| reply to LazMan
Re: Jailbreaking cell phones to become ILLEGAL at midnight said by LazMan:said by Juggernaut:said by LazMan:The ETFs (at least in Canada) are typically limited to about $200... That is not correct at all, and not even close to the reality of ETF's. Straight from TELUS' website - the maximum fee is $200. Rogers talks about a "Device Savings Recovery Fee" and uses formula's I haven't seen since Gr 12 calculus... But if I get the gist of it, they are actually charging for the remaining amount of the subsidy, plus a $50 cancellation fee. Bell charges a minimum of $100 to a max of $400 to cancel early. I was right about TELUS policy - Roger's changed theirs in '12, and I wasn't up on the changes... my bad... That seems like a real shady Policy on the companies behalf. Lets them open to cell phone scams and the such. An early termination fee should include the total cost of the smartphone minus the subsidized price you paid. |
|
 JuggernautIrreverent or irrelevant?Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2 | reply to LazMan
Yep, it's hard to keep up these days, no foul man. Quebec has totally different rules to boot.
My point was, if the device is paid for, why should they refuse to unlock it? They have their pound of flesh.
It's just greed, and nastiness after that.
--
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots." ~ Albert Einstein |
|
 LazManPremium
join:2003-03-26
canada | reply to OZO
said by OZO:Then why they don't set ETF accordingly to the phone price? Why do they need a new law now? Is it because they could be out of $450?
And BTW, they don't pay $650 to Apple/Samsung/HTC, etc for the phone as you, the individual consumer, may pay on the market. So, the cost, that you've mentioned here, is highly exaggerated.
And finally, you have explained why we have to worry about corporations and their profits and why someone (not me) needs a new law, that could punish consumer even further. Now tell me, where is the "copyright" infringement here and how it's related to DMCA?
To answer your points in order:
I think they should - once the subsidy has been repaid, I think the phone should automatically be unlocked, at no charge.
The wholesale and retails cost for the handsets isn't much different - Apple and Samsung in particular, know consumers want specific handsets, more then they want a specific carrier - hell, carriers have been known to pay Apple MILLIONS to be the first to carry the iPhone in a given market... It used to be the other way 'round, that the carriers had power over the handset producers, but thanks to Apple and the iPhone, it doesn't work like that anymore.
I won't pretend to understand the DMCA, and the ever growing range of things it covers... I said I get this particualr law, strictly from an economics point of view... How does it fit under the copyright act? No eff'ing clue. |
|
|
|
 ashrc4Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia | reply to Sindows 7
As we know there are all walks of life but who is this law going to target the most.....not those that can afford to avoid it.
A minimum fine of $2500 means those that can't afford to stick to a contract for a year or two will just be penalized further.
Company's that can't recoup their losses shouldn't be sucking in on one hand and crying foul on the other.
A more reasonable solution to providing access to a cell needs to be thought up and consumer rights to such should be offered not the other way around.
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT! |
|
OZOPremium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2 | reply to LazMan
said by LazMan:Your handset is subsidized... To buy a iPhone 5 outright, for instance, is about $700 - not the $50 that your carrier charges you, when you sign up for a 3 year deal. They count on that 3 year period to recoup the subsidy. Once your contract is expired, some carriers automatically unlock it, some allow you to unlock it for free or a nominal ($20-25) fee.
There are some pretty assinine laws out there - this is one I kind of agree with...
Wait a sec. How the law prohibiting unlocking phones could help here?
Here is scenario that you've mentioned.
One signs a contract, gets his phone (accordingly to your example for, cost $650 for carrier) and next day he breaks the contract, pays ETF and, without unlocking the phone, sells it on eBay? Should he be sued by carrier and pay $2,500 or go to jail for that? And how the new law, prohibiting unlocking phones, could help in this case? I'm asking because I smell absurd here...
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself... |
|
| reply to LazMan
said by LazMan:I agree with you, but I'm not aware of any carrier that won't unlock a device after it's paid off... Rogers does it for free; TELUS charges $25 - dunno about Bell or any of the new entrants... Mobilicity and Wind phones are sold locked and unsubsidized, and they would not unlock them even if you don't mind paying for the privilege. |
|
 sivranOpera convertPremium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
kudos:1 | reply to ashrc4
Contracts suck. Prepaid all the way.  |
|
| said by sivran:Contracts suck. Prepaid all the way.
Prepaid sucks. Shitty ass 3G network, throttled down speeds. Crappy 2 year old phones no one wants to choose from. No thanks... |
|
 redxiiPremium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Sherwood, MI
4 edits | reply to LazMan
[nm -- long post about rooting and probably isn't the same thing] |
|
Reviews:
 ·WestNet Broadband
| reply to LazMan
said by LazMan:Difference is - if the carrier is subsidizing the phone, they are counting on x amount of revenue over the term of the contract to recoup the cost of the subsidy... Like I said - an iPhone 5 costs about $700 to buy outright, and $50 on a 3 year contract... the carrier is $650 in the hole on day 1. The ETFs (at least in Canada) are typically limited to about $200... So in theory, I buy a phone on contract monday for $50 - cancel it on Tuesday, and pay a $200 ETF - I'm still $450 ahead of the game; and the carrier is out $450 (they pay Apple/Samsung/HTC, etc for the device either way... Cost of acquisition is the term, and it's one of the biggest expenses carriers face)
I understand most of what is said, but as a consumer buying an iPhone for $700, general rule of thumb, 50% mark up applies to cover the man in the middle's business and profit, so reduce that to $350 for the cost initially.
If you are a big Telco buying in bulk, $100 at least would be wiped off the initial cost at least due to bulk buying, if not half of the initial $350, which would make it $175 for the cost of the $700 iPhone.
This isn't including the cost of manufacture, where you may find a realistic figure of $100 per phone could be possible.
Just putting in perspective the dollar figure here. Off the shelf cost to the consumer is considerably different from the factual cost of the phone.
These are not factual figures, but the general public can be blinded to what real term figures of the phone they buy is.
That goes for most products give or take a few percentage points. The end user doesn't think too much about this when the "newest and greatest" is forced upon them before Xmas.
This would then theoretically put the termination charge equal to costs and a few dollars for profit. Most will not go the path of unlocking and will be sucked dry by the 2 yr/$50/mth fees for the phone.
That makes $1200 for a $200 phone over a 2 year period.
I'd love to see those profits for any company I worked for.
Down Under we are charged extra for phone contracts, from $20 to $80 for phone calls on top.
I'm not sure what you see there.
Quite differing figures to your initial theories quoted here for a handful who might consider being smart about the money they spend.
Nothing illegal in that from where I sit.
On those figures the law is for the corporations to protect very high profit margins, not take care of the end users, who spent the money and want a phone that works and a service.
Microsoft on the other hand charges extra for service outside of the US, does it not?
Beautiful example of fund raising.
There is a vastly differing cost to margin most people do not see, and an employee saying this would be sacked and or sued depending on the cost to the corporation from those words.
Laws are in place to cover the corporation here too, not the person who sees a company ripping blind the general public.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke
|
|
| reply to Sindows 7
To everyone here - why does large corporations usually have politicians or ex-politicians on the board?
It's not over the quality of the product I can assure you. |
|
LazManPremium
join:2003-03-26
canada | reply to norwegian
Difference is, my numbers didn't come out of my ass... As I said earlier; the cell carriers get no great breaks in cost as compared to retail anymore; the iPhone was a game changer in that regard. You can say there's a 50% or better markup, but doesn't make it true...
Anyways... |
|
| reply to Sindows 7
The article is lacking pretty much all of the facts in the matter.
This is not a new law. The copyright office and library of congress changed their interpretation of the DMCA as it pertains to unlocking of phones.
The reason they can do that is the basis that the software on your phone is licensed and not sold. So by unlocking the phone you are altering the software without the copyright holder's permission. A shaky foundation and one I don't agree with.
What this means in theory is that anyone who unlocks their phone without their carrier's permission is open to a lawsuit, not jail.
The carriers have stated that they are not interested in suing individuals for unlocking but are more interesting in rings of individuals that buy subsidized phones here, unlock them and sell them in foreign countries. The cost in doing that is absorbed by all of us in our cell bills.
Further I have yet to find evidence that an individual case of unlocking has ever ended up in a lawsuit. |
|
| reply to Juggernaut
said by Juggernaut:If you pay the device off, who cares? You have a right to have it unlocked, and the normal contract termination fee will apply anyway.
Not under US law. |
|
FickeyTerrorists target your backbone
join:2004-05-31 | reply to DarkSithPro
said by DarkSithPro:said by sivran:Contracts suck. Prepaid all the way.
Prepaid sucks. Shitty ass 3G network, throttled down speeds. Crappy 2 year old phones no one wants to choose from. No thanks... There's several GSM & CDMA MVNOs that allow you to "bring your own device", including brand new phones as long as they're not locked to another network & have a clean IMEI/MEID/ESN. Some may be limited to 3G, but not all.
--
Government controlled healthcare? Name one thing government does efficiently and effectively! |
|
 SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to LazMan
said by LazMan:The lock is to prevent consumers from ripping off cell phone carriers...
Your handset is subsidized... To buy a iPhone 5 outright, for instance, is about $700 - not the $50 that your carrier charges you, when you sign up for a 3 year deal. They count on that 3 year period to recoup the subsidy. Once your contract is expired, some carriers automatically unlock it, some allow you to unlock it for free or a nominal ($20-25) fee.
There are some pretty assinine laws out there - this is one I kind of agree with... It's pretty unfair to expect someone else to pickup the bulk of the cost of your phone, don't you think? And just 'cause it's a big, faceless company, doesn't change the basic principal...
If you don't want your phone to be locked to a specific carrier, then pay full freight up front, and buy an unlocked one outright.
T-mo supposedly will stop subsidizing phones. Meaning you pay full cost for the phone up front. Which gets you lower rates on service plans supposedly.
I recall a discussion a while back, about how in many parts of the world, a person buys the phone, and takes it to the carrier of their choice.
That the way we do it in the us isn't that common.
As I am not a world traveler, I don't know how true that is. But I thought that was a nifty ability. To be able to buy what ever phone you wanted, then selecting the service provider you wanted.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?. |
|
 M A R SPremium
join:2001-06-15
Long Island | reply to Sindows 7
Jailbreaking? |
|
| reply to Fickey
straight talk Iphone 5 best deal going once you pay for phone,financially speaking,depending on where you are which company you get for service |
|
 LagzPremium
join:2000-09-03
The Rock
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to LazMan
said by LazMan:Difference is, my numbers didn't come out of my ass... As I said earlier; the cell carriers get no great breaks in cost as compared to retail anymore; the iPhone was a game changer in that regard. You can say there's a 50% or better markup, but doesn't make it true...
Anyways...
Here's some numbers for you that won't just fly out of an ass.... I didn't specifically see you quote crap. Here in the US things are quite different than you describe.
I recently bought an HTC one X+ from AT&T. AT&T charges 199.99 with a contract and an ETC of $325. With fees and crap, that phone ended up costing $250 out of pocket directly from AT&T. Phone $250 + ETF $325 = $575. If we use what AT&T claims as the regular price, which is $549, then you can clearly see that if you buy the phone subsidized, then pay the ETF, you will end up paying more than the regular price AT&T claims the phone costs if you were to cancel.
--
When somebody tells you nothing is impossible, ask him to dribble a football. |
|
sivranOpera convertPremium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
kudos:1 | reply to DarkSithPro
said by DarkSithPro:said by sivran:Contracts suck. Prepaid all the way.
Prepaid sucks. Shitty ass 3G network, throttled down speeds. Crappy 2 year old phones no one wants to choose from. No thanks... I can use any GSM phone I want on TMo. I could go buy a Galaxy and use it on prepaid, assuming I wanted a phone with no keyboard.
--
Think Outside the Fox. |
|
