The settlement covers all customers who bought Sprint phones between Aug. 28, 1999, and July 16, 2007. It should allow those phones to be switched to competitors whose networks are compatible with Sprint's, such as Verizon Wireless and Alltel Corp.The settlement is a victory for consumers, and will hopefully nudge other carriers towards releasing their own codes. Similar class actions have been filed against T-Mobile, Apple and AT&T.Sprint, whose operational headquarters is in Overland Park, has denied wrongdoing but said it agreed to settle the cases to avoid the uncertainties and expense of litigation.
"We think this is a fair and reasonable settlement," said Matt Sullivan, a spokesman for Sprint.
Sprint Nextel will provide code to unlock cell-phone software [Kansas City Star]
(Photo: Maulleigh)
Seems silly-- Sprint and Verizon have policies in effect preventing them from activating phones that don't have their branding on them..
]]>Besides, the simplicity of changing SIMs makes GSM the best choice.
]]>@Scazza: AT&T tried that back in the day here in the US where you couldn't hook anything but AT&T equipment to the phone (which they charged you for). Odds are if enough people complained to the FCC the feds would apply that rule to Cell providers too.
]]>Also, the new carrier would have to then divulge their carrier code, and possibly even hardcode the phone to get the internet to work on it. I know many phones that the internet will only activate through a certain portal thats usually set up as the original carriers and bringing a phone to another network would cause it to not access the web (this problem is well documented with the moto Q as it can have its Home SID programmed manually among other things, but the internet will not activate thanks to a non-programmable internet, as far as I can recall. Another example is Telus's "SPARK" internet services on their phones, bringing their phone to another network would pretty much make the net unusable on the cell)...
]]>GSM vs. CDMA. Not really a debate I want to go into, but just saying everyone should use GSM isn't practical. Some people don't like GSM phones, and saying that everyone should use them just because you can't activate them somewheres else after you cancel seems more like running away than asserting your rights.
]]>Geez, the only things left are price and service. That's fucking unthinkable!
]]>This seems rather pointless if you ask me, and is also one of the million reasons why everyone should use GSM
]]>So if you could unlock your phone, that could be practical.
Even if it's only to resell your old phone on eBay.
]]>You can always get a free phone from your new carrier. Sure, it may not be as nice, but it isn't as if you NEED to buy a new phone to switch carriers.
]]>So you are better off getting the highend handsets if you plan on taking them to another carrier, one with more programming options. I recommend any Windows Mobile device. They are easy to retask.
]]>Aside from that, this announcement makes me happy.
]]>This lawsuit is at least moving this issue of locked phones in the right direction for consumers.
]]>*sound of crickets*
Great, these phones are unlocked, but what network and carrier will take the phone for use? Asia and Europe are on the GSM standard, and our counterparts North and South of us, Canada and Mexico respectively, are probably on that standard. Unless Verizon will allow for unlocked Sprint phones (which I think are on the same type of network), these phones would be unlocked toys for phone fans.
]]>