Not only is it a wrongful practice, it's been blatently outlawed in the US.

The FCC and FTC issued a mandate that all future Contract-cell phones be service-provider-open, no more locking, beyond the radio-type. Now, I'm sure Apple and Verizon feel they can counter this in court by calling upon the Anti-DRM-hacking-clause of the DMCA, which in turn was folded into the "renewed" Patriot act, which makes every violation of DMCA a terrorist act that can send you to Gitmo.

between the loss of the fair-use-exemptions on digital media and the loss of writ and cause and so on of the patriot act, the civil liberties of this country are being sorely erroded. Enough so that I have considered going ExPat to Canada where fair use is so dearly protected.

Vote with your money and don't buy that piece of crap, learn from others' mistakes. I mean the iphone is somewhat cool, but not cool enough to justify putting up with all the shit apple throws at you. If you buy any phone with a contract (at least here in Europe) you can have it unlocked by the provider in the first few minutes of your contract (you pay them for at least 18 months anyway so they don't care). Hell, providers even unlock prepay phones for you, if you've used up a predefined amount of credit (around 100-120 euros)! What apple's doing is disgusting at minimum, but possibly unlawful IMO. I'll be very curious about this same situation here in Europe.

Hey guys be realistic! You buy the phone knowing that ATT is the only service provided. You knew that when you purchased the phone. Someone goes in and says...I'll show them! I'm smarter than they are and I'll prove it! I'll hack into "their" software and make it so I can use "any" company I want to use! I am smarter than they are! Well guess what?

You say you have choices for your electrical privider and your gas provider. That's true. You have a choice for your cell phone too! However if you choose the Iphone the you choose ATT for the privider. You don't want ATT....get a phone that will accept the privider you want! Plain as that!

You violate the rules and now you have a paper weight! Whose fault is that? You knew the rules when you bought the phone! You chose to violate the rules! You have no right to complain! Everybody has to live with the decisions they make every day! You chose to break the rules now you pay the consequenses! Get over it! Guess who will win in court? Not you!

A) I don't know why it has taken THIS long for someone to make this comparison. It occurred to me the first time I read about the restrictions on game console mods.

B) I have no pity on anyone who rushed out to have the NEWEST & COOLEST 2-year financial anchor. Next time, read the fine print BEFORE you start vomiting money.

Originally posted by GrayMule:

---

Hey guys be realistic! You buy the phone knowing that AT&T is the only service provided. You knew that when you purchased the phone. Someone goes in and says...I'll show them! I'm smarter than they are and I'll prove it! I'll hack into "their" software and make it so I can use "any" company I want to use! I am smarter than they are! Well guess what?

You say you have choices for your electrical provider and your gas provider. That's true. You have a choice for your cell phone too! However if you choose the iPhone then you choose AT&T for the provider. You don't want AT&T....get a phone that will accept the provider you want! Plain as that!

You violate the rules and now you have a paper weight! Whose fault is that? You knew the rules when you bought the phone! You chose to violate the rules! You have no right to complain! Everybody has to live with the decisions they make every day! You chose to break the rules now you pay the consequences! Get over it! Guess who will win in court? Not you!

---

I agree... but I'd like to see Apple come out with an "unbricking" service... $50-$100 beats a $500 paperweight. It will be bad for Apple if there's no unbricking service available.

One other thing to consider: Did Apple change the firmware to intentionally brick the phone, or did they update it just to protect it, but knew any already-unlocked iPhone would be bricked by the update? I think Apple is holding back on features just to stymie unlocking. Want iTunes Store? If your phone is unlocked you're not getting it! Next round, maybe it will be voice activation/voice recording. I think this will be a battle that will serve Apple well. Apple is basically saying "Want the coolest, latest, greatest iPhone features? Better not unlock it!".

FYI the TappedApp mod didn't prevent me from upgrading to v1.1.1

I think there will be alot of lawsuits filed against apple and at&t.

For what? They haven't done anything wrong! Apple should sue the general public for being Dumba$$es!

Originally posted by dyckugood:

---

I think there will be alot of lawsuits filed against apple and at&t.

---

I agree... however how many consumer electronics/services companies aren't faced with this problem. Too many Americans would rather whine & cry than just play by the freakin' rules. Everyone who purchased an iPhone knew it was AT&T only, so it should come as no surprise that Apple is trying to make people abide by it.

Apple and the carrier are in violation of the current FCC & FTC law. but they obviously feel protected because they have lawyers on staff, with deep pockets and think they can fight off any consumer-advocacy lawsuit. they may or may not be right, or it may be that they think it will just take so long to get thru the courts it will be a moot point.

technically any and all iphone purchaser, not just an owner of a modded phone, can sue apple for this, and the most effective way would be a massive class action lawsuit. the end being to enforce the law requiring the cell phone to be sold unlocked and open to any network .

the problem for owners of already-bricked iphones, now that it's bricked, your posession of the phone is proof of the crime of DRM circumvention. they're hoping the owners who have bricked iphones won't want the hassle of dealing with the DRM / Patriot act violations. EG "you report us to FCC and/or sue us, we'll turn you in to Homeland Security for investigation"

oops sorry. blanked the double post.

From a business side, this move by Apple is very short-sighted if not down right stupid. If you can sell phones and they can be used on any network - you will sell more phones. Duh! If were a stock holder, I would not be happy.

If you make any phone only work with one network, you restrict your market. Not very smart.

Apple has made some very innovative decisions in the past and made some really bone headed decisions also. I think this falls into the bone head category.

Most of us that live in large metro areas pick phone companies based on service. I have had AT&T, Sprint and Verizon in the past, and they all have issues.

Let's see how long it is until Apple changes their mind on this. And if they do not, how much marketshare they lose. Considering that they now make most of their money with non-computer items, it could really be painful for Apple. Or maybe the public is as stupid as I think they are and nothing will happen to Apple.

Time will tell - but I won't buy ANYTHING Apple.

Originally posted by Messaline:

---

Apple and the carrier are in violation of the current FCC & FTC law. but they obviously feel protected because they have lawyers on staff, with deep pockets and think they can fight off any consumer-advocacy lawsuit. they may or may not be right, or it may be that they think it will just take so long to get thru the courts it will be a moot point.

technically any and all iphone purchaser, not just an owner of a modded phone, can sue apple for this, and the most effective way would be a massive class action lawsuit. the end being to enforce the law requiring the cell phone to be sold unlocked and open to any network .

the problem for owners of already-bricked iphones, now that it's bricked, your posession of the phone is proof of the crime of DRM circumvention. they're hoping the owners who have bricked iphones won't want the hassle of dealing with the DRM / Patriot act violations. EG "you report us to FCC and/or sue us, we'll turn you in to Homeland Security for investigation"

---

See? This is EXACTLY the attitude, the air of entitlement, I'm talking about! Well guess what? You can also sue Apple because you don't like the shape of their logo, too.

This is why medications cost so much more in the U.S. than elsewhere like Canada. Canadians aren't a bunch of whining crybabies and accept the deals they've agreed to. We Americans have been reduced to whining and crying about everything we don't like.

Bottom line: If you don't like the Apple/AT&T deal, buy a different phone. Don't cry about the deal and expect mommy to make it all better. Start acting like an adult who can take care of his own problems.

I chose to mod my iPhone. I knew I might brick it. If I had, why should Apple be blamed?

By the way, the FCC & FTC don't write laws... they have regulations. Congress writes laws.

Bottom line is, they are pursuing an illegal business practice that was ruled against by the FCC. congress grants the power to the FCC and other agencies to make rules and regulations on their behalf. and they are considered to have the same weight as "Law" passed by congress, unless overturned by courts or congress or superceded by a newer law.

I don't have an Iphone. I have no intention of ever purchasing one, for myself, or for resale. but it is a matter of corporate america being given a backroom nod to violate the protective laws in place in this country .

How many companies have already been sued in the past for illegal business practices? Why should apple be different and victims be called whiners?

you're throwing up a red herring, Iphones being modded in any way allows them to be bricked, sure, no problem with that. Iphones out of the box should however, NOT be locked. period.
they CANNOT enter into exclusive-use agreements, only exclusive sales channels....if you want to buy an ATT IPHONE and use it on another network, it should by law be able to do that right out of the box, and the exclusion of that feature is illegal . period. There was a decision made on this issue based on this that the Activation-fees/Deactivation-penalties were sufficient to keep users from swapping services early. but that they had every right to bite the financial bullet and do so, and not be locked in at an OS level.

(Edited for Typos)

Originally posted by Messaline:

---

Bottom line is, they are pursuing an illegal business practice that was ruled against by the FCC. congress grants the power to the FCC and other agencies to make rules and regulations on their behalf.

I don't have an Iphone. I have no intention of ever purchasing one, for myself, or for resale. but it is a matter of corporate america being given a backroom nod to violate the protective laws in place in this country .

How many companies have already been sued in the past for illegal business practices? Why should apple be different and victims be called whiners?

---

Lawsuits... America's answer to all her problems!

Big boys and girls don't need their mommies and daddies (or Congress) to fight their battles. Big boys and girls should simply support practices they agree with and not support those they find reprehensible. Apple makes their products. They should be allowed to decide how they will be sold.

Little Johnny broke his phone doing something he knew he shouldn't be doing. Poor Johnny! He's a victim!

you keep referring back to modded & bricked Iphones.

Quote:

---

Little Johnny broke his phone doing something he knew he shouldn't be doing. Poor Johnny! He's a victim!

---

That's a red herring. Modded phones ARE fair game. HOWEVER unmodded new-in-box phones are supposed to be sold unlocked. period. if apple chooses to disregard this, law enforement steps in by SUING . if you notice when the DA or ADA or AG step in to an issue like this it is referred to as a LAWSUIT , not a PROSECUTION.

and as for congress policing corporate america, without that we'd have no worker protections, and no consumer protections, at all. Cars would never be recalled. Pintos would continue to be sold, as the disposable car; it even removes itself from the scene of an accident...by exploding.....
Granted some protections are misguided, and some are overdone, but free market does nothing to protect consumers against collusive behaviors. it ONLY applies before a given business or cullsion reaches a critical mass, where they become the setters of standards. and at that point only the law is left to redress.

So much for freedom of choice. PPL should be able to choose which network they prefer to use.

This author's example is completely wrong. Imagine buying a car that only work ran on a certain brand gas station? Imagine buying a car.... Ok, the car represents the phone... The gas station companies provide gas.... Ok so, a certain company would provide a wireless service...... Now different cars run on different fuels.... Different cell phones work on different wireless services ..... Cars = diesel, and different octane fuels.... Cell phones = different technologies, band widths and frequencies. Bmw, Porche's, and mercedes use premium gas, if you use another type of gas, your car will not function properly and if it gets damaged becuase of this, you have voided your warranty. And so the iPhone in the same way will and should work with AT&T , if you wanna run it on something else, it's your risk. If it breaks. Oh well! The people driving a mercedes aren't complaining about the type of gas they have to use. And the people with iPhone's aren't complaining about the service they have to use. Who is complaining??? Those who wish to have the iPhone but cannot. If you can't afford it, then drive a Kia,....or in this case, a Nokia!

Quote:

---

you keep referring back to modded & bricked Iphones.

Quote:

---

Little Johnny broke his phone doing something he knew he shouldn't be doing. Poor Johnny! He's a victim!

---

That's a red herring. Modded phones ARE fair game. HOWEVER unmodded new-in-box phones are supposed to be sold unlocked. period. if apple chooses to disregard this, law enforement steps in by SUING . if you notice when the DA or ADA or AG step in to an issue like this it is referred to as a LAWSUIT , not a PROSECUTION.

and as for congress policing corporate america, without that we'd have no worker protections, and no consumer protections, at all. Cars would never be recalled. Pintos would continue to be sold, as the disposable car; it even removes itself from the scene of an accident...by exploding.....
Granted some protections are misguided, and some are overdone, but free market does nothing to protect consumers against collusive behaviors. it ONLY applies before a given business or cullsion reaches a critical mass, where they become the setters of standards. and at that point only the law is left to redress.

---

Are you nuts congress supports big business, not us, you only see recalls after people have threatened to sue big time otherwise there are no recalls. Ford hid a cruse control problem that would cause a vehicle to take off with no one behind the wheel. They totally denied this was their issue until many people got involved. How about Enron there is one more example and there are way too many others to state. You totally don't know what the h@ll you are talking about!

hahah Antitrust Cough.

Actually i would advise anyone looking at an iphone to look at the range of HTC phones.

Ok its not a iphone, but they will work on any network, have touch screen and being windows mobile will run anyone software.

Oh and i forgot to say theres a door on the battery compartment and who would have thought it you can change your own batties as well.

I tend to disagree with a few of you. I have a high performance car, and they do tell you to use premium gas or you risk ruining your car. They also say to use Mobile Synthetic oil or you will ruin your car. This is the case with most high performance cars right now. They almost all say the same thing,that you must use a certain oil or gas. I talked to my mechanic and he totally disagrees. Every different gas producer provides gas that you can use. After trying a few you figure out wich one works best. Every different oil company produces different oils you can use. Again after trying a few you can figure out wich one works best. The car manufacturers suggest Mobile etc. these are just suggestions and if you choose to do different your car will not stop working, it just might not run as well as it should. With the Apple thing you have to use Apple right ? Or you iphone will stop working. You cannot choose a provider that works best, they tell you what you will use, there is no choice. I think the authors analaogy was pretty good.

I personally do not have an iphone as yet but why not just revert back to the original software that was on the phone when you purchased it. You did back it up did'nt you.

One more thing. If you take your car to the dealership to have it serviced, they cannot tell by simply looking at the car that you used gas or oil other than what they told you to use. If they do figure out that you used different gas or oil (by the car not functioning properly) they won't mess with the computer to make your car stop working, they will simply suggest (again) that you use a certain gas or oil. At that point you can choose to use that gas and oil or again try different ones that may work better. I think my point here as well as the point of the author is that a choice exists, and will always exist. With Apple on the other hand it is their way and only their way, and it is all about the money.

wierd i can but a *(just for example) treo on any carrier i want & run 3rd party software, faster internet speeds, play music, touch screen... aren't these the features of a i phone? oh & i can change my battery my self without voiding a warranty! i don't feel bad for anyone! everyoner had a choice to but an iphone & another choice to hack/mod it. if you where able to hack/mod it you have most likely moded something before & know the risks!

If people want it, pay the price that comes with it. If you don't like it, then don't buy the phone. It's that simple. I'm thrilled with mine. I'm also glad that no one that I know has one.

I think the gas and oil thing is mirking the actual point here.

Ok just to clairfy if your going to compair gas and oil lets say in the phones case the battery is the equivilent, if so you can still use a third party batt. But as everyone know cheaper refurb batteries can be prone to all sorts of problems.

So really its the same with phones, the real point being made here was not that you have to use said provider. I can go any car shop and get a manufactures spec grade of oil or get the right ron value fuel.

Providers in the past have tried to use operator locks on the phone or in some cases country id locks, however these can normally be safely removed or got round if you know how.

However the point was apple going one step further by saying they will then lock the device down if you modded it, which is something thats never been done.

However apple pushing the legal boundries as ever and worring about it later, if you ask me, if i buy the phone with a contract, i am bound by the contract to subscribe to the service for x period, normally 12 months.

But they SOLD me the phone, doesnt matter if it was at a reduced rate because i singed up to the contract the phone was sold.

So legally i own it, i obviously dont own apples software on the phone, but thats not to say modding it breaks any legalities as its still had its sw licence paid for, its still the same software its not like i would have installed anything else.

So if apple were to take my hypothetical phone and then lock it down with a software update, i would argue that they had without my consent (owner) modified my device. Doesnt matter they own the software i have paid for my licence when i got the phone, i think apple are getting confused between them renting the phone.

In which case of a rental much like the poor old EV1 the company that owns it can do what they want.

But in the case of the iphone i would have paid for the device, its mine. Legally even if its in the contract i have to subscribe to their network, thats fine it was an agreed period.

But to modify the device without consent is wrong, doesnt matter what they put in the contact its my device, it they give me a warwanty replacement i would expect it to have the original software when it came back (square one time to mod again)

Thats like buying a car, sticking sports suspension and some good wheels on it and racing it on the track. Only to find when i take it back to my supplier that took off all my mods and crippled the engine.

No they wouldnt, they may decided that ive voided my warwanty by running my car at 7k all day and make me pay for repairs.

Lets see them try it, i cant see them winning if it went to court, take for example Joe who buys his iphone, does his 18 month contract then leaves for another network with his iphone, in this senario their software kill the mods, update would then mean he couldnt use his phone on the new netwrok. Despite the fact he had actually conformed to contract term (length) and payments etc.