Bill to Legalize Cell-Phone Unlocking Set for House Vote

A Blackberry cell phone is seen at Fixx wireless on November 4, 2013 in Miami, Florida.
National Journal
Feb. 25, 2014, midnight

The House is ex­pec­ted to vote on le­gis­la­tion Tues­day that would make it easi­er for people to switch cel­lu­lar pro­viders without buy­ing a new phone.

Un­der cur­rent law, people who “un­lock” their phones to switch pro­viders could face thou­sands of dol­lars in fines and — if they tried to profit from the device — even jail time.

H.R. 1123, the Un­lock­ing Con­sumer Choice and Wire­less Com­pet­i­tion Act, had broad bi­par­tis­an sup­port when it cleared the House Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee by a voice vote last year. But two Sil­ic­on Val­ley Demo­crats, Zoe Lof­gren and Anna Eshoo, are now mount­ing a last-minute bid to kill the le­gis­la­tion, say­ing the latest ver­sion doesn’t go far enough to pro­tect con­sumers.

Be­cause the bill is be­ing brought to the floor un­der an ex­ped­ited pro­cess, it will need a two-thirds vote to pass.

Most con­tract cell phones come “locked” to one car­ri­er. Be­cause of a de­cision by the Lib­rary of Con­gress in 2012, cus­tom­ers must ob­tain their car­ri­er’s per­mis­sion to leg­ally un­lock their phones to switch to a com­pet­it­or — even after they have com­pleted their con­tract.

The de­cision was based on the Di­git­al Mil­len­ni­um Copy­right Act (DMCA), which bans people from cir­cum­vent­ing a “tech­no­lo­gic­al meas­ure” to gain ac­cess to a copy­righted work. The lib­rary had ex­emp­ted cell-phone un­lock­ing from the DMCA’s re­stric­tions in 2006 and 2010.

The lib­rary’s 2012 de­cision to ban cell-phone un­lock­ing promp­ted an im­me­di­ate pub­lic back­lash, and more than 114,000 people signed a White House pe­ti­tion in protest.

Sup­port­ers of cell-phone un­lock­ing say it pro­motes com­pet­i­tion and that con­sumers should be able to do what they want with the devices they own.

Last year, Fed­er­al Com­mu­nic­a­tions Com­mis­sion Chair­man Tom Wheel­er pres­sured the car­ri­ers to sign on to a new un­lock­ing policy. Un­der the threat of new reg­u­la­tions, the ma­jor pro­viders all agreed to un­lock their cus­tom­ers’ phones upon re­quest.

But the new policy doesn’t pro­tect con­sumers who want to un­lock their phones on their own. People who want to tinker with their devices could still face steep fines un­der the cur­rent law.

H.R. 1123, which is au­thored by Re­pub­lic­an House Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee Chair­man Bob Good­latte, would over­turn the lib­rary’s de­cision and leg­al­ize cell-phone un­lock­ing.

But the latest ver­sion of Good­latte’s bill would not pro­tect people who un­lock phones in large batches. That pro­vi­sion promp­ted con­sumer-ad­vocacy groups Pub­lic Know­ledge and the Elec­tron­ic Fron­ti­er Found­a­tion to drop their sup­port. Those groups had al­ways pre­ferred le­gis­la­tion that would amend the un­der­ly­ing copy­right law in­stead of simply over­turn­ing the lib­rary’s de­cision.

Reps. Lof­gren and Eshoo began ral­ly­ing op­pos­i­tion to the bill on Monday and ac­cused Good­latte of adding the pro­vi­sion in “secret.”

“We urge a no vote on the Un­lock­ing Con­sumer Choice Act (H.R.1123) so that, in the fu­ture, we can de­vel­op con­sensus for le­gis­la­tion that provides real pro­tec­tion for con­sumers, pro­motes com­pet­i­tion, and un­locks in­nov­a­tion,” they wrote in a let­ter to oth­er law­makers.

But the bill still has sup­port from top Demo­crats in­clud­ing Rep. John Con­yers, the rank­ing mem­ber of the Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee, and Jer­rold Nadler, the rank­ing mem­ber of the in­tel­lec­tu­al prop­erty sub­com­mit­tee.

Aman­da Walk­er, a spokes­wo­man for Good­latte, said the bill is still ex­pec­ted to reach the floor on Tues­day des­pite the last-ditch op­pos­i­tion. 

CTIA, the lob­by­ing as­so­ci­ation for cel­lu­lar car­ri­ers, is quick to note that un­lock­ing a phone does not mean it will op­er­ate on any net­work. Tech­no­lo­gic­al bar­ri­ers could still pre­vent some cus­tom­ers from switch­ing their devices between cer­tain net­works.

What We're Following See More »
BREAKING WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AFTER TRUMP INSULTED THE SENATOR
McCain Family to Endorse Biden
59 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE

"The late Sen. John McCain's family plans to support former Vice President Joe Biden's White House bid, backing the Democrat not only in his party's crowded primary race but also in a general election matchup with President Trump, the Washington Examiner has learned. In an extraordinary snub to Trump, who derided McCain's Vietnam War service and mocked him even after his death last August at age 81, the McCain family is preparing to break with the Republican Party. McCain represented the party in Congress for 35 years and was chosen as its presidential nominee in 2008, losing to Barack Obama."

Source:
LEGAL BATTLE BETWEEN THE WHITE HOUSE AND CONGRESS LOOMS
IRS Resists Giving Congress Trump's Tax Returns
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin left little doubt Tuesday that the administration will reject a congressional request for President Donald Trump's tax returns by a self-imposed May 6 target for a "final decision," setting the stage for a legal battle that will test the limits of congressional oversight."

Source:
CALLS CONGRESS "VERY PARTISAN"
Trump Opposes White House Aides Giving Congressional Testimony
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"President Trump on Tuesday said he is opposed to current and former White House aides providing testimony to congressional panels in the wake of the special counsel report, intensifying a power struggle between his administration and House Democrats. In an interview with The Washington Post, Trump said that complying with congressional requests was unnecessary after the White House cooperated with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe of Russian interference and the president’s own conduct in office."

Source:
GAG RULE WOULD HAVE KEPT CLINICS FROM REFERRING WOMEN TO ABORTION PROVIDERS
Judge Blocks Trump Abortion Rule
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"U.S. District Judge Michael J. McShane late Tuesday said he’ll grant a preliminary injunction against new federal restrictions that bar taxpayer-funded family planning clinics from referring patients to abortion providers, calling the rule a 'ham-fisted approach to public health policy.' Oregon is one of 20 states and the District of Columbia that challenged the Trump administration’s changes to the Title X family planning program in U.S. District Court in Oregon, along with Planned Parenthood affiliates and the American Medical Association."

Source:
WANTS IT BY MAY 1
Nadler Subpoenas Unredacted Report
5 days ago
THE LATEST
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login