Judge Gives OK for Apple, AT&T Class Action Suit

[Onus]

The issue here isn't that the phone is locked, or exclusive to AT&T. The issue is that the contract is unclear. You want an iPhone, so you get a 2-year contract, planning to change to another carrier after that if the service sucks, or someone else is better/cheaper; only to discover that you can't, because of the exclusivity, which isn't described in your contract. You think it's for two years, but no, it's essentially for at least five years (if not for life) if you want to use that phone.

 

[pocketdrummer]

[citation][nom]DAK_59[/nom]They can buy unlocked phones in Europe. They have to pay full price for them. You can't get a free or discounted phone and expect to be free to move to another carrier. AT&T isn't the government. They have to pay for the phones and the network.[/citation]

You should have both options...

Buy it with a contract, or buy it UNLOCKED. You can be under contract if you already know you'll be using that service for 2 years, or you can buy it unlocked and use it wherever you want. Exclusivity should only apply to networks that offer a service you cannot have elsewhere. Unless we're talking about GSM/CDMA or 4G, this shouldn't be an issue.

 

[old_newbie]

[citation][nom]eddieroolz[/nom]This is the kind of market I want here in North America. Europe and Hong Kong does it perfectly fine - their mobile ecosystem is much healthier than ours.[/citation]

Agree, but I think DAK_59 was saying you also have to consider how much they would charge for an Iphone without a contract. In China the Iphone 3GS (without contract) was over $1,000 USD. I'm sure the price wouldn't be too different in the States (law of supply/demand).

For me, there still wouldnt be much of a choice between paying an exorbitant amount for just the Iphone and then paying for a Verizon contract on top of that...or joining AT&T for 2 years and geting an ~$800 USD discount on the phone.

 

[maestintaolius]

[citation][nom]Phyre[/nom]Why do so many people call it the iPhone 4G when it is not "4G" capable? Idiots![/citation]
Because that's an example of effective marketing by Apple, people think because it has a 4, it must be 4G.

 

[techguy378]

[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]The issue here isn't that the phone is locked, or exclusive to AT&T. The issue is that the contract is unclear. You want an iPhone, so you get a 2-year contract, planning to change to another carrier after that if the service sucks, or someone else is better/cheaper; only to discover that you can't, because of the exclusivity, which isn't described in your contract. You think it's for two years, but no, it's essentially for at least five years (if not for life) if you want to use that phone.[/citation]
Any smart person would know that when you buy a locked phone you're agreeing to exclusively use it with the carrier you bought it from. Legally in the USA a phone manufacturer has the right to permanently tie a phone to a specific carrier for as long as they want without telling you. AT&T can legally tell you that you can never, ever use that free flip phone on any other network. In most (if not all) countries that have both GSM and 2G CDMA carriers it's also legal for a phone manufacturer to make a high end smartphone running Android or Windows or any other OS that will only work on a GSM network, for example, in effect telling you that you can't take the phone to a competing CDMA carrier.