such.

Because of these very issues.

[brooklynite]

33. Unrec

Misleading title-no evidence that cell companies have demanded or even threatened jail time for an unlocking violation. In fact, there's been no attempt at all to prosecute anyone that I'm aware of.

Also, no "corporate monopoly". T-Mobile and many MVNO's are happy to let you use an unlocked phone.

[silverweb]

39. Thanks.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I was sensing some overreaction and misinformation. It's always a pleasure when cold facts and cooler heads prevail.

[JustAnotherGen]

51. +1

[Phillip McCleod]

59. t-mobile doesn't provide service everywhere..

..if there was horizontal competition the issue would change, because then yeah the argument 'choose a different carrier' holds water all the time, not just some of the time. it's not a big deal to give users root access to their devices. we have it on our PCs and laptops, and phones are now just little computers.

i read upthread someone said that everyone who unlocks their phone wants to change carriers. that's just not the case. there are many reasons to want to unlock/root/jailbreak a phone, including simple curiosity about how it all works. since there is not always choice of carrier, legislation allowing rooting of phones is entirely sane, and in fact encourages innovation.

[brooklynite]

60. As a computer geek, I can honestly say...

...the AVERAGE user has not the slightest interest in jailbreaking their phone "to see how it works" (fwiw, jailbreaking is NOT prohibited; only unlocking).

And FWIW, there is in fact a large range of options (besides T-Mobile), reflected in the fact that AT&T just set up their own independent provider that will happily take your unlocked phone. The reality however, is that the AVERAGE consumer makes no effort to locate a service that doesn't advertise on TV, and sticks to one of the major carriers with all of its limitations.

[Phillip McCleod]

62. not everywhere..

..like where I am now there's no service from *any* carrier. In town there are a couple options but nothing like the free market that would negate the need for legislation to let users change from a bad carrier.

[Egalitarian Thug]

37. Bill Gates has finally realized his fantasy with Office 365.

That there are enough fools that will happily go along with this scam is the most depressing part.