You're viewing an article in iPO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site: AT&T Threatens iPhone Unlocking Company

News

AT&T Threatens iPhone Unlocking Company

Monday, August 27th, 2007 at 8:25 AM - by

iphoneunlocking.com, a division of UniquePhones, was planning on launching a software-based service for unlocking Apple's iPhone on Saturday. The rollout never happened, and the company is claiming that possible legal threats from AT&T are to blame.

UniquePhones stated that the company received a phone call from a law firm in Menlo Park, California, that was representing AT&T. The firm claimed that the iPhone unlock the company was planning to offer potentially constituted "copyright infringement and illegal software dissemination."

Just like the unlock services UniquePhones offers for other brands of cell phones, this iPhone unlock would have allowed Apple's combination iPod and smart phone to work with any cell carrier service, and not just AT&T.

In the United States, the digital millennium copyright act allows users to unlock their cell phone so it can be used with any carrier. UniquePhones is looking into the legal ramifications of offering its service to U.S. customers.

For now, the company's iPhone unlock service is on hold.

9 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

Tiger said:

member since 17 Jun 2003 with 1018 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:33 am

To borrow a phrase from Hyundai...DUH.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:48 am

What did they expect, idiots! AT&T has an exclusive contract to sell and provide service for the iPhone. That means preventing the competition from doing the same. Duh! It was a stupid idea to begin with and they should have predicted that AT&T or Apple or both would come after them.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:56 am

It is legal in the copyright act to "Unlock" you phone, and will be until at least November 2009 when the DMCA is open for revision. The stumbling block I see is that this company is planning to make a buck off of it - where as if it was a freeware install an individual cannot be punished through the copyright act for unlocking his own phone.

Quote this post ↓

mchampag said:

member since 28 Jul 2006 with 13 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:58 am

Guest wrote:
What did they expect, idiots! AT&T has an exclusive contract to sell and provide service for the iPhone. That means preventing the competition from doing the same. Duh! It was a stupid idea to begin with and they should have predicted that AT&T or Apple or both would come after them.

Well, considering Jeff's "In the United States, the digital millennium copyright act allows users to unlock their cell phone so it can be used with any carrier[.]," I'd say that they had a reasonable expectation to be able to offer this service.

Why do some of us insist on blindly defending huge corporations' so-called "rights" over our own best interests--in this case, to have a modicum of choice when it comes to mobile phone service providers?

Neither Apple nor AT&T suffer from unlocked iPhones.

-Matt

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:00 am

Guest wrote:
What did they expect, idiots! AT&T has an exclusive contract to sell and provide service for the iPhone. That means preventing the competition from doing the same. Duh! It was a stupid idea to begin with and they should have predicted that AT&T or Apple or both would come after them.
The contract has nothing to do with it. That just means Apple can't have a side deal with any other carrier. Since you can buy an iPhone without interacting with AT&T (via Apple) There is no implied contract between you (iPhone owner) and AT&T. Had you Bought it and an AT&T Store and signed a contract - that may be a grey area.

Quote this post ↓

Tiger said:

member since 17 Jun 2003 with 1018 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:07 am

You're right, there is no implied contract. In fact, it's an explicit contract when you sign up to buy the phone. AT&T has a reasonable, and legal expectation that because they have signed and exclusive deal with Apple that it will, oh, say, STAY EXCLUSIVE for the term of the contract. And the exclusivity of the contract was announced before the phones went on sale, so that was no big shock to potential buyers either when they walked into either an Apple store or an AT&T store...the ONLY two locations the phones were even available.

Quote this post ↓

daemon said:

member since 17 May 2007 with 344 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:56 am

Tiger wrote:
You're right, there is no implied contract. In fact, it's an explicit contract when you sign up to buy the phone. AT&T has a reasonable, and legal expectation that because they have signed and exclusive deal with Apple that it will, oh, say, STAY EXCLUSIVE for the term of the contract. And the exclusivity of the contract was announced before the phones went on sale, so that was no big shock to potential buyers either when they walked into either an Apple store or an AT&T store...the ONLY two locations the phones were even available.

I disagree. By simply buying the iPhone, AT&T has no right to expect you to pay them for cellular service for 2 years, nor use only their service. Under the digital millennium copyright act consumers have the right to unlock cell phones that have been locked to a single carrier and have announced an exclusive contract with the manufacturer. AT&T does not have a leg to stand on in this case, a summary judgement should be requested and I believe AT&T will be found incapable of enforcing a copyright on a cell phone lock.

Quote this post ↓

gslusher said:

member since 13 Nov 2002 with 2088 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Mon Aug 27, 2007 1:32 pm

Why didn't AT&T's rather large legal department make the call, rather than a private law firm? Has anyone confirmed that the law firm did, indeed, make the call and that they are actually representing AT&T? Anyone can make a phone call.

Quote this post ↓

shrink said:

member since 26 Aug 2007 with 5 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:50 pm

I am hugely disappointed by this latest development. I've been holding off on buying an iPhone until I can use it with T-Mobile. I'm already with them and I love their service. They reall DO try harder and have excellent customer support. If Unique gets scared off, I hoping some Russian or Chinese group, beyond the long reach of AT&T steps in to offer this service. Also, if someone were to release the software unlock instructions into "the wild," it would be pretty hard to stop.

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.