FCC to Probe Into Exclusive Wireless Contracts

[pwjone1]

Finally, the FCC is perhaps starting to wake up after all those years of slumbering away. Having been in Europe, their cell phone systems work so much better, and the choice of phones is so much larger, that I'm really surprised this took so long. I'm all for competition, but we do need the FCC to set some ground rules, which basically should include:

1. Standardizing of cell phone networks and interface standards
2. Elimination of lock-ins and lock-outs of equipment
3. Regulate Termination fees to cost+$5 processing

Let the networks then increase on price and performance, with posted drop rates and coverage maps (ala airline on-time information), including 3/4G coverage and speeds and feeds. Plenty of room for competition, so the advantages of a capitalist approach are still to be had, but without the disadavantages (lock-in, exclusive equipment contracts) that are pseudo-competition, not the real thing.

 

[thirdshop]

[citation][nom]MDillenbeck[/nom]Umm... well, to those places that avoid Pepsi products, I'd say they should start carrying them to increase business - after all, I do avoid going to those places as I am a Pepsi drinker.[/citation]
So Microsoft shouldn't bundle other peoples browsers? Off topic but similar argument.

 

[Guest]

The competition argument would only make sense if AT&T were charging more for iPhone service. As of now, the service price is the same for all 3g smart phones and is competitive with the competition. IF AT&T begins charging special charges for equal services (such as tethering) that are available without charge on other phones, there might be a real issue. For now, AT&T is not taking advantage of the exclusive right to the iPhone and this is only about those people who want an iphone without AT&T service. Some people are just unreasonable about what they want. While a cellphone might be getting close to being considered as a basic necessity, an iPhone certainly isn't. I love mine, but it is a luxury, pure and simple.

 

[hakesterman]

I think it is very sad that you have to choose ATT&T if you want an Iphone. ATT&T have
the highest rates in the buisness and they don't have the best service to go with that
price. I disagree with the person who said going to Tacobell and only haveing the choise
of Coke products is different, it is the same exact deal. It's all a bunch of marketing crap
that we should no longer have to deal with. If i want a Pepsi instead or an Iphone with
Verizon or Tmobile i should beable to have it. The government is already looking into this
along with the contract penalty fee's, this might be a back breaking year for the cell phone
company's, i would love to see it happen, they deserve it after all the crap they have inflicted
upon us.

 

[jungleboogiemonster]

Would anyone think it's a good idea that you have to buy your computer from a certain ISP and it would only work with that ISP? Of course not! So why can cell providers do it?

 

[Guest]

Allowing the cellular providers to lock in cell phones so that they can only be used on their network is like having to buy a TV that only works if you use a specific cable TV provider. Or forcing users to buy PCs that only work on the ISP you've signed up for.

Would we put up with that ? Why do we put up with this on cell phones ?