Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Your phone or theirs?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Your phone or theirs?

    As usual, our 'representatives' in DC are looking out for you...not.

    New law makes 'unlocking' cell phones to switch carriers punishable by fines and even prison | Mail Online

    On the one hand, I see fairness to allowing a carrier to seek redress against a customer who obtains a *discounted* new phone in exchange for a subscription term and then have the consumer unlock the phone, break the contract and go to a genuine competitor in bad faith. Then again, they already had remedies for this such as hitting you for breach fees.

    In other countries, they've already been long at work with consumer protection concerns as much as protecting legitimate interests of the carriers, e.g.,

    . . . The Copyright Office in the U.S. found that because there are now unlocked phones widely available to consumers, there was no longer a need to make the practice of unlocking phones a legal one, as they only people who would still be unlocking their phones would be the ones doing it as breach of contract.

    Now, customers will need permission from their carriers in order to unlock a device. Some U.S. carriers like T-Mobile sell unlocked phones, while others like AT&T will let you unlock your phone at the end of your contract.

    As for what this means for Canadians, it looks like we’re pretty safe. The unlocking of cell phones in Canada is deemed a legal practice based on Bill C-343 or the ‘Cell Phone Freedom Act.’ According to the act, any phone can be legally unlocked in Canada at the end of a service contract by the provider, free of charge, if the phone was bought at a discounted rate (which is how many of us get out smartphones in Canada). If you don’t enter into a contract for at least six months or if you pay the full price of the phone, the provider must remove any network lock free of charge at your request. . . .
    Yahoo! News Canada - Latest News & Headlines

    Besides the fact that the decision was premised on lazy and sloppy generalisations, personally I'm getting way too tired of 'copyright' claims that really go steps too far. If I buy a phone, it's ultimately mine and I should only be held to terms of reasonable contracts that aren't unconscionable, disrespectful of reciprocal consumer investments and ownership interests, and/or against public policy.

    For example, IMO it's perfectly reasonable and in the interests of public policy that if I want a phone unlocked for a quick business or holiday trip abroad that I be permitted to do that. If someone legitimately moves abroad without original bad faith intent concerning an agreement, they should be able to unlock a phone and terminate an agreement upon payment of a release fee. And moreover, if there is no contractual obligation in place because the terms have expired, I see absolutely no legitimate reason that I cannot unlock a phone or even have it legally required that they unlock it. And there should be no reason whatsoever for a phone purchased at full price to be locked.

    Contract and copyright law is premised on good faith and fair dealings, and it's abused here IMO and gives way too much power for carriers to control the average consumers. I'm sure they'll be up to more ways to maximise this new advantage. They already have way too much power and influence as it is due to lack of competition and lobby power.

    For example, ever gotten sticker shock if roaming abroad? The EU already has regulations in place that helped resolve unfair and excessive charges and practices for roaming:

    European Commission roaming regulations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    For example, you're entitled to a carrier text message informing you of the costs of your phone use, e.g., price per minute, text and data. You can't be charged for receiving texts. After all, how can you control that if someone spams the crap out of you when roaming? You can set caps and carrier updates on roaming use. Best of all and far the most important, there is a set schedule for roaming fees so carriers can't excessively charge you for usage in an unconscionable manner.

    But, I'm sure you're surprised, we don't have these kinds of consumer protections here yet. I wonder why...hmmm.
    Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 01-26-2013, 05:10 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Your phone or theirs?

    Yeah your title says as much insofar as hitting the nail on the head, is it your phone or the manufacturer's property? Some of it likely is covered under contract law given some of the way some companies (*cough* the ones beginning with the letter "V") operate, and they already have plenty of existing law to cover late payment / early break / absconding / flee breaches and or violations of contract without needing to tag along this but it is a better option that what they have coming down the pipe line of "locking down" all phones up to and inclusive of 24 month(s) of contract for such penalties.

    However i do believe that it does now need to be worded in stone the phone is yours to do as you wish once the contract is up even though that is assumed anyway but the copyright and patent infringement arguments made in favor of restricting the unlocking of a phone are total BS. Eventually this will come to a head with contracts being sim / tariff only and people just being the phone outright if companies carry on like this and unless they can get super deals that only cost them like 10 to 15 bucks a month like i can they will just pay the few hundred buck mark up and the 20 to 25 a month for no phone, deal.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: Your phone or theirs?

      Originally posted by Chloe View Post
      . . . (*cough* the ones beginning with the letter "V") operate, . . .
      You mean Verizon? Oh no...saintly buggers who are always concerned with the consumer. What's already mostly redundant about this yet another new pro-mobile carrier ruling is that Big Red is a CDMA carrier and has its 'global' phones built to include only foreign GSM bands so you either can't use them or at least cannot use them at 3G-4G speeds on AT&T or T-Mobile in the US. It's therefore usually a waste of time to attempt using them on those competing networks. I don't have a problem with companies constructing phones that aren't designed to work on competitor networks...that's common sense and you know that when you buy them. This new 'crime' just goes to show, however, who the government really works for when you see how US mobile consumers are treated compared to others abroad where such referenced governments actually think and give a shit about fairness and the interests of the consumer too.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: Your phone or theirs?

        Right! For all the "They serve Wall Street" nonsense, nobody who has any beef with government should let the phone companies get away without blame. It is like Congress is scared to speak out against Verizon which runs the whole shtick, and again people who think the GOP are afraid to talk out against the NRA or Democrats are beholden to the abortion lobby etc, at least that is partisan one way or another. Cell phone and telecommunication companies lobby so well that they are pretty much fine with whichever candidate wins in every single race! I am still yet to see a single individual in Congress ever go up against Verizon.

        I think the whole idea of having the CDMA incompatibility on faster 4G networks within the US is intentional ; then combine that with data caps and limits on Verizon now put on almost every single customer and the loss of unlimited plans and now everyone knows how it is Verizon plan to make money again at a very sharp rate now that the regulation on unfair roaming policies will kick in. The EU for once has got it right on unfair practices on charging you for receiving text messages for roaming but to be fair its not just because it may potentially SPAM you but there is no need to even connect to the carrier's own communication system once the message leaves a message command center from the other person. There is no justified reason to charge people for receiving texts. Or maybe that is just me sounding like i hate phone companies. You make the call lol.

        In regards to stopping people from shafting phone copyrights and patents this is where the unseen damage of what Samsung did comes in ; instead of a Federal judge barring all sales of the Siii, no Apple went straight to the head regulatory agencies to get round the whole deal and now every single company is in likely to have to comply with such measures to prevent phone unlocking leading to the theft of copyrighted and protected data and patents.

        I figure you both were trying to talk about that the other day and figure out whether it was the right way for you to go on your new phone ; please accept my apologies on how loud and noisy it was in the background, didn't mean to make the place sound like one big wild orgy.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: Your phone or theirs?

          I never liked the vendor lock of hardware.

          I bought my current phone (Samsung Galaxy Note 2) at an electronics shop with no contract. Even then you get some crap from Samsung on it, but at least Samsung allows root acces so I control the device and I can put whatever software/OS I want on it.

          I will never buy any vendor-locked device like a Windows RT machine or anything made by Apple or Sony.



          I don't understand why we let companies get away with it. And sure as hell don't understand why our governements should be supporting this.



          Also see this previous posts by me on this topic http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/abor...ature-ps3.html

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: Your phone or theirs?

            I must admit this surprises me when I found out you can't unlock a phone. I'm not a phone kind of guy and have only had 3 including my beloved old Nokia 3310 but as far as I know I'm free to stick any sim card I like in them. I can maybe see a case for locking if you're on a contract but pay as you go the phone is yours to do with as you please.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: Your phone or theirs?

              While Condition
              Wend

              This conditional loop structure had been around since Fred Flintstone and guess who is still trying to patent it in order to put other software development companies out of business?
              Microsoft, of course.
              And somewhere there's a well paid-off jurist who will allow the case to go to trial.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: Your phone or theirs?

                Originally posted by erikvv View Post
                I never liked the vendor lock of hardware.

                I bought my current phone (Samsung Galaxy Note 2) at an electronics shop with no contract. Even then you get some crap from Samsung on it, but at least Samsung allows root acces so I control the device and I can put whatever software/OS I want on it.

                I will never buy any vendor-locked device like a Windows RT machine or anything made by Apple or Sony.



                I don't understand why we let companies get away with it. And sure as hell don't understand why our governements should be supporting this.



                Also see this previous posts by me on this topic http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/abor...ature-ps3.html
                The vast majority of consumers, by far, will never make use of the 'root' or 'other OS' features or other advanced features, much less the vast multitude of the other unlocked features the device offers. Some techies with the background or inclination will, so in reality this is a limitation that only applies to those few.

                I can see where an unpopular carrier tries to grow their market share with special phones and pricing, only to have the techie around the corner crack the phone open for a nominal fee and have the carriers new subscriber flee to their competitor and lose their discounting expense without a mean for making that money back.

                That being said, and being a bit of a techie myself, I find it objectionable that the device that I purchased, whether on on contract or outright doesn't matter, isn't 100% in my control, should I chose to exercise that control. I paid for the hardware, it's mine to do with as I see fit. I may not get support on the changes that I made, but I take on that responsibility when I make the changes.

                The exception would be that a cell phone is on lease (or any other device for that matter), in which case, I really don't own the phone, but I am leasing it from the carrier, and therefore have limited control over the hardware, which isn't paid for and mine.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: Your phone or theirs?

                  Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
                  While Condition
                  Wend

                  This conditional loop structure had been around since Fred Flintstone and guess who is still trying to patent it in order to put other software development companies out of business?
                  Microsoft, of course.
                  And somewhere there's a well paid-off jurist who will allow the case to go to trial.
                  Source?

                  Ofcourse you can write a while loop easily using GOTO. Or is that patented also?

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: Your phone or theirs?

                    Hey now...if you throw Iphone into the mix then you doubly don't own your phone.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: Your phone or theirs?

                      I must be contrarian on this issue.

                      With the heavy subsidies the operating companies provide on these, the most expensive smart phones, you are, of all intents and purposes buying the phone on time... taking out a loan as it were.

                      And like many many things bought with a loan the borrower sets requirements as to what you can and cannot do with this property.

                      Car loans require that you do not modify car beyond 'manufacturers standards' Home loans have very similar requirements.

                      So... who owns your car?

                      Now go to the Apple Store, buy an iPhone outright, and yes, you should be able to do with it as you wish. And you can... because you didn't sign a contract otherwise. And spent 650.00 for it. Not 199.00 down and 24 months to pay it off.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: Your phone or theirs?

                        Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
                        While Condition
                        Wend

                        This conditional loop structure had been around since Fred Flintstone and guess who is still trying to patent it in order to put other software development companies out of business?
                        Microsoft, of course.
                        And somewhere there's a well paid-off jurist who will allow the case to go to trial.
                        I wonder how long is the longest you have ever gone without mentioning Microsoft.
                        Last edited by Whipple; 01-27-2013, 09:37 AM.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: Your phone or theirs?

                          Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                          I must be contrarian on this issue.

                          With the heavy subsidies the operating companies provide on these, the most expensive smart phones, you are, of all intents and purposes buying the phone on time... taking out a loan as it were.

                          And like many many things bought with a loan the borrower sets requirements as to what you can and cannot do with this property.

                          Car loans require that you do not modify car beyond 'manufacturers standards' Home loans have very similar requirements.

                          So... who owns your car?

                          Now go to the Apple Store, buy an iPhone outright, and yes, you should be able to do with it as you wish. And you can... because you didn't sign a contract otherwise. And spent 650.00 for it. Not 199.00 down and 24 months to pay it off.
                          I don't disagree with you in principle but in practice cell phone carriers already cover this in their contracts.

                          I just don't see any real reason why the government has to add penalties on top of the contract's own; particularly when they're so punitive. $500,000 and jail time is absurd!

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: Your phone or theirs?

                            Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                            I must be contrarian on this issue.

                            With the heavy subsidies the operating companies provide on these, the most expensive smart phones, you are, of all intents and purposes buying the phone on time... taking out a loan as it were.

                            And like many many things bought with a loan the borrower sets requirements as to what you can and cannot do with this property.

                            Car loans require that you do not modify car beyond 'manufacturers standards' Home loans have very similar requirements.

                            So... who owns your car?

                            Now go to the Apple Store, buy an iPhone outright, and yes, you should be able to do with it as you wish. And you can... because you didn't sign a contract otherwise. And spent 650.00 for it. Not 199.00 down and 24 months to pay it off.
                            No, you don't own your Iphone, even if you buy it outright. Apple lets you use their product.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: Your phone or theirs?

                              Originally posted by Whipple View Post
                              I wonder how long is the longest you have ever gone without mentioning Microsoft.
                              Pretty long time, actually, as it is no longer relevant other than the nonsense it brought to bear in the world of modern litigation.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X