Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Your favorite Apple, iPhone, iPad, iOS, Jailbreak, and Cydia site.


Thread: Will the FCC Divorce AT&T from Apple?

  1. #1
    MMi Staff Writer Michael Essany's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Valparaiso, Indiana
    Posts
    3,852
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked 1,482 Times in 568 Posts

    Default Will the FCC Divorce AT&T from Apple?

    Image via iPhoneBuzz.com

    AT&T can't have it both ways.

    On Friday, AT&T sent a letter to the FCC accusing Google of violating the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules. But AT&T doesn't see its one-way relationship with Apple's iPhone as a violation of the same.

    FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, however, is dropping hints that he does.

    From the SFC this weekend:
    In his "network neutrality" speech this week, Genachowski did not talk explicitly about exclusive deals between handset makers and carriers. But what he did say could lay the foundation for unprecedented and, for a group of market-oriented scholars, unneeded FCC regulation of wireless vendor contracts.
    The obvious implications of such rules would likely impact future "exclusive arrangements" in the mobile world. But many are speculating that this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back. And by "camel's back," I mean the cozy partnership between Apple and AT&T for the iPhone.

    The comprehensive article from the SFC raises a host of questions about the plausibility of regulatory policy restricting exclusive contracts. Andrew Jay Schwartzman, president of Media Access Project, responded to the FCC chief's speech by telling Bloomberg News that "The iPhone can't be exclusive under a true net neutrality regime."

    On the other hand, Ryan Radia, an information policy analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), is quoted in the SFC piece saying that exclusivity can't be ruled out, especially if the agreement "doesn't carry provisions that would conflict with whatever the final network neutrality rules might be."

    "[Deals may be legal] so long as the deals do not prevent a consumer from accessing the content of their choice," he says. But, if Apple and AT&T allowed access to only a subset of applications or services, such a practice would likely be illegal.
    Although it is entirely too early to speculate if yet-to-be formulated rules and regulations will ultimately make deals like that between Apple and AT&T a thing of the past, it's far more likely that the open access requirement of a growing number of networks (like Verizon's LTE 4G network) will do more to open this highly competitive market than any rules and regs ultimately can... or should in a free market.

  2. #2
    Retired Moderator one1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In my own little world
    Posts
    10,318
    Thanks
    349
    Thanked 1,180 Times in 730 Posts

    When you get greedy, one bad apple (PUN) spoils the whole damn bunch. Forever more.......... regulated.
    Screw #Winning, I'm #Juanning
    iMac 27" i5 quad 2.8Ghz (1TB), MacBook Pro 17" 2.6, iPhone 4s

  3. #3
    This is getting very interesting...
    If I helped you, hit the button or be Banned!

    Download Macbook 3.1 for Winterboard-Now LIVE on Cydia-Macbook Final, Macbook Final Widget,Macbook SBSettings
    Need Hardware Repair Support?: PM ME

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Melech518 For This Useful Post:

    Melloout (09-27-2009)

  5. #4
    Fuk the FCC like peter say in family guy it's side boob hour

  6. #5
    Custom Title angiepangie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Golden State :)
    Posts
    3,844
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 222 Times in 211 Posts

    Oh the drama!
    I always feel sorry for the guy in the iPhone commercials. He always gets a call right in the middle of trying to do something

  7. #6
    The FCC shouldn't regulate the exclusive deals between Handset makers and the carriers but maybe should institute a mandatory unlock of the exclusive handset after a set period of time, at the end of the subscribers contract, etc.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to eremeya For This Useful Post:

    cpotoso (09-27-2009)

  9. #7
    MMi's "X" Member awesomeSlayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Dragonspiral Tower in 3DS
    Posts
    4,524
    Thanks
    114
    Thanked 347 Times in 259 Posts

    Hmm...Interesting and delicious
    Asking for help is different from being stupid. Fanboys can rot in @#$%!

  10. #8
    My iPhone is a Part of Me
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    951
    Thanks
    56
    Thanked 81 Times in 64 Posts

    I don't see how the FCC can force Apple to sell the iPhone on other carriers. By selling the iPhone on AT&T alone, Apple makes a higher profit on each phone. If they were to sell on another carrier, neither carrier would pay as high of a subsidy, and Apple would make less. Unless the FCC is willing to pay the difference, that's not fair.

    And even if Apple would make the same profit, how can you force a company to sell their devices to someone else? If you own a store, you have the right not to deny customers. Why can't Apple deny other carriers?
    Does this rag smell like chloroform to you?

    If I helped you, be sure to press the Thanks! button over there ->
    If I didn't, press it anyway.

  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by xchemical View Post
    Fuk the FCC like peter say in family guy it's side boob hour
    lol "what is this....thats MY side boob!

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to playboii For This Useful Post:

    inzandity (09-27-2009)

  13. #10
    The way I see is that I don't think is fair at all how at&t is playing the whole thing. is more like a monopoly run by At&t. I hope the FCC do Divorce AT&T from Apple.
    [SIhttp://modmyi.com/forums/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=2631011&dateline=1251 526432GPIC][/SIGPIC]

  14. #11
    Green Apple
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    38
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    To be fair, phones should all be unlocked. You buy the phone so it is yours and it should be your right to do whatever da heck you want with it.

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to khiphone3g For This Useful Post:

    b3nny (09-29-2009), cpotoso (09-27-2009), Melloout (09-27-2009)

  16. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by khiphone3g View Post
    To be fair, phones should all be unlocked. You buy the phone so it is yours and it should be your right to do whatever da heck you want with it.

    alright so you want to pay the actual price of the phone and not the lowered price if you're on a contract?

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to gotjpeg For This Useful Post:

    MaxRabbit (09-28-2009)

  18. #13
    Livin the iPhone Life tudtran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Foco, Colorado
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 39 Times in 30 Posts

    Quote Originally Posted by V.A.M.P View Post
    The way I see is that I don't think is fair at all how at&t is playing the whole thing. is more like a monopoly run by At&t. I hope the FCC do Divorce AT&T from Apple.
    Good point. Since U.S. is allowed GSM and CDMA services. I think Apple should dealing with the other half.

  19. #14
    Every phone AT&T sells can be unlocked, just by calling AT&T. Excluding the iPhone. This should be illegal. The iPhone is no different. It is a subsidized phone just like the rest. If any thing AT&T & Apple should be required to unlock the iPhone.
    I agree to a 2yr contract, pay my fees, the phone is mine to do with as I please. At any time, whether I end the contract early or not, I should be able to use that device any way I see fit. The contract is for me to keep service with them. No where does it say I have to use the phone I bought for the term of the contract.
    The US carriers are screwing the consumers & we keep letting them.
    Last edited by Cokeman; 09-27-2009 at 06:33 AM.
    If I can't mod it...I don't want it.

  20. #15
    "So the FCC won't let me be
    or let me be me, so let me see
    They try to shut me down on AT&T...."

    so anyways... No I definitely don't agree with the FCC getting involved, because there are plenty of devices that are specific to carriers... Look at the palm pre for instance
    Is my girlfriend the only one that gets mad at me because I spend too much time with my iPhone?

  21. #16
    Is this all a moot point ? I thought AT&T's exclusive rights to the iphone were ending next year . I for one would love to switch carriers but I dont think the the FCC can or would do anything to stop AT&T .

  22. #17
    iPhone? More like MyPhone DayumQuitPlayin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fayetteville, NC
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 37 Times in 21 Posts

    IMO I feel the FCC should do something. This exclusivity deal between AT&T and Apple has gone long enough. With all the lawsuits, customers complaining about the 3G shortages, dropped calls.. it's about time for Apple to start opening doors and give us more options. It has taken Apple and AT&T 2 years to finally get MMS on the iPhone? That's ridiculous.

    I still have my 1st gen iPhone and AT&T still will not unlock it when I asked. 2G, 3G, 3GS.. we're on the 3rd generation iPhone and I cannot unlock my first one? That's just ridiculous. I paid the full retail price of that phone and I feel I should be able to do whatever I want with it since it is a product I've purchased.

    Because of all this.. I absolutely HATE AT&T, just hate them. It's time for a change, seriously.

  23. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by gotjpeg View Post
    alright so you want to pay the actual price of the phone and not the lowered price if you're on a contract?

    Not that way. The phone should be UNLOCKED, but if you break out of the contract you pay the termination fee (or wait until the end of the contract). The device itself should be yours to do as you please (as mine is).

  24. #19
    Default nope
    Quote Originally Posted by khiphone3g View Post
    To be fair, phones should all be unlocked. You buy the phone so it is yours and it should be your right to do whatever da heck you want with it.
    I dont think you understand the subsidizing cell phone idea. The reason these companies lock their phones is to sell you it at a more attractive price.

    Now not enabling the customer to unlock their phone after the company has made money back on the phone is completly OUTRAGEOUS! And then they have the nerve to try to make jailbreaking illegal?? F U A(T T)P P L E!

  25. #20
    To whoever asked about when the contract with AT&T ends, it's 5 years from when the first iPhone was released. So we're about halfway there.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •