US makes unlocking phones illegal, Canada proposes bill to make carriers unlock phones (link fixed)

by 12 replies
15
The same week the US makes unlocking phones illegal, Canada proposes legislation to make carriers unlock phones.
LINK: Wireless fee, contract guidelines proposed by CRTC - Technology & Science - CBC News
Sounds like doubletalk to me...


CRTC releases a draft of the "Wireless Code"
CRTC releases a draft of the "Wireless Code" | MobileSyrup.com

(thanks again Kim, I check these links before I hit save, this is the 2nd time there's no link :confused
#off topic forum
  • I get a "page not found" message when clicking the link.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
  • Ok, locking a phone that YOU paid for, in the US, is ILLEGAL! If nothing else, it could be considered a violation of the sherman antitrust act! Phone companies were probably allowed to do it in the first place ONLY to lock you in for a SPECIFIED TIME so they could offer a great deal on the phone. The idea is that you could get a phone for as little as nothing, and excess income each month was used to pay for the phone.

    Once you have paid for YOUR phone, what right do they have to leave it locked?

    steve
  • You never got the phone for little or nothing,though they did/do market them as such. You get locked into a long term contract,long enough to pay for the phone before you can drop it without significant penalties.
    But you are right,if you buy a phone,it is nobodies business what you do to it.
    Again,government sticking its nose wehre it doesn't belong.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Basically, you ARE saying what I did. The low price at the beginning was to pull you in for the higher service fee that paid for it. The lock enforces that. The phone can only be used with that carrier. In the beginning it is a win/win/win/win. In the end it is a lose/-/-/win.

      Steve
  • It's kinda sad for you guys. Our phones are not carrier locked, and it's been great. The deals you get when you subscribe to a carrier are simply amazing.

    We can send texts @ 0.1 rupees/text (0.2 cents roughly). Some even less than that. I've read a report that said, the total cost for carriers to handle one text is 0.01 Re. Call rates are 0.01 Re/second (Some of my friends can make calls @ 0.1 Re/minute).

    Before you say that I live in a third world country, let me tell you that internet costs in India are 2-5 times than those in the US ( It has tremendous govt. regulation).

    This is one of the sectors where a free market is allowed to function. Result - Public Sector telecom company is about to go bust.

    Sumit.
    • [1] reply
    • In the third world, things like this should be More expensive, NOT less. GRANTED it is easier and maybe cheaper to lay the infrastructure, but it goes farther and there are fewer customers.

      As for the phone company, they DO support the internet, AND cell phones. So many fail to realize that.

      Steve
  • Steve,
    Many times we say the same thing in different words :-)
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • I have always wondered about unlocking and jailbreaking. I used to do it to my iPhone but the iPhone days are over for me.

    Pretty interesting stuff here though. Thanks for the post
  • Let's just say that we have a bought congress. They aren't the finest ANYTHING!
  • Americans demand re-legalization of cell phone unlocking
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 15

    US makes unlocking phones illegal, Canada proposes bill to make carriers unlock phones (link fixed)

    The same week the US makes unlocking phones illegal, Canada proposes legislation to make carriers unlock phones. LINK: Wireless fee, contract guidelines proposed by CRTC - Technology & Science - CBC News Under advertising guidelines in the draft code, wireless providers would still be able to advertise plans with some limits as "unlimited," but would have to explain "whether there are limits to the 'unlimited' plan and whether the service provider retains the discretion to move the consumer to a 'limited ' plan if usage limits are exceeded." :confused: Sounds like doubletalk to me...