| Author |
Is cellphone branding illegal ? |
TeenInvader
Joined: May 13, 2005
Posts: 398
From: South Africa - Jo'burg
PM, WWW
|
Are the network operator breaking some law by branding & locking the cellphone?
I can across this article, someone file a law suit against the network operator for selling him a branded cellphone.
http://vowe.net/archives/005664.html | |
|
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
why should they? the brands and ops have several contracts among each other according the brandings. just think of it, se v630 would be an illegal fone on that way...
|
maggflodd
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: <500
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-28 10:09:04, TeenInvader wrote:
Are the network operator breaking some law by branding & locking the cellphone?
I can across this article, someone file a law suit against the network operator for selling him a branded cellphone.
http://vowe.net/archives/005664.html
|
|
hmmm... People who sue aren't always right, neither are lawyers (Blair's one, remember).
The idea is that networks can brand the phone because they sell you the phone slightly cheaper, i.e. they subsidise the phone... i guess, if they sold him the phone as sim-free at the full price, that'd be a case... The v630 example is a good/bad example as it's a vodafone handset, made for vodafone by SE... Demanding that one unbranded would be like asking nokia to remove all their logos incl. the stupid touching-hands-start-up-animation... Or, Mercedes to remove the star... However, I feel once you've spent enough with the network on the handset (when you're entitled to have it unlocked, e.g.), it should be made easier to remove all branding,,,
[addsig] |
Seanyb2
Joined: Jan 26, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
I agree though rather than going down the sim free route all the time which is expensive i think that if a customer is signing up to a monthly contract and has to pay it by law really the customer should have the right to have the phone as it was originally intended and not customised. Yes i know its subsidised but still the customer should get whatever they wish if they sign up to a commitment. I think Orange icons on their phones are worse them Vodafones as they look like they have been drawn by a school boy with a crayon. Horrible and spoils the phone.
This message was posted from a 6233 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
but read the article more carefully....in this particular case the phone was branded in such a way that
1. On the T-mobile Siemans A60, you could incurr service charges when pressing the branded operator button (normally for sms - in most branded handsets it simply takes you to the operators site but at NO CHARGE),
2. T-Mobile offered no "unbranded" version, so therefore the customer had no option to pay full price for an unbranded version
and
3. They had marketed the phone as a Siemens A60, which means it should perform as per the manufacturer specifications. For example, Vodafone rename their branded handsets ie: a K600 becomes a V600 etc. so they would be satisfying the law with regard to branding by not falsly advertising the product.
I also agree with posts above that branding has a place. It provides some people access to cheaper phones. And if they want, they can always legally debrand the phone anyway, if they are that put off by the branding.
But the legal case above I fully support. If you are going to sell a branded phone, it must be cheaper than unbranded retail handsets, and you must clearly mark and advertise the phone as branded, and it MUST not allow you to incurr charges accidently. That is just plain wrong no matter how much cheaper the handset is.
_________________
File System Tweaks for the K750 K750 Tricks
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2007-01-28 20:59 ] | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2007-01-28 10:09
