AT&T Says Unlocking Not a Big Deal

Some will see AT&T’s comments about device unlocking as posturing, but it is not entirely clear that device unlocking is something the leading mobile service providers could not live with or even support.

“AT&T’s policy is to unlock our customers’ devices if they’ve met the terms of their service agreements and we have the unlock code,” says  Joan Marsh on the AT&T Policy Blog. “ It’s a straightforward policy, and we aim to make the unlocking process as easy as possible.”

Federal law makes it unlawful to circumvent technological measures employed by copyright owners to protect their property, including software. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the Librarian of Congress conducts a periodic review to determine whether or not users of copyrighted work – in this case device owners – will be adversely affected.

On October 28, 2012, as part of the periodic review, the Librarian issued a new ruling on the mobile handset exception which narrowed the unlocking exemption that it had previously granted.  

Under the latest interpretation, the unlocking must be initiated by the owner of the device (not a bulk reseller) who also owns the copy of the software on the device, the device must have been purchased within a specific time window, the wireless carrier must have failed to act with a reasonable time period on a request to unlock the device and the unlocking must be requested to permit connection to another carrier’s network.

The new interpretation “has very little impact on AT&T customers,” Marsh says.

“If we have the unlock code or can reasonably get it from the manufacturer, AT&T currently will unlock a device for any customer whose account has been active for at least sixty days; whose account is in good standing and has no unpaid balance; and who has fulfilled his or her service agreement commitment,“ Marsh says.  

“ If the conditions are met we will unlock up to five devices per account per year,” says Marsh.

So “the Librarian’s ruling will not negatively impact any of AT&T’s customers,” says Marsh.

Some will say that is fine, but what they really want is unlocked phones at the start of a relationship with a service provider. Some might say that often is possible. Others might say the financial advantages are structured to make such practices nonsensical.

For example, if a user bringing an unlocked device has to pay the same monthly fees as a customer whose fees include a phone subsidy and a two-year contract, then there is no real financial break for supplying one’s own phone.

Unlocking, per se, seems not to be the issue. The ability to buy a user an unlocked phone “on any mobile network (consistent with air interface capabilities of the device)” with the benefit of a lower monthly service plan seems to be the real issue.