Long-term carrier lock-in could soon be a thing of the past in America after the FCC proposed requiring telcos to unlock cellphones from their networks 60 days after activation.

FCC boss Jessica Rosenworcel put out that proposal on Thursday, saying it would encourage competition between carriers. If subscribers could simply walk off to another telco with their handsets after two months of use, networks would have to do a lot more competing, the FCC reasons.

“When you buy a phone, you should have the freedom to decide when to change service to the carrier you want and not have the device you own stuck by practices that prevent you from making that choice,” Rosenworcel said.

Carrier-locked devices contain software mechanisms that prevent them from being used on other providers’ networks. The practice has long been criticized for being anti-consumer.

  • nooneescapesthelaw@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t really see why people are against it, personally I never buy locked devices but they are usually a chunk cheaper and there is always an option for a locked device.

    If telecoms were making certain phones exclusively locked (as in not selling unlocked phones) it would be a problem. But rn it seems that it is an easy way to save money if you like a carrier.

    • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      okay but you end up paying more - if it was just normal data plan and cost of phone it would be even, but there’s also something paid to middleman that provides something that is effectively credit and extortion services like simlock and some legal thingies, it might have smaller downpayment but it’s not this, see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory

      this is on top of various security and privacy implications of using a phone which you can’t legally reflash

      • Bimbleby@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        In Denmark you get two options, you can buy an unlocked phone with cash. Or purchase a subscription with it, and the provider gives you some incentive for it. The subscription is locked for 6 months which is the max by law.

        If I buy a phone with the subscription, the discount means you would usually pay 80% of the phones value.

        That locks you to a subscription for 6 months that is usually more expensive than the other offers out there, but the difference doesn’t make up for the reduced price of the phone over the 6 month period.

        So you are actually saving money, as long as you remember to switch to a cheaper subscription after the 6 months pass. The telecom of course hopes you don’t, and that’s their incentive for taking a hit on profit in the short term. It buys them marketshare.

      • nooneescapesthelaw@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Boots theory doesn’t really apply because it is the exact same phone/hardware. Plus most people don’t really care about reflashing their phone.

        As for the privacy stuff I don’t really know much about it in the context of locked phones so I’ll take your word for it.

        • n2burns@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think it’s more of a corollary that phone companies can incentivize people to buy more than they need. I live in Canada, where carrier locks have been outlawed for a decade, so we don’t typically get $100s off the phone, but they do often give interest free financing. This pushes people to get a brand new, top-of-the-line Galaxy or iPhone, when all they do is simple stuff that any basic smartphone could do. They just get used to paying “only an extra $50/mo” so once that phone is paid off, they finance a brand new, top-of-the-line smartphone.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      The problem is that you don’t get to have a cheaper plan whether or not you own your own phone. Same monthly cost if you get their free phone under lease, or if you bring your own phone.

      • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        If you buy your phone unlocked, you can get Red Pocket which is extremely cheap for service compared to most post paid plans. You can get ~5gb data and unlimited everything else for 20 a month on AT&T. And then if you go to Europe you can just buy a cheap Sim while there and pop it in.

        If you’re not picky about the phone, I have gotten sub 300 USD phones for the last 2, first lasted 4 years and I’m about 6 months into the second. Honestly there’s not much I feel like I’m missing, except spending way more money.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’m very good with electronics (repairs and care). I’m on an unlocked Note 20 ultra I bought used in early 2021 and it’s still in flawless condition. Not parting with it anytime soon and already replaced the battery in it so it would keep going.

          Issue with things like mint or rocket is that you get bumped down in priority as soon as towers get a bit congested. I’m paying more, but I like having unlimited data and 40 or 50 GB of hotspot a month.