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.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Oh there’s a reason. Hotspot bypass being a big one I’d wager, the other being making it significantly harder to avoid ads

          • Kairos@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            But I can use a non Verizon phone on Verizon? Are they just trying to dissuade it because the people doing hotspot bypass are likely gonna do the research.

            Edit: oh yeah ads. Of course it’s ads.

            • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              This was for bootloader locking, not carrier locking. But yeah, they want you to buy their bullshit hotspot plan instead of just using the data you already pay for.

              • Kairos@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Of course.

                And yeah carrier locking is already illegal [if the phone is fully paid for].

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        For quite a long time now, it’s been the case that if your vendor makes this hard as is, a carrier on top of that will make it considerably worse. As an example, take a look at older Samsung devices, that all needed special-tailored roms for each carrier variant

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Pretty sure Samsung does it to appease carriers since they sell unlocked snapdragon variants elsewhere

      • BigFatNips@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        …on OEM unlocked devices that you buy upfront and pay full price for. Buy one second hand? Fuck you. Get one through a carrier? Fuck you. Get a gift from a family member who has upgraded? You guessed it, fuck you.

    • androidisking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I sent the FTC a letter asking them to look into the practices of bootloader locking. They did they they would consider looking into it