Reps Introduce Bipartisan Bill To Legalize Mobile Device Unlocking 133
New submitter tomservo84 writes "It seems some people in the House of Reps have their heads screwed on straight. A bill would 'make it permanently legal for consumers to unlock their mobile devices, and consumers would not be required to obtain permission from their carrier before switching to a new carrier.' 'This bill reflects the way we use this technology in our everyday lives,' Rep. Lofgren said. 'Americans should not be subject to fines and criminal liability for merely unlocking devices and media they legally purchased. If consumers are not violating copyright or some other law, there's little reason to hold back the benefits of unlocking so people can continue using their devices.' Now, what chance does this have of actually passing?"
A bit late (Score:5, Interesting)
This bill would have never passed when it actually meant something to consumers. With the plethora of unlocked devices available on the market, T-Mobile has already begun offering favorable deals on no-contract plans where you pay for your own device, so it's only a matter of time before the rest follow suit. If this actually does pass, it just means that the financial incentive to the phone companies was simply too small to justify the cost of supporting a lobby against it.
way beyond cellphones (Score:5, Interesting)
This bill goes way beyond cellphones. According to the summary posted on the linked article, the bill's text "makes clear that it is not a violation to circumvent a technological measure if the purpose of the circumvention is to use a work in a manner that is not an infringement of copyright." In other words, it neuters the infamous anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA!
Re:No chance of passing (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Paying off a subsidy that's already paid off (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:No chance of passing (Score:2, Interesting)
Re GITMO: Obama had control of the Senate and House for 2 years, plus he can submit an Executive Order. Don't blame anybody but Obama and the Dems if you think GITMO should be closed.
Only partially correct. The opposition to moving GITMO detainees to the United States for trial was widespread and came from both parties. The Senate voted 90-6 to block all funding associated with moving any GITMO prisoners to the US. Blame the Democrats, sure, but also blame the Republicans. Almost nobody in the Senate was willing to see GITMO closed. (See the Associated Press story [webcitation.org].)
And please, let's put that canard about "control of the Senate and House" to bed. Remember that it takes 60 votes to do anything in the Senate, not 50, if there is even one member of the opposition willing at assert a fillibuster. And Republicans used the filibuster a record number of times in 2009 and 2010. According to the American Enterprise Institute:
"Republicans have ratcheted use of the filibuster up to completely unheard of levels. Look at the things that the House (of Representatives) has passed that can't make it through the Senate. The list just keeps growing," said Norman Ornstein, an expert on Congress at the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right policy organization.
(source [mcclatchydc.com])
The chart accompanying that article shows 112 cloture votes (used to try to end a filibuster) in 2009. The previous record was 61. Blaming Obama and the Democrats for anything on the excuse that they could have passed Program X when they controlled the House and Senate is flatly untrue. At no time during the Obama administration did the Democrats ever have functional control of the House and Senate.