| Author |
The O2 iPhone discussion thread |
fatreg
Joined: Jul 26, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
exactly nanu, I can fully understand Apple wanting to recoup the cost, which is fine, but by doing so, they then play themselves in the EU laws, as to say, I want my iPhone unlocked within my contract, O2/Apple must do it, there are no 2 ways about it, if a consumer requests it, O2/Apple HAVE to supply it, at what cost I don't know but they are even failing to get over the first hurdle, which is where we go back to th pint of purchase, is it therefore Sim free? in which case, must be unlocked....
see my confusion here?
|
|
|
Jools
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
I'm not really sure if it would be classed as a monopoly...
O2 do offer other phones on other tariffs, and there are other networks to choose between...
I'm not sure it can be a monopoly where just one device is concerned. If O2 were the only network, and Apple were the only handset manufacturer, then yes, it would be a monopoly.
It's like 3 have the exclusive rights to the Skypephone - no other network sells this particular phone. Is that also a monopoly?
A variety of handsets have always been available exclusively on one network, in the past.
|
Nanu
Joined: Feb 18, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Warrington, UK
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-11-12 12:41:10, JoolsG4 wrote:
I'm not really sure if it would be classed as a monopoly...
O2 do offer other phones on other tariffs, and there are other networks to choose between...
I'm not sure it can be a monopoly where just one device is concerned. If O2 were the only network, and Apple were the only handset manufacturer, then yes, it would be a monopoly.
It's like 3 have the exclusive rights to the Skypephone - no other network sells this particular phone. Is that also a monopoly?
A variety of handsets have always been available exclusively on one network, in the past.
All of the above though have been sold on contract!
The iPhone isn't!!!!!!
That's the difference to get the skype phone you have to sign up to 3, who will then give you the phone, as you have signed an agreement to buy it from them and pay them the outstanding balance.
But I can go and buy the iPhone without putting my signature to anything, and it will be my phone to do with what I like by trading laws, but oh no I can't do with it what I like because to use it I Then have to sign up to O2 which then becomes frowned upon!
|
fatreg
Joined: Jul 26, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
[quote]
On 2007-11-12 12:41:10, JoolsG4 wrote:
It's like 3 have the exclusive rights to the Skypephone - no other network sells this particular phone. Is that also a monopoly?
/quote]
No that's not the same, as 3 supply the phone and therefore the contract, in the iPhones case, Apple supply the phone as an entity, yet to use the thing you have no choice but to join O2, therefore removing any choice whatsoever, the contract being the second entity, one won't work without the other and vica versa.
It goes back to buying a car but being told you can only fill up at Shell.
It doesn't help that neither company knows their arse from their elbow, and all the Ts and Cs are about as ambiguous as a very ambiguous thing!
A bit of clarification is all we're after, from there I know where I stand, and can then tackle, O2 or Apple dependent on the actual phone.
If Apple supply the phone at a unsubsidised cost, it has to be sim free.
If O2/Apple subsidised the cost, they have to unlock it when requested for a fee.
But neither statements can be confirmed, which is where is confusion lies!
|
mswallis
Joined: May 23, 2003
Posts: 460
From: England
PM |
Personally I think O2 and Apple will have there arses covered. O2 will obviously know the laws with being a mobile network for many years, and they obvously wouldn't ignore anything that could infringe them in any way. |
fatreg
Joined: Jul 26, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
but they clearly don't have their arses covered..
o2 should know that if consumer a wants an unlocking code they have to oblige.. so why refer consumer a to Apple?
Apple, are either selling iPhone with or without subsidy. if it with a subsidy, they have to supply unlocking codes if requested, if without subsidy, then they have to unlocked as standard..
it's as simple as that.
|
MWEB
Joined: Feb 13, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: somewhere nicer than you
PM |
Basicaly Apple and O2 can do WTF they like because no individual consumer is going to take the enormous financial risk of taking either to court and finding out exactly where the law stands in this regard.
|
fatreg
Joined: Jul 26, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2007-11-12 14:56:21, mweb6161 wrote:
Basicaly Apple and O2 can do WTF they like because no individual consumer is going to take the enormous financial risk of taking either to court and finding out exactly where the law stands in this regard.
you wanna bet?
it costs nothing for me to take Apple/O2 to court over it in a small claims court.....
even if it is to see where we stand as no buggers seems to be able to tell me.
|
Jools
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
o2 should know that if consumer a wants an unlocking code they have to oblige.. so why refer consumer a to Apple?
Apple, are either selling iPhone with or without subsidy. if it with a subsidy, they have to supply unlocking codes if requested, if without subsidy, then they have to unlocked as standard..
We still don't have any definitive proof of this... all we've got is "guidelines" from 2001.
I hope what you're saying is true - but without proof of the law in writing from whoever makes these laws, we've got nothing to go on.
|
fatreg
Joined: Jul 26, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
I know Jools but no one seems to be able to tell me any different!?
|
MWEB
Joined: Feb 13, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: somewhere nicer than you
PM |
On 2007-11-12 15:07:42, fatreg wrote:
On 2007-11-12 14:56:21, mweb6161 wrote:
Basicaly Apple and O2 can do WTF they like because no individual consumer is going to take the enormous financial risk of taking either to court and finding out exactly where the law stands in this regard.
you wanna bet?
it costs nothing for me to take Apple/O2 to court over it in a small claims court.....
even if it is to see where we stand as no buggers seems to be able to tell me.
If it costs nothing, then why dont you do it and find out, too much hassle and possible expense is the reason Fatreg  thats what O2 and Apple are banking on, people can prevarocate all they like, but unless and untill someone initiates a test case against them people can pointlessly speculate untill their blue in the face!!
|
Jools
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
Just a few links I've found, that might be useful if anyone decides to take this further:
Ofcoms comments on switching supplier (unlocking as an option).
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consumeradvice/mobile/switching/switch/
Ofcom case against 3 for alleged unfair contract terms (mentions unlocking)
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/bulle[....]bull_ccases/closed_all/cw_888/
The below text from here, from 7th September 2007, suggests that currently there aren't actually any agreed clear standard, rules or laws regarding SIM locking.
SIM Locking of Handsets
In conjunction with the proposals to facilitate the porting of mobile numbers,
OnePhone believes it is appropriate for Ofcom to consider the question of Operator SIM locks, which can provide a further bar to consumers switching their provider. We believe that a strong case can be made to introduce and require UK MNOs to adhere to a set of agreed clear standards (as exists in many other European countries, e.g. Sweden) for the practice of SIM locking of handsets, so that there is a single unified & harmonised practice in the UK, with which consumers can become conversant.
This should specifically include the consumer’s ability to be relieved of any SIM-lock after an initial contract period has expired.
|
fatreg
Joined: Jul 26, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
that's all good and well Jools but O2 claim then when you cancel your contract the iPhone is redundant.....
|
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
that last bit about unlocking, written in September this year, more or less confirms that currently there is no legal requirement for an operator to provide an unlock code (snice they suggest introducing some standards ni this area)
|
Nanu
Joined: Feb 18, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Warrington, UK
PM, WWW
|
Just got off the phone to OFCOM and although they are not yet clear on where Apple and O2 stand, as far as the person I spoke to was aware there is no clear rule/law on having to unlock a device sold on contract!
Obviously the grey area of how they are selling the iPhone will leave an area to be explored as it isn't sold on contract but is still locked down, only time will tell the outcome of that one, will the fact that you are made aware beforehand stand up, or should they be getting you to sign the contract at POS to ensure you agree to have understood! 
Anyways the nice chap I spoke to suggested the best way for me to get the iPhone would be to source one outside of the UK where it will be cheaper and can be unlocked to use on any network as this is what he is in the process of doing as there is no way he will be buying one in the UK! 
|
|
|
Posted: 2007-11-12 12:40
