Carriers fight plan to require unlocking of phones 60 days after activation.

T-Mobile and AT&T say US regulators should drop a plan to require unlocking of phones within 60 days of activation, claiming that locking phones to a carrier’s network makes it possible to provide cheaper handsets to consumers. “If the Commission mandates a uniform unlocking policy, it is consumers—not providers—who stand to lose the most,” T-Mobile alleged in an October 17 filing with the Federal Communications Commission.

The proposed rule has support from consumer advocacy groups who say it will give users more choice and lower their costs. T-Mobile has been criticized for locking phones for up to a year, which makes it impossible to use a phone on a rival’s network. T-Mobile claims that with a 60-day unlocking rule, “consumers risk losing access to the benefits of free or heavily subsidized handsets because the proposal would force providers to reduce the line-up of their most compelling handset offers.”

  • Fester@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    9 hours ago

    “consumers risk losing access to the benefits of free or heavily subsidized handsets because the proposal would force providers to reduce the line-up of their most compelling handset offers.”

    I can’t stress this enough: It’s almost always cheaper to pay full price for a phone, plus a pay-over-time fee through your credit card if needed, and use a prepaid MVNO instead of a major carrier.

    So what they really mean is “we risk losing profits on our inflated rates if we can’t trap customers in our overpriced plans and play games with their bills.”

    • logicbomb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Honestly, it is such an obvious lie, too. Can companies really just lie in their filings to the FTC?

      • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        They can, they do and they won’t stop.

        They will also lie right to your face

        They lie when advertising

        Companies lie. They need to lie. If they don’t lie, and actually told the truth…they wouldn’t be in business anymore.

    • r00ty@kbin.life
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Here in the UK, it generally used to be 1 year, then moved to 18 month, then two year “contracts” (that are essentially paying for the phone). They will of course (if you don’t realise) continue to charge you the increased price after you’ve paid for your phone…

      Recently I was looking at upgrading, almost clicked confirm on a price that seemed suspicious. Until I saw “48 month contract”

      Nope. Bought the phone outright, interest free credit over 1 year (I’m done with that in 3 more months). A few months later, swapped to one of the “virtual” networks we have here. £8 per month (first 3 £3), unlimited/unlimited/30GB data (I don’t need much), plus roaming to Europe (a frequent destination of mine) included.

      100% here it works out a LOT cheaper not to buy through the provider. I have no doubt it’s the same pretty much everywhere too.