or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Bipartisan US Senate bill would allow customers to legally unlock their smartphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bipartisan US Senate bill would allow customers to legally unlock their smartphones - Page 2

post #41 of 47
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post
I'm not sure I understand how it's unfair for the carrier to abide by the terms of a contract you both agreed to.

 

Wait, is your argument "if you don't like the international rates, don't bother getting a plan from that company"? They all have the same rates, so it becomes "don't get a cell phone".

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #42 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Wait, is your argument "if you don't like the international rates, don't bother getting a plan from that company"? They all have the same rates, so it becomes "don't get a cell phone".

 

I think he's asking what's unfair about all parties adhering to the terms of the contract you voluntarily signed.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #43 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Wait, is your argument "if you don't like the international rates, don't bother getting a plan from that company"? They all have the same rates, so it becomes "don't get a cell phone".

I think he's asking what's unfair about all parties adhering to the terms of the contract you voluntarily signed.
I suggest you do a deep study of corporate trust in the early 20th century. Cell phones are no longer an option. They are necessary. So when all companies offer unfair terms, with or without overt collusion, the consumer may appear to have a choice, but that choice is in reality a false choice. Tallest has made his point and you have failed to counter it.
post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I suggest you do a deep study of corporate trust in the early 20th century.

 

You appear to be implying this issue is about one of deception and fraud and not about some people being unhappy with the terms of the contracts they signed. 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Cell phones are no longer an option.

 

Of course it is. This is the lie you liberals tell yourself (and everyone else) when a luxury becomes so useful that you don't want to do without it that you need to force those providing it to terms they wouldn't accept voluntarily.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

They are necessary.

 

Bullshit.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

So when all companies offer unfair terms, with or without overt collusion, the consumer may appear to have a choice, but that choice is in reality a false choice.

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Tallest has made his point and you have failed to counter it.

 

Not to my mind.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #45 of 47

I'm not sure that I agree that a cell phone is required for business. Not quite yet, anyway. But is that point not moot, as a work-provided cell is going to have its bill footed by the company in question? You, the individual, don't have to worry about roaming charges in that regard.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #46 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Oh? Well, the law already allows that. I don't know why we'd need another bill to continue to say that.


I also don't see why I'd care about what it says anyway, as I'll unlock MY device at any time anyway. 1oyvey.gif


Under the current state of affairs, the law allows it.  But it doesn't require it: carriers are free to decide on their own whether or not they're willing to unlock your phone at any point during or after the lifecycle of your service agreement.  That AT&T currently does so can be attributed to the fact that they have chosen to.

 

I would interpret this initiative as an effort to make it mandatory for carriers to fulfil customers' requests to unlock their phones after they have reached a certain point in the life of their service agreements.


Edited by lfmorrison - 3/13/13 at 12:32pm
post #47 of 47
Originally Posted by lfmorrison View Post

I would interpret this initiative as an effort to make it mandatory for carriers to fulfil customers' requests to unlock their phones after they have reached a certain point in the life of their service agreements.

 

Well, every little helps, I suppose.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Bipartisan US Senate bill would allow customers to legally unlock their smartphones