President Obama signs bill making it once again legal to unlock cell phones
President Obama on Friday put his signature to to the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, a bill resolving a number of legal conflicts under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that previously presented legal challenges for consumers seeking to unlock their mobile phones.
The new law repeals a previous decision by the Library of Congress -- the official legal steward of the DMCA -- to uphold a provision of that bill that makes unlocking mobile phones illegal. The Library of Congress had previously exempted mobile phone unlocking, but chose not to in its most recent review.
Consumers revolted following the Library of Congress's decision, signaling their displeasure by gathering more than 110,000 signatures on a petition to make unlocking legal via congressional action. The passing of the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act marks the first time such a petition has led to a legislative change.
"This commonsense legislation ensured that consumers could transfer their phones between carriers, and that second-hand phones could be put to good use by new owners connecting to a network of their choice," the Obama administration wrote in a release.
Though the law makes unlocking legal, it does not direct wireless carriers to provide unlock codes without a valid reason. Consumers who are still under a previously-signed service contract with their wireless provider, for instance, will still need to satisfy the terms of that contract before being allowed to unlock their device.
The new law repeals a previous decision by the Library of Congress -- the official legal steward of the DMCA -- to uphold a provision of that bill that makes unlocking mobile phones illegal. The Library of Congress had previously exempted mobile phone unlocking, but chose not to in its most recent review.
Consumers revolted following the Library of Congress's decision, signaling their displeasure by gathering more than 110,000 signatures on a petition to make unlocking legal via congressional action. The passing of the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act marks the first time such a petition has led to a legislative change.
"This commonsense legislation ensured that consumers could transfer their phones between carriers, and that second-hand phones could be put to good use by new owners connecting to a network of their choice," the Obama administration wrote in a release.
Though the law makes unlocking legal, it does not direct wireless carriers to provide unlock codes without a valid reason. Consumers who are still under a previously-signed service contract with their wireless provider, for instance, will still need to satisfy the terms of that contract before being allowed to unlock their device.
Comments
There’s a responsibility to balance thread titles that are honest and responsible to the content and thread titles designed to get views. I’d keep that in mind.
Just thought I'd share..
Not sure how similar/different the US and Canadian rules are.
Over here in Norway you just order your unlocked iPhone directly from the Apple Store website. You don't even need a contract in the first place.
As we can in the US also. This unlocking change concerns phones that were previously sold under contract and locked.
Bell Canada allowed me to unlock my phone for $75, no questions asked. They said anyone could do it as long as 12months have passed after signing the contract (out of 36months in my case).
Where the FACK do cellular carriers get off charging me money to release their grip on MY PROPERTY?! I own the phone! What legal or ethical justification could there possibly be for them being able to restrict my use of my own property?!
It gets better. I have an old iPhone 3 that was replaced and retired four or five years ago. I'd like to give it to the kid to use as an iPod. The carrier won't even unlock THAT without getting their pound of flesh! SERIOUSLY?
ANY charge for an out-of-contract phone is indefensible.
Where the FACK do cellular carriers get off charging me money to release their grip on MY PROPERTY?! I own the phone! What legal or ethical justification could there possibly be for them being able to restrict my use of my own property?!
It gets better. I have an old iPhone 3 that was replaced and retired four or five years ago. I'd like to give it to the kid to use as an iPod. The carrier won't even unlock THAT without getting their pound of flesh! SERIOUSLY?
ANY charge for an out-of-contract phone is indefensible.
Canadian carriers seem to be much worse scheisters than the US ones who pretty much unlock GSM phone once contract is UP or paid off. The $75 loonies for unlocking is unconscionable and this law change in the US probably leaves you SOL.
However, this headline seems weird. I just had AT&T unlock an iPhone 4 I picked up off ebay for cheap. I just used one of my 5 annual unlocks and it came through in 24 hours. It wasn't even mine originally, though it was clean ESN and off-contract. I have AT&T unlock all my iPhones to repurpose them or give them to family. How does this law change any of that? Was that all illegal before? It is a long way from making unlocks legal to something like enforcing all phones to be unlocked before contract end or always unlocked or unlimited unlocks on demand or anything truly useful.
The non-GSM carriers will typically unlock the GSM portion of an iPhone as long as you have an account in good standing though this blocks use on all US GSM carriers forever. I suppose it could stop this blockage which would redirect more Sprint/VZW phones into the overall US used market.
But I'm still not sure this what this law is actually going to do for us. It is of a pretty minor benefit to unlock a phone that is still on contract since you still owe either the contract or the ETF. If you pay the ETF, you can have it unlocked already. The halcyon days of unlocking was from ebay vendors competing down to a dollar to unlock your iphone regardless of provenance. It was sweet, cheap and easy, though surely helped thieves as well. Now with icloud locks etc. stolen iphones are mostly bricked anyway. The vendors clearly had their access within the carriers to unlocking capabilities and apparently no-one cared... until they did. This crack down was not DMCA driven but carriers wanting to control the used phone stock which risks the upgrade cycle as phones become "good enough" for a longer useful life. I don't see this law changing this once open loophole. Will cheap 3rd party unlocking come back? If so, how and why? If anyone has clearer understanding of the practical benefits of this law, please let me know.
Dear Republicans, how did Obama **** this up?
Where the FACK do cellular carriers get off charging me money to release their grip on MY PROPERTY?! I own the phone! What legal or ethical justification could there possibly be for them being able to restrict my use of my own property?!
It gets better. I have an old iPhone 3 that was replaced and retired four or five years ago. I'd like to give it to the kid to use as an iPod. The carrier won't even unlock THAT without getting their pound of flesh! SERIOUSLY?
You live in Canada. In the US, there is no charge to unlock the phone when you have satisfied the contract, if you purchased it under subsidy. The law never restricted anyone from unlocking a phone once they satisfied their contract. To use an iPhone as an iPod, it does not have to be unlocked. Turn on Airplane Mode so it doesn't search for a carrier and it is an iPod.
This is the best thing I've seen all day.
What tripe since it passed the US House - hell, I think it was even started in the US House. He signed an "Bill" that began as an Act! Did School House Rock miss you as a child or are you trying to start trouble? The last 3 iPhones I bought were unlocked. My carrier has a website that you can online submit a request and the phone is unlocked. Pretty damned hard, right?
And we were doing so well until you came along. There was no reason for this.
Lame Duck.
but it's true. rogifan has a "no-Obama" avatar icon on disqus, I'm curious her opinion on this. oddly quiet.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with the thread. Take this conversation to PoliticalOutsider.
After the subscription (usually 24 months) is over, you can continue, switch, receive a new phone, or do whatever pleases you.
the cell phone carriers were making it hard for consumers to unlock their phones even when they were out of contract. I remember signing the petition myself and tracking the petition for months.
You realize this law does nothing to remedy your complaint? We also didn't need legislation for the carriers to address your complaint, All of the major carriers will unlock your phone once you have fulfilled the contract. This law is as close to pointless as a law can get and primarily undoes part of the DMCA that removes your personal liability for using something like SIMfree (which for legitimate purposes is a moot point as the carriers will unlock your out of contract phone already).
Also, currently this law does nothing about the lip service quoted from the White House.
"This commonsense legislation ensured that consumers could transfer their phones between carriers, and that second-hand phones could be put to good use by new owners connecting to a network of their choice,"
There is nothing the law stipulates or requires that will magically change the different technology and frequencies the carriers use on their networks that will ensure consumers can transfer their phones between carriers. Apple is one of the very few device makers that goes to the trouble of designing their phones to support as many bands as possible, but they still have 8 different versions of the iPhone5s to handle the various networks around the world (See the table below from everymac.com) The models in the US (A1533 GSM, A1533 CDMA, and A1453 CDMA) have some slight differences in cellular networks. For example you can not take an AT&T (or the unlocked T-Mobile) iPhone5s and use it on Verizon or Sprint other than for LTE which is a GSM standard. In another 5 - 10 years all of the networks will be mostly LTE or later GSM and we may finally see Apple (and other device makers) drop legacy support for CDMA.
Number
DC-HSDPA
EV-DO
(4G)
TD-SCDMA 1900 (F), 2000 (A); TD-LTE (38, 39, 40)
source:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/iphone/iphone-faq/differences-between-iphone-5s-models.html
Quote:
What tripe since it passed the US House - hell, I think it was even started in the US House. He signed an "Bill" that began as an Act! Did School House Rock miss you as a child or are you trying to start trouble? The last 3 iPhones I bought were unlocked. My carrier has a website that you can online submit a request and the phone is unlocked. Pretty damned hard, right?
Sadly most people in America are too lazy, too apathetic, or too caught up in what is #trending to have a clue about how our government is to function according to the Constitution.
Where the FACK do cellular carriers get off charging me money to release their grip on MY PROPERTY?! I own the phone! What legal or ethical justification could there possibly be for them being able to restrict my use of my own property?!
It gets better. I have an old iPhone 3 that was replaced and retired four or five years ago. I'd like to give it to the kid to use as an iPod. The carrier won't even unlock THAT without getting their pound of flesh! SERIOUSLY?
ANY charge for an out-of-contract phone is indefensible.
I'm not familiar with Canadian contract law, however I would speculate that if you purchase a subsidized phone under contract the phone is not your property until the contract is fulfilled. I do agree with you about the out of contract devices and that they charge you to unlock them.
Regards,
-PopinFRESH
Lame Duck.
Nope.
Yep.