[raino]

It doesn't really hampers competition at all. There are a lot of Canadians (like me) in this forum that will tell you the horrors of 3 years contract up north --- and Canada doesn't have DMCA. What really hampers competition in Canada is the fact that there are only 3 major carriers.

It's a competition killer in the sense that MVNOs and even the fourth largest carrier, T-Mobile, made good business out of advertising BYOD, and now they won't be able to. T-Mobile even went as far as providing support documentation on how to make unlocked iPhones work on their network. I doubt they'll mind too much since they're getting their own iPhone, but MVNOs might take a hit.

Okay, so there seems to be no issue for anyone but cell phone thieves. If I want to sell my Sprint phone, I take it to Sprint and they unlock it (or whatever it is they need to do), I wipe it, and then I sell it on eBay.

If a thief steals my phone and tries to sell it unlocked, then they're SOL.

Yes. That was the basic argument in favor of this decision. Except circumventing it will be pretty easy, and I doubt they'll really go after anyone given the 'low profile' nature of a violation.

[timmy t]

This changes nothing for you, really. You can buy it locked and have it unlocked in Bermuda, OR you can buy the phone unlocked in the US. What you can't do in the US is buy the phone locked, and have it unlocked by anyone else but the carrier.

Why? Just tell them you unlocked it while out of the country.

[timmy t]

This is good for RIM because if people have to buy a new phone to switch carriers, they may as well upgrade to a BB10 phone.
Silver lining.

[loc5]

Hopefully soon in Canada you don't have to unlock them, there is a bill pushing for carriers to sell unlock phones. Hopefully the bill, it passes into law soon.

[onvisa]

I might be off topic, the reason that some carrier don't like unlocked there phones is that if you use it in another country you get charged for roaming.
I have my BB unlocked so when i'm on holidays i just get a month sim card, and vola surfing and making local calls cheaper, if i used my provider and then roaming provider i get hit with $3 / min by my provider when i get back.

[brmiller1976]

If you unlock your phone, or root it to install a custom ROM, you can technically be convicted of a felony and sentenced to up to a $1 million fine and/or 15 years in prison.

Incidentally, both the max fine and prison time are larger than any sentence handed down in the USA, UK or Canada for the trillions of dollars in mortgage and securities fraud that led to the great economic implosion of 2008. Good to see the regulators looking out for the little guys. /eyeroll

[raino]

If you unlock your phone, or root it to install a custom ROM, you can technically be convicted of a felony and sentenced to up to a $1 million fine and/or 15 years in prison.

Where are you getting this from? The exception expiry is only for unlocking. Jailbreaking and rooting are still allowed. Care to share a source for your claim?

[brmiller1976]

Where are you getting this from? The exception expiry is only for unlocking. Jailbreaking and rooting are still allowed. Care to share a source for your claim?

The whole root of the unlocking question is that it modifies the software without the software vendor's permission. Jailbreaking and rooting do the same thing -- in an even more extreme way. They're undoubtedly covered.

[raino]

The whole root of the unlocking question is that it modifies the software without the software vendor's permission. Jailbreaking and rooting do the same thing -- in an even more extreme way. They're undoubtedly covered.

Undoubtedly is not a source

Here are some sources that confirm rooting/jailbreaking are legal for phones:

From The Verge:

It's also worth noting that the ruling upheld protection for rooting and jailbreaking

From Mashable:

Note that unlocking is different from "jailbreaking," which opens the phone up for running additional software and remains legal for smartphones.

From TmoNews:

For those of you concerned about jailbreaking and rooting, it�ll still be legal to jailbreak/root smartphones which really leaves this cut off date affecting customers looking to unlock devices and switch carriers.

If you have any sources saying otherwise, again, I'd like to see those.

[Triplell]

Not to mention that people who root phones likely don't care if they are breaking the law or not. I would assume that these same groups of people have a plethora of downloaded music as well.

[MADBRADNYC]

Why? Just tell them you unlocked it while out of the country.

I could be wrong but, believe the reason "why" is because Raino was explaining the proper legal ways of doing this, without having to jump through hoops with lies to your carrier over a phone that you paid for and own.

[timmy t]

I could be wrong but, believe the reason "why" is because Raino was explaining the proper legal ways of doing this, without having to jump through hoops with lies to your carrier over a phone that you paid for and own.

It doesn't have to be a lie. Just do it next time you are out of the country. Or just tell them they have to prove that it was done while you were in the US and if they cannot, they don't have a case.
Remember, the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

[MADBRADNYC]

It doesn't have to be a lie. Just do it next time you are out of the country. Or just tell them they have to prove that it was done while you were in the US and if they cannot, they don't have a case.
Remember, the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand....
If it's already done outside of your carrier, then it would in fact be a lie, correct?
I believe he already stated that the OP could purchase the device, and unlock it in Bermuda, correct?
Or, just purchase an unlocked device in the first place, correct?
I never mentioned a "Burden of Proof" but if you have to go that route due to lies, why not just do things in the correct manner in the first place?
Then "Burden of Proof" does not factor into the equation at all, correct?

Maybe I just got it all wrong....

[raino]

I could be wrong but, believe the reason "why" is because Raino was explaining the proper legal ways of doing this, without having to jump through hoops with lies to your carrier over a phone that you paid for and own.

This was exactly my point. Yes, you can still unlock your locked phone ten million different ways, but you cannot do so legally in the US once it becomes illegal.

One thing to note, and this may already have been said in posts prior, but the protection for unlocking phones purchased prior to 1/26 does not go away. So if you've buy a phone before tomorrow's deadline, you can get it unlocked once the ban kicks in. Just save the receipt showing an order date of 1/25 or earlier

Makes me wonder...is this why US GSM carriers aren't taking pre-orders for BB10? Could pre-order dates be legally considered the "order date" when it comes to this unlocking ruling?

[cjcampbell]

I think the whole point of this is to stop those purchasing on contract, getting a great subsidized rate, then turning around and selling it for a profit to places that have higher costs for devices. You only have to wait 3 months to unlock the phone and you can have your carrier unlock it for you. I think the only people who really will be affected by this are the ones that travel a lot.

[DenverRalphy]

If you unlock your phone, or root it to install a custom ROM, you can technically be convicted of a felony and sentenced to up to a $1 million fine and/or 15 years in prison.

The whole root of the unlocking question is that it modifies the software without the software vendor's permission. Jailbreaking and rooting do the same thing -- in an even more extreme way. They're undoubtedly covered.

Boy oh boy are you misinformed.

You can root your device all you wish. Depending on carrier, you may void your warranty, but that's about it. There's nothing illegal about it at all, nor are there any efforts in the legal realm attempting to squash the practice.

Unlocking a device for use on other networks is not a software modification, and the premise behind it has nothing to do with modifying software. It's based solely on carriers not wanting people taking a phone purchased under a subsidized price to be used on another carrier's network. If you get a cheap deal on a device under the agreement that you'll pay through a 2/3 year contract, the carrier won't allow you to unlock it unless you fulfill the contract, or pay the difference of the actual retail price of the device.

[brmiller1976]

You are aware that for many phones, including the iPhone, unlocking the phone is typically the same action as rooting/jailbreaking it, right?

The arguments about contracts and subsidies have literally zero to do with the LoC's decision on the issue. It's equally illegal to unlock your device even after your contract expires, or if you purchased a locked device at full price from your carrier and used it on a month-to-month plan.

Have you actually read the Library of Congress's decision on the issue?

It is a very sweeping order. Technically, carriers cannot even unlock phones, since they don't own the software in question. Unlocking, jailbreaking AND rooting are all illegal under the order, based on the DMCA's provisions banning modification of software without the software owner's permission. In fact, technically, installing "mod" software that allows customized icons or backgrounds could be perceived as a violation of the DMCA as well. (Which underscores how ridiculous it is).

[DenverRalphy]

You are aware that for many phones, including the iPhone, unlocking the phone is typically the same action as rooting/jailbreaking it, right?

The arguments about contracts and subsidies have literally zero to do with the LoC's decision on the issue. It's equally illegal to unlock your device even after your contract expires, or if you purchased a locked device at full price from your carrier and used it on a month-to-month plan.

Yeah... you're confusing two different actions, both of which are loosely referred to as Unlocking.

The topic at hand is over Unlocking a device's ability to be used on other carriers/networks. Usually accomplished simply by purchasing/acquiring an unlock code and installing a new sim card.

However you seem to be confusing it with Unlocking a device's bootloader to accommodate flashing custom ROMS. Either way, neither use of the term Unlocking is required to root/jailbreak a device.

Have you actually read the Library of Congress's decision on the issue?

It is a very sweeping order. Technically, carriers cannot even unlock phones, since they don't own the software in question. Unlocking, jailbreaking AND rooting are all illegal under the order, based on the DMCA's provisions banning modification of software without the software owner's permission. In fact, technically, installing "mod" software that allows customized icons or backgrounds could be perceived as a violation of the DMCA as well. (Which underscores how ridiculous it is).

Where are you getting this?

If you have actually read the decision on the issue, you would know that rooting/jailbreaking smartphone devices (and other devices) are exempt and the exemption was renewed just last year (to be reviewed again in 2015). The root/bootloader/jailbreaking exemptions keep getting approved because of the argument that the purchaser of the device owns the device itself and is free to do whatever they please with its software. All that's change is that Unlocking to allow use on different carriers/networks was not included in the last exemption and thus expired (since technically, the sim card is covered by provisions in your contract as a license to use, and not owned by the end user). You're still free to root/jailbreak all you wish.

[bigboybkrises]

Thats bull**** federal government for you. Always want to poke their nose in your business.

[cjcampbell]

Thats bull**** federal government for you. Always want to poke their nose in your business.

I'd beg to differ... if you buy a subsidized phone, do you really own it out rite? Nope.. you have a contractual obligation to fill. The new law does not apply to phones bought at full price.

[bigboybkrises]

No politicians rob you blind and yet we keep supporting them in doing so. They give those companies the bailouts with our money. Crony capitalism

[Mikethaler]

The whole root of the unlocking question is that it modifies the software without the software vendor's permission. Jailbreaking and rooting do the same thing -- in an even more extreme way. They're undoubtedly covered.

This makes no sense. I buy a copyrighted book. I alter it by making notations and comments. The vendor has gotten his fee. I buy a patented phone w. installed hardware and software. I add to the hardware to make it run better and tweak the software (an app) to enhance it. In both cases it's for my own benefit. The vendor got their fee. I think I could buy a patented item, enhance it, and resell it.

[hennesseystealth]

I have never been able to get anyone at Verizon to agree to unlock my old 9530 or 9550. Both were long out of contract (9550 was never under contract). Everyone says that it is not allowed under any circumstances. So, I just used an outside source so I could use a Yoigo SIM card while in Spain. Any trick to getting them to unlock a phone?

[Mikethaler]

I have never been able to get anyone at Verizon to agree to unlock my old 9530 or 9550. Both were long out of contract (9550 was never under contract). Everyone says that it is not allowed under any circumstances. So, I just used an outside source so I could use a Yoigo SIM card while in Spain. Any trick to getting them to unlock a phone?

Maybe since Vz isn't a GSM carrier, they don't really know what unlocking is? Question - Can you use a Vz. phone on Sprint and vice-versa?

[raino]

I have never been able to get anyone at Verizon to agree to unlock my old 9530 or 9550. Both were long out of contract (9550 was never under contract). Everyone says that it is not allowed under any circumstances. So, I just used an outside source so I could use a Yoigo SIM card while in Spain. Any trick to getting them to unlock a phone?

I'm not a 100% sure on this, but if you want to unlock a phone bought prior to 1/26, you can still do that. Don't take my word for it though.

Maybe you could make it a point of discussion during your next contract negotiation Getting unlock codes for old phones already paid for sounds fair to me. And if they still don't budge, well, personally I'd think about continuing to give them my business.

Question - Can you use a Vz. phone on Sprint and vice-versa?

I'm 100% sure you can't do it legally, and 99% sure you can't do it illegally either. I remember reading somewhere that CDMA BBs get irreversibly flashed during manufacturing.