dslreports logo
 story category
White House Punts on Cell Phone Unlocking
Leaves it to Bickering Congress and Timid FCC to Figure Out

In late January, unlocking your cellphone technically became illegal after the Librarian of Congress removed it from the DMCA exception list last year. It remains legal for you to jailbreak your phone, but you can't unlock it unless you get your carrier's permission. If you think that sounds idiotic you're not alone; a petition was formed on the White House website aimed at making unlocking cell phones legal again, and after getting the necessary 100,000 signatures has now received a White House response.

Click for full size
In the response, the White House argues they agree that users should have the legal right to unlock the tablets and smartphones they pay a pretty penny for. They also argue that the current DMCA exemption process is a "rigid and imperfect fit" for this particular issue (many argue it's a rigid and imperfect fit for all issues). They then proceed to offer a three-pronged possible solution that isn't much of a solution.

One, the White House argues they could apply a "narrow legislative fix" that would ensure cell phone unlocking stays legal. Two, they could wait for the FCC to do something despite the fact the FCC probably doesn't have authority over this issue. Three, they want to ask carriers to "consider what steps they as businesses can take to ensure that their customers can fully reap the benefits and features they expect when purchasing their devices."

In other words, the White House's solution is to wait for a bickering, gridlocked, and industry-beholden Congress to stand up to carrier lobbyists and fix the law (good luck), wait for a timid FCC boss with dubious jurisdiction here to do....something (good luck), and ask giant duopolists to pretty please be nice (good luck). After effectively punting the issue down the road, the White House then gives consumers a healthy dose of the blah blah blah:
quote:
We look forward to continuing to work with Congress, the wireless and mobile phone industries, and most importantly you -- the everyday consumers who stand to benefit from this greater flexibility -- to ensure our laws keep pace with changing technology, protect the economic competitiveness that has led to such innovation in this space, and offer consumers the flexibility and freedoms they deserve.
Sure, the White House's options are limited, but more could be accomplished if the administration seriously supported copyright enforcement and DMCA reform in the first place. They don't (feel free to ask any of the many former RIAA or MPAA employees on staff), and as a result fixing the DMCA exemption process or copyright on any broader scale gets left unmentioned. While getting the White House to acknowledge the issue is a small win for fans of tech, there's still a very long way to go before sanity prevails.
view:
topics flat nest 

Mike
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA

1 recommendation

Mike

Mod

Translation

We have no idea what you're talking about. We're old.

I guess the FCC may know. However you may get a straighter answer just asking ATT directly.

Dream Killer
Graveyard Shift
Premium Member
join:2002-08-09
Forest Hills, NY

Dream Killer

Premium Member

Fines?

What's the punishment/fine if someone gets caught?

Mike
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
·Verizon FiOS

1 recommendation

Mike

Mod

Re: Fines?

$2,500 fine civil. Possible jail time if you do it for criminal gains.

If you're a reseller it's $500,000 and you go to jail.

So if you own a phone store and want to do something illegal, just stab someone in the chest 20 times then mutilate their corpse.

You don't want to do a real crime such as take $200 away from ATT. Besides, you'll serve less time with murder.

Dream Killer
Graveyard Shift
Premium Member
join:2002-08-09
Forest Hills, NY

Dream Killer

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

Well, I guess I can't get caught if it isn't in the country in the first place.

Mike
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA

Mike

Mod

Re: Fines?

only illegal if you're caught
Taget
join:2004-07-29

Taget

Member

Re: Fines?

It's easy to say "who the hell would catch me?" But it's actually far more insidious than you think.

If for are stopped or arrested for any reason they can and will search everything you have. And a prosecutor is then free at solely their own discretion to prosecute you for something stupid.

And searching computers and cell phones of someone suspected of well.. anything.. is becoming more and more common place. Even if you are not suspected of any crime whatsoever and want to take a commercial flight.

Cthen
Premium Member
join:2004-08-01
Detroit, MI

Cthen

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

said by Taget:

It's easy to say "who the hell would catch me?" But it's actually far more insidious than you think.

If for are stopped or arrested for any reason they can and will search everything you have. And a prosecutor is then free at solely their own discretion to prosecute you for something stupid.

And searching computers and cell phones of someone suspected of well.. anything.. is becoming more and more common place. Even if you are not suspected of any crime whatsoever and want to take a commercial flight.

Uumm yea, sure, a cop or a prosecutor will know what they are looking at when searching an unlocked phone. Well that is if they even bother to look at that part.

Smokey
I'd rather be skiing
Premium Member
join:2003-05-20
Wild West

Smokey

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

As a cop who does search phones and would know what I'm looking at, I can say... I have bigger fish to fry if I'm looking at your cell phone than did you unlock it without permission.

While that can not be said outright for every agency or case, I really doubt you will see many prosecution for this violation.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

said by Smokey:

As a cop who does search phones and would know what I'm looking at, I can say... I have bigger fish to fry if I'm looking at your cell phone than did you unlock it without permission.

While that can not be said outright for every agency or case, I really doubt you will see many prosecution for this violation.

I get the feeling if a suspect's cell is being searched by you they have possibly done something far worse than violating the DMCA.

But I wonder, If it was found a phone was unlocked after the cutoff date, Would a DA would toss that in too just because they can?

Smokey
I'd rather be skiing
Premium Member
join:2003-05-20
Wild West

Smokey

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

That is a possibility, but I don't think any of the AUSA's or DA's I deal with would go to that well. If you need to fall back on something like that in a plea deal, you really need to take another look at your case.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

I was honestly kind of thinking that. If your evidence is so weak you need to hunt for a DMCA violation it is time to go back to your evidence again.

Reel World
@sbcglobal.net

Reel World to Cthen

Anon

to Cthen
said by Cthen:

said by Taget:

It's easy to say "who the hell would catch me?" But it's actually far more insidious than you think.

If for are stopped or arrested for any reason they can and will search everything you have. And a prosecutor is then free at solely their own discretion to prosecute you for something stupid.

And searching computers and cell phones of someone suspected of well.. anything.. is becoming more and more common place. Even if you are not suspected of any crime whatsoever and want to take a commercial flight.

Uumm yea, sure, a cop or a prosecutor will know what they are looking at when searching an unlocked phone. Well that is if they even bother to look at that part.

Oh they will search everything including your online activities my intentionally naive friend and if they find as much as a speck of illegality they will throw the book at you and even if its not illegal, they will use it to portray you are a bad person.

By the way, cases are packaged for a DA/Prosecutor by a long line of technology competent private firms, technicians and forensic investigators who know exactly what they're doing.
clone (banned)
join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN

1 recommendation

clone (banned)

Member

Re: Fines?

So they can tell if the unlock code you entered came from the carrier or a third-party website, huh?

I call bullshit.
Taget
join:2004-07-29

Taget to Cthen

Member

to Cthen
If they think you might have done something wrong they will search everything for any possible violation to throw as much at you as possible so that you'll plead.

Even if they don't think you've done the other stuff they will still have a way to get something for the tally sheet so it looks like they didnt competely waste their time.

Now you can argue whether or not they'd bother or waste their time. The problem is that is not up to you. And laws that make someone harmless of doing what most people agree should be allowed but have largish potential penalties are dangerous. Just look at Aaron Swartz. He had the bad luck of being prosecuted by someone looking to climb the political ladder. Discretion does not always work to your favor.

Dream Killer
Graveyard Shift
Premium Member
join:2002-08-09
Forest Hills, NY

Dream Killer

Premium Member

In all honesty though, some carriers deserve it. Stock ROMs on Verizon Android phones is probably the worst I've seen.
en103
join:2011-05-02

en103

Member

Re: Fines?

That's a huge part of the problem - that's not even part of the 'unlocking' issue. From an OS ROM level, items that the carriers have (bugs/patches/upgrades) that they won't release are a huge issue. Bad ROMs remind me of 'CarrierIQ'.

Locking is making the device carrier tied (i.e. can't take an AT&T tablet to T-Mobile or Verizon even after I finish my contract). I'll just have to buy from a vendor outside the country

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: Fines?

or you could stop buying devices from carriers. That would be the smart choice.
en103
join:2011-05-02

en103

Member

Re: Fines?

In general - yes... that's the solution.
Apple / Google do sell their devices unlocked.
As you get into LTE, it gets a little complicated for purchasing unlocked devices, as carriers are setting devices to be incompatible with others by carrier band. This reminds me of purchasing 'global' (read non-north America) spec'd GSM phones that did not have the 850MHz band. If you were on T-Mobile - you were fine... on AT&T or an 850MHz roamer, you may have been out of luck.
Carriers are performing this with 700MHz bands as well as a few others. Some devices will not support portions of 700MHz bands for competing carriers.

pike
Premium Member
join:2001-02-01
Washington, DC

pike to ArrayList

Premium Member

to ArrayList
said by ArrayList:

That would be the smart choice.

Is it really smart to pay the same monthly service fee as those that are receiving a subsidized phone? I don't think so.

So far, only T-Mobile discounts monthly service for bring your own device. And their wireless coverage is lacking.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina to Dream Killer

Member

to Dream Killer
You might be talking about "jail breaking" instead of "unlocking". Although they sound similar, they are different. One breaks the lock the manufacturer puts on the phone to prevent a customer from installing custom "unapproved" software. The other breaks the phone's tie to a specific carrier so that it can be used with another carrier's compatible system. So far I understand the first is still legal provided the customization does not break the carrier tie or you continue to use the phone with the carrier through which it was subsidized.

cdru
Go Colts
MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

1 recommendation

cdru

MVM

Wait a sec...

...you mean to tell me a White House petition just passed the buck to someone else, and didn't actually make a bit of difference? Color me shocked!

Camelot One
MVM
join:2001-11-21
Bloomington, IN

Camelot One

MVM

Re: Wait a sec...

said by cdru:

...you mean to tell me a White House petition just passed the buck to someone else, and didn't actually make a bit of difference? Color me shocked!

Oh come on now. Everyone knows, when you really want a problem solved, you send it to the US Congress.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to cdru

Member

to cdru
Just out of curiosity where does the color "shocked" fall on the color spectrum?

John Galt6
Forward, March
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp

John Galt6

Premium Member

Re: Wait a sec...

said by Skippy25:

Just out of curiosity where does the color "shocked" fall on the color spectrum?

It varies from red to electric blue, with some gray to black smoke thrown for contrast.

cdru
Go Colts
MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

cdru to Skippy25

MVM

to Skippy25
said by Skippy25:

Just out of curiosity where does the color "shocked" fall on the color spectrum?

It's between ultrared and infrablue.

"Color me" means "I am" or "I was" and usually as a result of a unexpected outcome. Other examples would be "color me surprised" or the late 80s/early 90s group Color Me Badd.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

1 recommendation

88615298 (banned)

Member

What else is the White House to do?

You act as if Obama can just change the law. Sorry he's President not King. He doesn't rule by decree. CONGRESS makes the laws so if a law needs to be changed it's CONGRESS that has to do it. People like to give the President( no matter who it is ) more power than he actually has. The only time a president has power these days is if he has his party in charge of the House and a 60 member filibuster proof majority in the Senate AND even with those the members of his party in agreement with what he wants. Which is not always the case when Congress is more worried about being re-elected that placating to the President even if he's a member of the same party.

jester121
Premium Member
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

2 recommendations

jester121

Premium Member

Re: What else is the White House to do?

You haven't been following the news much for the past few years, have you?
buckweet1980
join:2011-12-31
Saint Petersburg, FL

buckweet1980

Member

Re: What else is the White House to do?

I guess all of those executive orders he's done has blown right past him..
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned) to jester121

Member

to jester121
said by jester121:

You haven't been following the news much for the past few years, have you?

yes I do but I also have read the US Constitution and passed Civics class.
buckweet1980
join:2011-12-31
Saint Petersburg, FL

buckweet1980

Member

Re: What else is the White House to do?

We'll you're a step ahead of the president and congress then. If only they would read it and uphold it too!!
spurious
join:2001-06-09
Florence, OR

spurious to 88615298

Member

to 88615298
said by 88615298:

You act as if Obama can just change the law. Sorry he's President not King. He doesn't rule by decree. CONGRESS makes the laws so if a law needs to be changed it's CONGRESS that has to do it.

Curious, if only Congress can change the law, as you claim, why is the Librarian allowed to do this?
Hmmmmm ???
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: What else is the White House to do?

said by spurious:

said by 88615298:

You act as if Obama can just change the law. Sorry he's President not King. He doesn't rule by decree. CONGRESS makes the laws so if a law needs to be changed it's CONGRESS that has to do it.

Curious, if only Congress can change the law, as you claim, why is the Librarian allowed to do this?
Hmmmmm ???

The Librarian is not changing the law. The Librarian is acting in according to the power CONGRESS( not the President ) gave them.

pike
Premium Member
join:2001-02-01
Washington, DC

pike to 88615298

Premium Member

to 88615298
said by 88615298:

You act as if Obama can just change the law. Sorry he's President not King. He doesn't rule by decree.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex ··· ve_order
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: What else is the White House to do?

said by pike:

said by 88615298:

You act as if Obama can just change the law. Sorry he's President not King. He doesn't rule by decree.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex ··· ve_order

Too bad that doesn't apply in this case.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer to 88615298

Premium Member

to 88615298
Actually, for this, it is the librarian of congress who is appointed by the president.

••••
SunnyD
join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL

SunnyD

Member

Something.

And we expected what, exactly, from yet another administration who cares not what they can do for the people, but what the people can put into their pockets.

Probitas
@teksavvy.com

Probitas

Anon

We The People ...

Clearly that only refers to those non-persons called corporations, who have the status of registered voters yet can't vote, but can donate piles of cash to control all branches of the government.

I think the whole idea of allowing that to happen violates the Constitution. Letting corporate America dictate the freedoms of U.S. citizens is SO wrong. It's a Plutocracy, not a Democracy.

NOCTech75
Premium Member
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA

NOCTech75

Premium Member

Change

We can believe in!

bigunk
Gort, Klattu Birada Nikto
join:2001-02-10
USA

bigunk

Member

Re: Change

Typical sheik hussein obama white house. Non-committal, non-governing. He'll never govern because that means his name will be on policy. If his name is on policy, he's responsible for it.

If it doesn't have anything to do with raising taxes, he'll kick the can.

PapaMidnight
join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

PapaMidnight

Member

This just in: "We're just doing our job!"

»www.loc.gov/today/pr/201 ··· 041.html

That's pretty much the gist of their response there.
quote:
In a statement today, the Obama administration announced its view that, as a matter of telecommunications policy, consumers should be able to unlock their legally purchased cell phones for purposes of switching from one wireless carrier to another.

Both the Librarian of Congress and the Register of Copyrights value our colleagues in the administration and the thoughtful discussions we have had with them on this issue. We also agree with the administration that the question of locked cell phones has implications for telecommunications policy and that it would benefit from review and resolution in that context.

The question of locked cell phones was raised by participants in the Section 1201 rulemaking conducted between September 2011 and October 2012 by the Register of Copyrights, who in turn advises the Librarian of Congress. The rulemaking is a process spelled out by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in which members of the public can request exemptions from the law to enable circumvention of technological protection measures. In the case of cell phones, the request was to allow circumvention of technological protection measures controlling access to copyrighted software on cell phones.

The rulemaking is a technical, legal proceeding and involves a lengthy public process. It requires the Librarian of Congress and the Register of Copyrights to consider exemptions to the prohibitions on circumvention, based on a factual record developed by the proponents and other interested parties. The officials must consider whether the evidence establishes a need for the exemption based on several statutory factors. It does not permit the U.S. Copyright Office to create permanent exemptions to the law.

As designed by Congress, the rulemaking serves a very important function, but it was not intended to be a substitute for deliberations of broader public policy.

However, as the U.S. Copyright Office has recognized many times, the 1201 rulemaking can often serve as a barometer for broader policy concerns and broader policy action. The most recent rulemaking has served this purpose.

U.S. Copyright Office Section 1201 Proceeding – www.copyright.gov/1201
White House Response – »petitions.whitehouse.gov ··· nlocking

# # #

PR 13-041
03/04/13
ISSN 0731-3527

CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

Derek Khanna on Democracy Now

There was an interesting interview with Derek Khanna, one of the promoters of the petition on Democracy Now. As PapaMidnight just said, the White house has come out in favor of people being able to unlock.

Interesting side note, Derek Khanna was the House of Representatives staffer that was let go after writing a memo suggesting reform of the copyright laws because they were stifling creativity.

»www.democracynow.org/201 ··· nlocking

AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ

AVD

Premium Member

SHAME

SHAME

'nuff said.

ARGONAUT
Have a nice day.
Premium Member
join:2006-01-24
New Albany, IN

ARGONAUT

Premium Member

Hold on..

You can still root your phone, just not unlock.

Juggernaut
Irreverent or irrelevant?
Premium Member
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC

Juggernaut

Premium Member

It's HW, not SW

said by PapaMidnight:

In the case of cell phones, the request was to allow circumvention of technological protection measures controlling access to copyrighted software on cell phones.

It's a hardware lock, not software. Punch a code into the hardware generated screen after putting in a 'foreign' sim, and you're done.

raypsi1
join:2001-04-09
Wayne, MI

raypsi1

Member

boycott the tel co's

I imagine the Executive Branch spends lots of money with the tel co's best would be to boycott their sorry excuse for those telecommunications corporations, but alas they didn't word the petition properly IMO and the POTUS isn't cutting off his nose despite his face.

Squire James
@embarqhsd.net

Squire James

Anon

Congress is File 13

Aka the garbage can. If anything comes up that you want to do but do not want responsibility for, leave it up to Congress with the understanding it will not get done. If the issue becomes popular enough, then blame Congress for not doing it... and if one branch of it is held by the opposition party, blame only that part of Congress.
Tlamming
join:2001-08-21
Howell, MI

Tlamming

Member

congress? lol

Working with congress on this issue is like walking up the down escalator.