Lets see what everyone thinks about this one. That is for everyone who does not have cingular already. This is a direct quote which also gives sec. numbers from this site.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1170410587623.
So What this means is that because the phone is being sold in two locations. They can not stop you from unlocking the phones network. Cingular knows this and that is why they are trying to get everyone to sign a two year contract. It is the only way to keep people from going to a new carrier. So unless Apple is going to have you sign the contract in the Apple store you can also get this phone out right with no contract. But if you do not have a GSM network I do not think you should try this. Because this is a GSM phone. So remember do not sign any contract that you do not think you can get out of. Tell Me what you think? Good find or not?
THE CELLULAR PHONE INDUSTRY
Prior to this ruling, mobile service providers were using software locks to block user access to operating software and firmware embedded inside mobile phones. These locks prevented cellular users from switching existing phones from their current mobile carrier to a competitor's network. This was particularly problematic for users who traveled, because most mobile carriers only provide cellular service in certain geographical areas. Consequently, if a cell phone user wanted to switch from one carrier to another, the user oftentimes had to either (1) voilate the DMCA by circumventing the locking software to access the computer program that allows the phone to operate (mobile firmware) or (2) buy a new phone from the new carrier.
In at least one instance, a mobile service provider has enforced its rights under Section §1201(a)(1) of the DMCA by filing suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. See TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. Sol Wireless Group, Inc., No. 05-23279-CIV (S.D. Fla., Feb. 28, 2006). In that suit, TracFone, a prepaid wireless company, alleged, among other things, that the defendants "avoided, bypassed, removed, disabled, deactivated, or impaired a technological measure for effectively controlling access to the proprietary software within the TracFone Prepaid Software without TracFone's authority." The case ultimately resulted in a permanent injunction in TracFone's favor.
Oddly enough, however, TracFone and most other major mobile service providers failed to provide their timely comments in response to the Librarian's public Notice of Inquiry. Only one opponent of the proposed exemption submitted timely comments. Meanwhile, numerous proponents of the exemption submitted timely comments which were entered into the record. The lack of attention on the part of the mobile service providers, however, should not be interpreted to mean that the exemption is of no consequence to the mobile phone industry. To the contrary, the results of the cell phone exemption on the industry and consumers will be significant.
RESULT OF CELL PHONE EXEMPTION
The result of this exemption is good news for cellular users. No longer will users be faced with an unpleasant choice of either (1) voilating the DMCA or (2) having to buy a new phone.
Now, users can legally unlock their cellular phones. Unlocking a cell phone allows a consumer to keep their current phone while changing service providers. Because cellular users can now easily switch from one carrier to another, there will be increased competition amongst service providers. Increased competition should cause prices for cellular service to stabilize or drop and also encourage providers to provide better service.
Timothy C. Meece is a partner and senior shareholder of Banner & Witcoff, and Aseet Patel is an associate at the firm. They are located at the firm's Chicago office and may be reached at tmeece@bannerwitcoff.com and apatel@bannerwitcoff.com. i>
Law.com's ongoing LEGAL MINDS article series highlights opinion and analysis from our site's contributors and writers across the ALM network of publications.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1170410587623.
So What this means is that because the phone is being sold in two locations. They can not stop you from unlocking the phones network. Cingular knows this and that is why they are trying to get everyone to sign a two year contract. It is the only way to keep people from going to a new carrier. So unless Apple is going to have you sign the contract in the Apple store you can also get this phone out right with no contract. But if you do not have a GSM network I do not think you should try this. Because this is a GSM phone. So remember do not sign any contract that you do not think you can get out of. Tell Me what you think? Good find or not?
THE CELLULAR PHONE INDUSTRY
Prior to this ruling, mobile service providers were using software locks to block user access to operating software and firmware embedded inside mobile phones. These locks prevented cellular users from switching existing phones from their current mobile carrier to a competitor's network. This was particularly problematic for users who traveled, because most mobile carriers only provide cellular service in certain geographical areas. Consequently, if a cell phone user wanted to switch from one carrier to another, the user oftentimes had to either (1) voilate the DMCA by circumventing the locking software to access the computer program that allows the phone to operate (mobile firmware) or (2) buy a new phone from the new carrier.
In at least one instance, a mobile service provider has enforced its rights under Section §1201(a)(1) of the DMCA by filing suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. See TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. Sol Wireless Group, Inc., No. 05-23279-CIV (S.D. Fla., Feb. 28, 2006). In that suit, TracFone, a prepaid wireless company, alleged, among other things, that the defendants "avoided, bypassed, removed, disabled, deactivated, or impaired a technological measure for effectively controlling access to the proprietary software within the TracFone Prepaid Software without TracFone's authority." The case ultimately resulted in a permanent injunction in TracFone's favor.
Oddly enough, however, TracFone and most other major mobile service providers failed to provide their timely comments in response to the Librarian's public Notice of Inquiry. Only one opponent of the proposed exemption submitted timely comments. Meanwhile, numerous proponents of the exemption submitted timely comments which were entered into the record. The lack of attention on the part of the mobile service providers, however, should not be interpreted to mean that the exemption is of no consequence to the mobile phone industry. To the contrary, the results of the cell phone exemption on the industry and consumers will be significant.
RESULT OF CELL PHONE EXEMPTION
The result of this exemption is good news for cellular users. No longer will users be faced with an unpleasant choice of either (1) voilating the DMCA or (2) having to buy a new phone.
Now, users can legally unlock their cellular phones. Unlocking a cell phone allows a consumer to keep their current phone while changing service providers. Because cellular users can now easily switch from one carrier to another, there will be increased competition amongst service providers. Increased competition should cause prices for cellular service to stabilize or drop and also encourage providers to provide better service.
Timothy C. Meece is a partner and senior shareholder of Banner & Witcoff, and Aseet Patel is an associate at the firm. They are located at the firm's Chicago office and may be reached at tmeece@bannerwitcoff.com and apatel@bannerwitcoff.com. i>
Law.com's ongoing LEGAL MINDS article series highlights opinion and analysis from our site's contributors and writers across the ALM network of publications.
