Re: Can someone explain the locked contract iphone reasoning/
06-29-2012 04:48:16 PM
I appreciate this Leroy. It may indeed be splitting hairs - i mentioned this in my first post - about whether or not we can consider the device in an incomplete contract 'owned' per se. I lean toward it being owned, since the contract is binding. If the terms were that the iphone was leased, if the contract were to be terminated at some point, we would have to give the phone back. As it is, there is an ETF, which means the iphone will be paid for one way or the other.. this makes it hard to see the phone as partially owned by At&t even while the 2 year contract is still going.
as far as people engaging the discussion - perhaps 'able' is too strong a word. What i don't get is why people contribute to the thread with input that isn't relevant, and continue to do so repeatedly. I didn't think they've been At&t employees, which is why i've been so surprised by the tacit support they give.
you are also right that in order for this to change it would have to be legislated... i started this thread because i thought maybe i was missing something about it all - like maybe there's another perspective that would make locked phones make more sense to me... but i suppose if someday it needs to be legislated the ideas need to start somewhere.