• TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      They lock it so you’ll pay for the phone. That’s the only reason.
      Should requiring people to pay for things be illegal?

      Frankly you’re being ignorant, and expect to somehow get a thousand dollar device for free. That’s not how the world works.

      • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        19 days ago

        Wha? The guy I responded to said the customers now pay full price up front. If a device is bought it should be unlocked.

        Additionally giving away a phone for a determined time contract means that the company is technically giving you a loan and it should be on your credit record, require the company to do a proper credit check and be allowed to give out loans.

        Bottom line, it’s predatory and should not be allowed. Noone is advocating giving 1000 dollar phones for free… it was a strawman you stuck me with… but I don’t want it.

        • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          Wha? The guy I responded to said the customers now pay full price up front.

          No. I never said that. I said the cost of the phone is upfront. There are no 2 year contracts anymore, and haven’t been for at least a decade. You see the full price of the phone, and decide how much a month you want to spend to pay it off.

          If a device is bought it should be unlocked.

          I agree with you. And that’s how it works. The question is how long after paying off the phone should it be locked.

          Additionally giving away a phone for a determined time contract …

          Again, they haven’t offered contracts like that in ten years. But yes you do need to pass a credit check to have a phone financed.

          Bottom line, it’s predatory and should not be allowed.

          What exactly should not be allowed?

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            19 days ago

            OK so you buy the phone on a payment plan… and credit check. Then once it’s paid off it should be unlocked.

            • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              19 days ago

              Correct, you’ve got it. That’s how it’s worked for ten+ years.

              • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 days ago

                Here in the Netherlands they don’t allow carrier locking and still sell on these installment plans.

                They are 2 separate services (telecom & financing) and thus cannot be linked at sale. That’s not an issue… why would it be different in the US?

                • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  18 days ago

                  The Netherlands has mobile phone contracts. You purchase a new phone and a fixed monthly subscription for calls, texts, and data. You choose to pay for the phone itself upfront, or with installments each month, along with your monthly subscription cost.

                  That’s the same thing. I think you don’t know what you’re talking about, friend.

                  • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    18 days ago

                    The part they are saying is different is that the phones are unlocked immediately. They don’t ever lock.

                  • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    18 days ago

                    Back to the original point… Phones are not provider locked. That’s not allowed. It’s a predatory practice.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        You can continue paying at&t for the phone after moving to a different carrier.

        How do you think people will steal phones like this?

        • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 days ago

          When did that become possible?
          Last I knew is when you cancel your account (which is what moving to another carrier is) they billed you for the remaining balance of the phone.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            18 days ago

            No I mean thats what’s proposed. I’m saying leaving the companies service has nothing to do with a loan they gave you. They are separate things. Its possible they would stop with no interest but I believe they can still make money without interest in some cases.

            • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              18 days ago

              Ah gotcha. Yeah that’d be cool. I hope it works out. More options is always better.
              Your probably right about the interest, or else why would they agree to it.