This appeared in a MAJOR newspaper, and you know what?
I think they ought to CHOP THE EDITOR'S HAND OFF.
WOW.
it just goes to show you, just like “Property Taxes” makes it so you don’t really own your property, you are just renting it, so goes it with these devices you don’t “really” own them you are just renting them.
What next, I wonder?
Payoffs - I mean ‘lobbying efforts’ must have run into the hundreds of millions for their piece of legislation. Nice to know our public servants got a lotta skim on this one.
The carriers are loosing the battle to the very companies the sell blocks of air time to. (the prepaid companies) why should I be paying sprint 190 dollar a month when I can get the exact same service through boost for 100?
I don’t care if sprint gives me a 300 dollar phone for a penny and I have to pay boost 300 bucks for it. Anyone who can do simple math can figure out where the deal is.
I highly doubt this rule will be enforced.
Radical changes in Intellectual Property law are necessary. And I mean RADICAL.
Yet another way to make “criminals” out of even more people. Where are they going to incarcerate all these “new” felons...or are they?
this would only kinda make sense if the carrier still owns the phone.
if YOU own the phone, then it’s your property and you can do whatever you want with it
Tyranny would be so much easier if it weren't for that darned impulse people have to be free.
I remember arguing with a co-worker (liberal democrat and Obama voter) about your right to own and do what you paid for. This concerning the IBM PC’s that came out in the late 1980’s. You could buy either the 8 MHz or 12 MHz model and the only difference between them was the clock crystal. Same motherboard, same parts. What some folks did was buy the * MHz model for a lower price and then change the crystal.
WHat IBM did if you had the machine serviced is they removed the 12 MHz crystal and put the 8 MHz crystal back in and then reprogrammed the BIO’s so the 12 MHz crystal wouldn’t work.
I made the remark that IBM was screwing people and one of the reasons I wouldn’t buy their equipment. The woman remarked that since you didn’t pay the extra money, you have no right to change the crystal. She also remarked that you should get punished by the legal system as well. My take is I worked for the money to buy something, my property and my decision to do whatever. Her comeback, she remarked that society has a say and changing the crystal is considered fraud. The woman was kind of nuts.
Today, my opinion is the same. You work for the money to buy something, whatever you do with the item is your business so long as no one is directly harmed (physically injured, maimed, lose job, etc).
Aren’t cellphones sold unlocked in foreign countries?
Law enforcement my donkey! It’s political corruption in its purest form. Payback for campaign contributions and lunches, excuse me, luncheons at D.C. Trader Vics (as ou can see I haven’t been to the swamp in a while.) Can you think of any objective reasons for this law? Outrage! With an unlocked phone you could travel abroad with it, buy a SIM card there and use it inexpensively (rates tend to be lower elsewhere, and you don’t pay for incoming calls.) Foggetabouit now, mate!
I’m probably oe of the few people who doesn’t own a cell phone, and I know nothing about ‘em; can someone with some savvy explain to me what’s the big deal about fiddling with one’s own personal property if that property is a cell phone?