The issue here is that the unlock is still at the carrier's discretion.
This simply should not be the case. It should be legal, easy, and simple for any cell phone owner to unlock (or, preferably, not allow carrier locks on any phone sold in the country) their own device whenever they like at their own discretion with easy to use and readily available tools.
When someone chooses to unlock their device is their business, not the business of the corporation that sold them the device.
·Time Warner Cable
said by Angrychair:There should be no reason for carrier locks. The ETF guarantees that the carrier will recoup their subsidy.
This simply should not be the case. It should be legal, easy, and simple for any cell phone owner to unlock (or, preferably, not allow carrier locks on any phone sold in the country)
I'm all for giving people the power to hack hardware they own and weakening the DMCA, but a "cell phone unlock" exclusion just seems bizarre to me. Why not just prohibit cell phone locks in the first place?
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
King PDon't blame me. I voted for Ron PaulPremiumReviews:
|reply to Angrychair |
Agreed. The carrier should have no say in how or when I unlock my device. I bought my Lumia 920 at full price, directly from AT&T yet, they won't unlock it unless I have active service.
My Music blog: