Free Press Says Verizon Breaking FCC's 700MHz Rules
This is great.
THough I doubt that the free press will win the case. It would be awesome if they did, though. I did hear that gingerbread had many tethering road blocks built in, so that may help if brought up in court.
...
The regulations were very clear that the "C-block licencee" was not permitted to close device access in any way. But, there is no language at all in the rule making that force handset makers to abide by the open access rules.
Let the war of re-interpretation begin. If Verizon can get all the handset suppliers to lock down phones at the handset level, then the whole open access stipulation turns into a phantom regulation and no longer exists.
The FCC should have clarified that all handsets sold in the US supporting that band must be unlocked as well, but they didn't.
☹️
Let the war of re-interpretation begin. If Verizon can get all the handset suppliers to lock down phones at the handset level, then the whole open access stipulation turns into a phantom regulation and no longer exists.
The FCC should have clarified that all handsets sold in the US supporting that band must be unlocked as well, but they didn't.
☹️
...
CellStudent said:
The regulations were very clear that the "C-block licencee" was not permitted to close device access in any way. But, there is no language at all in the rule making that force handset makers to abide by the open access rules.
Let the war of re-interpretation begin. If Verizon can get all the handset suppliers to lock down phones at the handset level, then the whole open access stipulation turns into a phantom regulation and no longer exists.
The FCC should have clarified that all handsets sold in the US supporting that band must be unlocked as well, but they didn't.
☹️
But, one could argue that Verizon should not be able to sell any handset that would violate the open access cla...
(continues)
...
I might be mistaken in this comment, but let me put it this way, no device manufacturer locks a phone or whatever, unless the carrier wants it. They don't automatically lock.
...
Versed said:
I might be mistaken in this comment, but let me put it this way, no device manufacturer locks a phone or whatever, unless the carrier wants it. They don't automatically lock.
Try to sell that line in Cupertino!
...
mycool said:
But, one could argue that Verizon should not be able to sell any handset that would violate the open access clause as a Verizon branded handset. In branding a handset, they are giving it their seal of approval to be used on their network.
Basically, Verizon shouldn't be liable for the manufacturer locking down a handset or application store if they don't sell the device as a branded Verizon Wireless device. If, however, Verizon is selling the device as part of their lineup, the rules should apply. Otherwise, as mentioned, this would circumvent the entire purpose of the open access rules.
That's the problem. The regulations only list what they can't do. It does not specify what ...
(continues)
...
This forum is closed.
