White House supports unlocking smart phones
March 6, 2013 1:01 pm Leave your thoughts
In response to a petition on its website the received over 114,300 digital signatures, the White House took a public stance in favor of smart phone users being able to "unlock" or "jailbreak" their devices as long as they are not still signed to a service agreement. Under the current law, users are banned from manipulating their phones so as to allow them to switch their carriers, a process that has always fallen in shady legal water, which earned the practice its nicknames.
The petition, entitled "Make Unlocking Cell Phones Legal," was reformed after the Library of Congress – the governing body of this particular branch of copyright regulations – made a ruling that classified unlocking such devices as a violation of the manufacturer's copyright. When the law was passed, there was immediate outcry from smart phone users across the country who claimed that such restrictions were unfair to users and limited them from exploring the entirety of the market while bound to what is often a very expensive device. In its response, the White House agreed.
"If you have paid for your mobile device, and aren't bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network," White House spokesperson David Edelman wrote on the White House website. "It's common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers' needs."
With new technologies entering the marketplace, there is an ongoing debate between users and manufacturers over how much control a company has over a device once it is purchased by a consumer, particularly as it pertains to a service agreement. Companies in Arizona looking to incorporate more technology in the workplace should contact a Phoenix business law attorney to ensure they're operating within the manufacturers' copyright agreements.
Categorised in: Business Law
This post was written by