WebProNews

Tag: cellphones

  • Teens, Get the Hell Off Your Phones and Drive

    This post is brought to you by cranky old men everywhere.

    Teens, put down your goddamn phones and look at the road. Stop changing tracks on Spotify, stop texting bae. Stop dancing with your friends and looking at stuff in your passenger seat. Please look at the road. You’re going to die.

    Check out this two minute video from AAA:

    Before you ask, yes, those are real in-car videos from crashes involving distracted teens. And yes, all of the kids in that video are incredibly lucky.

    AAA has just concluded what they claim to be “the most comprehensive research ever conducted into crash videos of teen drivers.” What they found is that distracted driving among teens is much worse than they thought.

    “Researchers analyzed the six seconds leading up to a crash in nearly 1,700 videos of teen drivers taken from in-vehicle event recorders. The results showed that distraction was a factor in 58 percent of all crashes studied, including 89 percent of road-departure crashes and 76 percent of rear-end crashes. NHTSA previously has estimated that distraction is a factor in only 14 percent of all teen driver crashes,” says AAA.

    Now, all of those “distractions” aren’t cellphone related. About 12% are. But 6% of the crashes are caused by “reaching for an object” and 10% by “looking at something in the vehicle.”

    Also, this:

    Researchers found that drivers manipulating their cell phone (includes calling, texting or other uses), had their eyes off the road for an average of 4.1 out of the final six seconds leading up to a crash. The researchers also measured reaction times in rear-end crashes and found that teen drivers using a cell phone failed to react more than half of the time before the impact, meaning they crashed without braking or steering.

    Cranky old man* knows that adults text and drive, too. But cranky old man also knows that teens have the highest crash rate of any group of drivers on the road – 963,000 drivers aged 16 to 19 were involved in police-reported crashes in 2013.

    “It is troubling that passengers and cell phones were the most common forms of distraction given that these factors can increase crash risks for teen drivers,” said AAA CEO Bob Darbelnet. “The situation is made worse by the fact that young drivers have spent less time behind the wheel and cannot draw upon their previous experience to manage unsafe conditions.”

    Exactly. Your experience is weak.

    *Person who was 19 nine years ago

  • Cellphone Deals Can Be Found Year Round

    Cellphone deals seem like they would be exclusive to Black Friday and Cyber Monday, and that is mostly true. If you’re in the market for the latest devices, you’ll have to wait for sales. What about low end devices? Have the cheap phones of the world finally reached a point to where a user will get an exemplary experience without breaking the bank?

    NPR reports that low-end smartphone are finally starting to dominate the market. It was only a few years ago that lower end smartphones paled in comparison to the iPhones and Galaxy Notes of the world, but low-end is no longer a sign of inferiority. Sure, low-end smartphones still boast lower specs than their cutting edge contemporaries, but the experience is no longer curtailed. Interestingly enough, the trend began with Microsoft.

    Nokia defined what the Windows Phone experience should be with its high-end devices, but it provided the same overall experience to low-end devices as well. It all began with the Lumia 520 – a $30 smartphone that delivered a full Windows Phone experience. How did Nokia achieve this? It’s all thanks to Microsoft building the Windows Phone platform as one that can easily scale with the hardware that it’s on. Nokia followed up the 520 with the 521 and 525 – both of which provide the full Windows Phone experience on sub-$100 smartphones.

    So let’s say you’re a staunch Android fan and you’re tired of putting up with subpar low-end Android devices. After all, Android was seemingly built for high-end devices, and the experience suffers when the mobile OS ends up on a device with a slow CPU. Thankfully, Google has greatly improved the experience by making later versions of Android compatible with more low-end hardware configurations. In other words, you’re now going to get a great Android experience on low-end devices as long as the hardware manufacturer doesn’t slow down the experience with bloatware.

    The best example of affordable Android devices comes in the form of Motorola’s Moto G. The 8GB version retails for $180 while the 16GB version retails for $199 – both of those are off-contract prices mind you. You can also get the Moto G Google Play Edition which comes with stock Android for an even better experience.

    The only real holdout is Apple. The company still primarily makes luxury devices so you’re going to have to sign a contract if you want an Apple device on the cheap. The good news is that the excellent iPhone 5S is only $99 when you sign a two-year contract. Unfortunately, the off-contract price is $549 so those hoping to avoid contracts when buying an iPhone still don’t have a cost effective option.

    Only a few years ago, it was unthinkable that a smartphone could cost less than $100. Now there are more sub-$100 options than ever. Those who are still holding out on a smartphone have no excuse this holiday season.

  • Unlocking Your Cellphone Is Now Legal – Again

    Today, President Obama will sign a bill into law that The White House calls “a win for American consumers, a win for wireless competition, and an example of democracy at its best.” It’s the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, and it will allow consumers to unlock their cellphones to work on other carriers.

    “The most important part of this joint effort is that it will have a real impact. As long as their phone is compatible and they have complied with their contracts, consumers will now be able to enjoy the freedom of taking their mobile service — and a phone they already own — to the carrier that best fits their needs. At a time when partisan gridlock all too often threatens progress on everyday issues that matter to consumers, working together we listened to your voices, and the American people benefited as a result,” says the White House.

    In other words – this kind of legislative smooth sailing is rare. Cherish it, folks.

    Here’s a little background on the whole cellphone unlocking saga:

    In January of last year, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via a decision from the Library of Congress. In short, they reversed their decision to exempt cellphone unlocking from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (by opting not to renew the exemption). It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, 2013, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the DMCA.

    Quickly after, a petition on the White House’s We The People site garnered 114,000 signatures. It demanded a simple task of the administration: Make Unlocking Cellphones Legal.

    The White House responded – emphatically.

    “The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties,” said Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy David Edelman. “In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren’t bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It’s common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers’ needs.”

    All that was left to make it happen was for Congress to act. Senator Patrick Leahy authored the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, and it got a companion bill in the House. The House measure was passed in February and the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Leahy’s bill earlier this month. Last week, the full Senate unanimously passed the bill, sending it over to the House. They also passed it unanimously.

    It went to Obama’s desk, and he’s signing it today. Congratulations, it’s no longer a crime to do what you want with something you own.

    Unfortunately, the new law only restores the exemption to the DMCA that allows consumers to unlock their cellphones and change wireless providers when their contracts expire. It doesn’t address the bigger problem – the DMCA itself. The exemption will be up for renewal again in a few years.

    Image via White House, Flickr

  • Cellphone Unlocking Bill Passes House, Heads to Obama’s Desk

    The House has unanimously passed legislation, unanimously passed last week in the Senate, that will once again make it legal for consumers to unlock their cellphones.

    “With today’s House passage of the bipartisan Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, this important legislation is headed to the President for his signature. This law will protect consumer choice by allowing flexibility when it comes to choosing a wireless carrier.This is something that Americans have been asking for and I am pleased that we were able to work together to ensure the swift passage of legislation restoring the exemption that allowed consumers to unlock their cell phones,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) said in a statement.

    Some background on why we’re having to pass new laws allowing cellphone unlocking:

    In January of last year, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via a decision from the Library of Congress. In short, they reversed their decision to exempt cellphone unlocking from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (by opting not to renew the exemption). It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, 2013, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the DMCA.

    Quickly after, a petition on the White House’s We The People site garnered 114,000 signatures. It demanded a simple task of the administration: Make Unlocking Cellphones Legal.

    The White House responded – emphatically.

    “The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties,” said Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy David Edelman. “In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren’t bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It’s common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers’ needs.”

    All that was left to make it happen was for Congress to act. Senator Patrick Leahy authored the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, and it got a companion bill in the House. The House measure was passed in February and the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Leahy’s bill earlier this month. Last week, the full Senate unanimously passed the bill, sending it over to the House.

    And now it heads to President Obama’s desk. Taking its unanimous bipartisan support and the previous statements made by The White House on the matter, the bill’s signing is a virtual certainty.

    “I thank the House for moving so quickly on the bill we passed in the Senate last week and for working in a bipartisan way to support consumers. The bipartisan Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act puts consumers first, promotes competition in the wireless phone marketplace, and encourages continued use of existing devices,” said Sen. Patrick Leahy. “Once the President signs this bill into law, consumers will be able to more easily use their existing cell phones on the wireless carrier of their choice.”

    Unfortunately, the new law only restores the exemption to the DMCA that allows consumers to unlock their cellphones and change wireless providers when their contracts expire. It doesn’t address the bigger problem – the DMCA itself.

  • Cellphone Unlocking Bill Passes Senate, Heads to House

    Late Tuesday, the Senate passed the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act with a unanimous vote. The bill, introduced by Democratic Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, reverses a Library of Congress decision regarding DMCA exemptions and would once again make unlocking your cellphone legal.

    “I applaud the Senate for so quickly passing the bipartisan Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, which puts consumers first and promotes competition in the wireless phone marketplace,” Leahy said. “With the Senate’s swift action last night, just days after the Judiciary Committee approved the measure, I hope the House will soon take up and pass our bill so that consumers will be able to use their existing cell phones on the wireless carrier of their choice.”

    The bill also asks the Library of Congress to take a look at tablets and other wireless devices to determine if they should also get an exemption from the DMCA.

    A little background on the whole cellphone unlocking issue:

    In January of last year, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via a decision from the Library of Congress. In short, they reversed their decision to exempt cellphone unlocking from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (by opting not to renew the exemption). It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, 2013, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the DMCA.

    Quickly after, a petition on the White House’s We The People site garnered 114,000 signatures. It demanded a simple task of the administration: Make Unlocking Cellphones Legal.

    The White House responded – emphatically.

    “The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties,” said Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy David Edelman. “In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren’t bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It’s common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers’ needs.”

    All that was left to make it happen was for Congress to act. Senator Patrick Leahy authored the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, and it got a companion bill in the House. The House measure was passed in February and the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Leahy’s bill last week.

    With the unanimous decision from the Senate, the bill will travel to the House with a lot of momentum.

    Image via Thinkstock

  • Cellphone Unlocking Bill Passes Senate Committee

    A Senate bill to reverse a Library of Congress decision and make unlocking your cellphone legal again has passed the Judiciary Committee.

    In January of last year, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via a decision from the Library of Congress. In short, they reversed their decision to exempt cellphone unlocking from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (by opting not to renew the exemption). It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, 2013, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the DMCA.

    Quickly after, a petition on the White House’s We The People site garnered 114,000 signatures. It demanded a simple task of the administration: Make Unlocking Cellphones Legal.

    The White House responded – emphatically.

    “The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties,” said Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy David Edelman. “In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren’t bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It’s common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers’ needs.”

    All that was left to make it happen was for Congress to act. Senator Patrick Leahy authored the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, and it got a companion bill in the House. The House measure was passed in February and now the Senate Judiciary Committee has approved Leahy’s bill.

    “Consumers should be able to use their existing cell phones when they move their service to a new wireless provider. I have worked for months with Ranking Member Grassley, Chairman Goodlatte and House members, consumer advocates and wireless providers to ensure we enact common sense legislation that puts consumers first by allowing them to ‘unlock’ their cell phones,” Leahy said. “With today’s strong bipartisan vote in the Judiciary Committee, I hope the full Senate can soon take up this important legislation that supports consumer rights.”

    The act also urges the Library of Congress to take another look at tablets and other wireless devices to determine if they should also get an exemption from the DMCA. It also “ensures that consumers who lack the technological savvy to unlock their phones themselves can authorize others to do the unlocking for them.”

    The bill technically only restores the exemption to the DMCA that allows consumers to unlock their cellphones and change wireless providers when their contracts expire. It’s not a permanent solution to a bigger problem – the DMCA itself.

  • Checking Maps While Driving Not Part of Cellphone Ban, Rules California Court

    A California appeals court has ruled that consulting Google Maps on your cellphone is not the same thing as talking or texting on said phone, and therefore does not fall under the handheld ban the state issued back in 2008. Effectively, that means you can use your device to look up directions without the fear of an eagle-eyed cop handing you a pricey ticket.

    The ruling comes from a two-year case involving one Steven Spriggs, who was ticketed for consulting a map on his iPhone while trying to navigate construction traffic in 2012. A motorcycle patrol officer saw Spriggs and gave him a $165 ticket–one that he immediately protested.

    He would lose that initial protest.

    About a year later, in March of 2013, he appealed his case to a Fresno County Superior Court, where he once again lost. That court clarified that use of a cellphone’s GPS or map features while driving is part of California’s no-handheld law.

    But with the ruling today by the 5th District Court of Appeal, drivers in the state will be able to consult their phones for directions–even when their car is in motion.

    California’s first ban on using handheld devices while driving went into effect in July of 2008. The state later added to the statutes, making texting while driving illegal in 2009. Motorists are allowed to use a hands-free device, but only if they’re over the age of 18. All of these laws are primary infractions, meaning officers can pull you over for talking on your cellphone and talking on your cellphone only.

    The AP reports that the appellate court said the current laws “could have been written more clearly,” and the law that Spriggs was ticketed under only applies to “listening and talking” on a handheld device–not any other activities.

    Of course, the laws in California and other states could probably use a rewrite–just for clarity’s sake. For instance, what if I’m just changing songs on my Spotify app? What then?

    Maybe we’ll see those updates when states begin to update the code to tackle new wearable tech, like Google Glass.

    Image via Google Maps, iTunes

  • Framily Plan- A Sprint Plan Frame-Up?

    Calling all family, friends, enemies, frienemies– CNet tells us that Sprint has introduced a new family plan that they refuse to call anything other than the Sprint Framily Plan.

    Likely more of an unfortunate scenario for the fine customer service folks at Sprint who are forced to say the made-up word each time, the spelling represents not just family being able to join in on the bill, but friends too.

    While we applaud Sprint for reminding us of the important virtues of community, only time will tell how wise this will be. Will small claims courts see a rash of lawsuits as unpaid bills add up? Will television court shows entertain us with horrific stories of enemies driving their cars over once framily member’s cellphones because they refused to chip in on the phone bill?

    Since Sprint apparently watches the same quality reality television shows as we do, it looks as if they’ve attempted to alleviate that risk by allowing each member of the Framily Plan to still be billed separately. Nice Move, Sprint.

    This is how the Framily Plan works:
    One line of service costs $55 per month. The line includes unlimited talk, text and 1GB of data. This price is dropped $5 for each new Sprint customer than joins the line. Six people plus the original line holder are allowed to join the line, which could transform a $55 bill to a $25 bill for everyone.

    Although this Framily Plan has been active for close to a week, Sprint has just recently dropped their television ad to make it official. So far, it looks like some folks are happy with it,

    some people aren’t

    and some people just really think that Framily Plan is a horrible name for something.

    Either way, do you think this would be a good deal for you and your circle? Should we all request that they change the name to Phramily Plan to make it even more exciting? Let us know!

    Image via Youtube

  • Restaurant Offers Insane Discount If People Just Turn Off Their Damn Phones

    One restaurant owner in Abu Ghosh, just outside of Jerusalem, is taking a stand against distracted eating. In “wow that’s great, but aren’t you running a business?” news, the owner of Abu Ghosh is offering anyone who completely shuts down their phone during dining 50% off the entire meal. Yep, 50%.

    Apparently, he’s not collecting phones at the door – he’s working on the honor system. Cellphones must be turned completely off – not on silent or not on airplane mode – off.

    “I’m changing something. It might be something small, but maybe in some small way I’ll be changing the culture of eating,” the restaurant’s owner, Jawdat Ibrahim, told the AP. “Technology is very good. But just when you eat, just especially when you are with your family and your friends, you can just wait for half an hour and enjoy the food and enjoy the company. A lot of people, they sit down and they don’t enjoy their food, their company.”

    But…but how am I going to Instagram my delicious falafel?

    Ok, he has a point. People should get the hell off Facebook and enjoy their meals, and their company. This bar has the right idea (this is not a photo from Abu-Ghosh).

    As far as Abu Ghosh’s clientele? Well, they love the concept – as almost every patron has taken advantage of the deal since it was instated. Ibrahim says he’s taking a financial hit due to the offer – one you’d expect from a restaurateur offering a discount so large.

    This is not an entirely new idea, but it is the first time I’ve heard of a restaurateur offering such a gigantic price cut for such a seemingly easy act. Last year, a Los Angeles restaurant made headlines when they offered a 5% discount to any diner who left their phones at the door.

    Image via Renée Suen, Flickr

  • FCC May Greenlight Mid-Flight Cell Calls

    FCC May Greenlight Mid-Flight Cell Calls

    Could you soon be permitted to call your loved ones while flying the friendly skies?

    According to a report from the Wall Street Journal, the Federal Communications Commission is set to suggest new rules that would allow passengers to use their cellphones at cruising altitude.

    From The Wall Street Journal:

    The Federal Communications Commission will propose allowing passengers to use their cellphones on airplanes, people familiar with the matter said.

    While phone use would still be restricted during takeoff and landing, the proposal would lift an FCC ban on airborne calls and cellular data use by passengers once a flight reaches 10,000 feet, an FCC official said.

    That’s the dream, right?

    Of course, the FCC isn’t the only group with a say in this.

    Even if the FCC decided to change their rules, any changes would have to be considered by the Federal Aviation Administration and gain approval over there as well, and individual airlines would have the final say on whether or not they allow you to jabber away during flights. Not only have flight staff expressed concerns about any possible lifting of the cellphone ban in the past (they say it would be a nuisance), but you can probably imagine how some passengers would feel about their row-mates airing their laundry for the entire plane to hear – for a four-hour flight. Ugh.

    As of right now…

    “Federal Communications Commission rules prohibit the use of cellular phones using the 800 MHz frequency and other wireless devices on airborne aircraft. The ban was put in place because of potential interference to wireless networks on the ground.”

    Almost a decade ago, the FCC first explored lifting the cellphone ban – but the proceeding was ended in 2007 when they “determined that the technical information provided by interested parties in response to the proposal was insufficient to determine whether in-flight use of wireless devices on aircraft could cause harmful interference to wireless networks on the ground.”

    Also, as stated before, some people weren’t happy about the notion.

    It is the digital age, however, and things have been trending toward a general relaxing of in-flight electronics rules lately. Just last month, the FAA decided to expand passenger use of portable electronic devices during all phases of flight. That means you no longer have to power down your cellphones, tablets, and e-readers during landing and takeoff – or at least that will be the case as soon as all the airlines get on board. The FAA says that they hope this will be the case by the end of the year.

    Image via Thinkstock

  • Bullet Hits Smartphone, Saves Gas Station Clerk’s Life

    A Winter Garden, Florida gas station clerk was shot in the abdomen on Monday morning, and today he is alive after only sustaining minor injuries. He can almost certainly give all the credit for that amazing turn to the fact that he was carrying his cellphone in his front pocket.

    Yep, it’s the old cellphone-stopped-a-bullet story – and this time it’s real. Like something out of a movie, an HTC smartphone is being credited with saving the life of a robbery victim.

    According to WFTV, police say a man entered a gas station in Winter Garden early Monday morning. He reportedly pulled a revolver and demanded that our gas clerk open the safe. Two different employees tried – and failed – to open the safe.

    With his plain apparently fuddled, our robber turned around and went for the exit. But out of frustration, anger, or some combination of the two, the robber decided he needed to take one shot at the clerk. So he put one in his chest before leaving.

    According to police, the clerk had absolutely no clue that he had even been shot until he pulled out his cellphone and saw the shattered glass.

    I’m no marketer, but this is one hell of an opportunity for HTC. “HTC – saving lives…literally.” Suck on that, Apple.

    Image via WFTV, Winter Garden Police

  • Cellphones May Not Cause Car Crashes, Show Study

    It’s now a given that talking on the phone while driving is dangerous. Public service announcements, ads from mobile providers, and laws in many states attest to that. However, a new study from researchers at Carnegie Mellon is now calling into question this supposed fact.

    The study, published in the journal American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, shows that talking on a cellphone while driving does not increase the risk of a car crash. Researchers used data from a major mobile provider taken from 2002 to 2005, then cross-referenced it with accident reports from the same time period. Many mobile providers at that time offered free calling on weekends and at night, and call volumes seen by the research team reflected this. The car crash rates during these peak calling hours, however, did not see a subsequent increase.

    “Using a cellphone while driving may be distracting, but it does not lead to higher crash risk in the setting we examined,” said Saurabh Bhargava, lead author of the study and an assistant professor of social and decision sciences in Carnegie Mellon. “While our findings may strike many as counterintuitive, our results are precise enough to statistically call into question the effects typically found in the academic literature. Our study differs from most prior work in that it leverages a naturally occurring experiment in a real-world context.”

    The study also points out that laws banning the use of mobile phones while driving have also had no effect on vehicle crash rates.

    The study’s authors emphasize that the research only pertains to talking on a phone while driving. It does not touch on texting, which they admit could be more dangerous. It also did not determine why the results were so different from previous studies, though Bhargava did put forth some hypotheses.

    “One thought is that drivers may compensate for the distraction of cellphone use by selectively deciding when to make a call or consciously driving more carefully during a call,” said Bhargava. “This is one of a few explanations that could explain why laboratory studies have shown different results. The implications for policymakers considering bans depend on what is actually driving this lack of an effect. For example, if drivers do compensate for distraction, then penalizing cellphone use as a secondary rather than a primary offense could make sense. In the least, this study and others like it, suggest we should revisit the presumption that talking on a cellphone while driving is as dangerous as widely perceived.”

  • Police Performing Warrantless Cellphone Searches After Car Crashes? Yep, There’s a Bill for That

    Hey guys, meet my new favorite terrible state bill.

    Narrowly beating out the Internet Posting Removal Act, an Illinois bill that’ll make your head spin, comes a bill to modify New Jersey state law to permit police officers to confiscate and search a driver’s cellphone when they are involved in an accident – simply if they feel the accident may have been caused by texting/talking while driving.

    The bill, SB 2783, was proposed by Republican Senator James W. Holzapfel – a former lawyer who served as a county prosecutor.

    Here’s the actual text from the bill:

    (New section) Whenever an operator of a motor vehicle has been involved in an accident resulting in death, bodily injury, or property damage, a police officer who reports to the scene of the accident may confiscate the operator’s hand-held wireless telephone if, after considering the facts and circumstances surrounding the accident, the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the operator involved in the accident was operating a hand-held wireless telephone while driving a motor vehicle in violation of section 1 of P.L.2003, c.310 (C.39:4-97.3).

    Upon confiscating the telephone, the police officer may review the hand-held wireless telephone’s call history data in order to determine whether the motor vehicle operator was in violation of section 1 of P.L.2003, c.310 (C.39:4-97.3) at the time of the accident. After reviewing the call history data, the law enforcement officer shall return the hand-held wireless telephone to the motor vehicle operator. Any information contained in the call history data that indicates that the motor vehicle operator was in violation of section 1 of P.L.2003, c.310 (C.39:4-97.3) shall be included in the police report in accordance with R.S.39:4-131.

    FYI, any mention of “P.L.2003, c.310 (C.39:4-97.3)” refers to the statue banning to use of wireless devices (non-hand-free) while operating a motor vehicle in the state of New Jersey.

    With the overbroad “accident resulting in death, bodily injury, or property damage” clause, you can already see the abuse of power. Look closely. Can you see it? I’m no alarmist or anything, but when the police can, without a warrant, browse the contents of my iPhone with no restrictions just because I happened to get in a fender bender – call me crazy, but that doesn’t take me to my happy place.

    The ACLU of New Jersey has already said that this bill doesn’t come close to passing constitutional muster:

    “Our State and Federal Constitutions generally require probable cause before authorizing a search, particularly when it comes to areas that contain highly personal information such as cellphones,” said Alexander Shalom of the ACLU-NJ. “The legislature cannot authorize searches unless there is probable cause, therefore the bill is likely susceptible to a constitutional challenge.”

    That’s putting it nicely.

    The bill was introduced on May 20th and has yet to see any additional action. It’s been referred to the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee – which I truly hope is code for “the nearest trash can.”

  • Wireless Carriers Back Worthless Cellphone Unlocking Bill

    Wireless Carriers Back Worthless Cellphone Unlocking Bill

    Should you be able to unlock your cellphone? Wireless carriers used to not think so, but now the industry’s lobbying group seems to be fine with it as long as the bill is worthless.

    The Hill reports that the wireless industry group CTIA has indicated that it will support a cellphone unlocking bill during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the matter. Now, the group isn’t supporting broad unlocking rules, but rather the very limited, and kind of worthless H.R. 1123, or the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act.

    If you’re just joining us. H.R. 1123 is a House bill introduced by Rep. Bod Goodlatte. The bill would reverse the Librarian of Congress’ decision earlier this year to put cellphone unlocking back on the list of practices that violate the DMCA. Previously, it was exempt under the copyright law thus allowing customers to unlock their devices.

    At the time, the reasoning for putting it back on the list was because the Librarian thought that wireless carriers were doing a good enough job of letting customers unlock their phones. Leaving it up to the carriers, however, leads to some being able to unlock their devices and some can’t. Even those that can have to sometimes jump through a lot of hurdles just to move a phone to a different carrier.

    So, why do wireless carriers like Goodlatte’s legislation when they make it as hard as possible for customers to move phones? They like it because it does absolutely nothing to change the status quo. As the CTIA puts it, the bill provides “a reasonable balance that protects consumers and carriers alike.”

    Unfortunately, Goodlatte’s bill does nothing to protect consumers. It just alleviates their suffering under the DMCA for three years. It does nothing to fix the actual problem.

    In a perfect world, Congress and wireless carriers would be listening to FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai. In an op-ed for The New York Times, he argues that cellphone unlocking should be removed from the DMCA altogether.

    To restore a free market that benefits consumers, we should amend the 1998 act to allow consumers to take their mobile devices from one carrier to another without fear of criminal prosecution or civil fines. We should also make clear that those who help consumers unlock their phones and tablets won’t be prosecuted either. And we should reiterate that contracts remain valid and enforceable. These fixes should be permanent, so that consumers, developers and wireless carriers don’t have to worry about the law shifting on a whim.

    The entire op-ed is well worth reading, but the above is the central argument. Let people do whatever the hell they want with their phone after the contract is up. Cellphone unlocking should not be a crime, and it shouldn’t have even been a copyright issue in the first place. As Pai says – “No one seriously believes that unlocking a cellphone to switch carriers is equivalent to piracy.”

    Unfortunately, the carriers do, and they will fight to keep cellphone unlocking under the DMCA. Goodlatte’s bill does just that while pretending to care about consumer choice. Here’s hoping that the House heeds Pai’s words instead of the carriers’ during today’s hearing.

  • House To Hold Hearing On Worthless Cellphone Unlocking Bill Next Week

    Pretty much everybody in Washington agrees with the common man – you should be able to unlock your cellphone without fear of repercussion. Where we tend to disagree is how to go about doing this. Unfortunately, the House has decided to hold a hearing on a cellphone unlocking bill that does absolutely nothing to fix the problem.

    The Hill reports that subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet will hold a hearing next Thursday to discuss Rep. Bob Goodlatte’s Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act. The bill would repeal a decision by the Librarian of Congress last year that made unlocking cellphones a violation of the DMCA.

    It sounds pretty good, right? Unfortunately, Goodlatte’s bill, and its companion bill in the Senate, only puts a bandaid on a bullet wound. The bill in its current state doesn’t address the DMCA or its anti-circumvention protections that currently make unlocking your cellphone a punishable offense. Instead, the bill will make unlocking cellphones legal for only three years until the Librarian of Congress makes another decision as to the legality of cellphone unlocking.

    As I’ve previously discussed, the cellphone unlocking debate is just one tiny part of a larger debate on the DMCA. It’s an outdated bill that was meant to protect intellectual property in the digital age, but instead stands in the way of progress. Rep. Zoe Lofgren’s bill – the Unlocking Technology Act of 2013 – does a much better job of addressing this issue by permanently legalizing cellphone unlocking and other technology circumventions that don’t explicitly violate copyright.

    Unfortunately, Congress has a proven track record of pushing for bills that only delay the problem instead of addressing it head on. Depending on how next week’s hearing goes, we may get another three years of legalized unlocking before the Librarian of Congress deems it illegal yet again. Maybe then Congress will actually act on meaningful reform, but I doubt it.

  • Theatergoing Hero Threw Woman’s Cellphone When She Refused to Shut Up, Stop Googling

    Kevin Williamson is a theater critic and a writer for the National Review. This does not make him a hero. What does make him a hero is that he took action on an impulse that plenty of us have battled from time to time: physically separating the loud, obnoxious, moviegoer who won’t turn off their damn phone from said phone.

    In Williamson’s case, we’re talking theatergoers here. But the principle remains the same: When you’re at a play, turn off your phone you self-absorbed butthole. I promise you that nothing you’re doing is that important. Promise.

    As he tells it, the night began with a couple of annoying women who were “talking, using their phones, and making a general nuisance of themselves.” The audience was watching a performance of Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812, and two women with “too much makeup and too-high heels, and insufficient attention span for following a two-hour musical” were preventing everyone from enjoying the show. Or at least preventing Williamson, as he was seated right next to them.

    Williamson claims his date spoke to theater management during intermission, whose assurances that the situation would be taken care of wound up being hollow.

    I’ll let him take it from there:

    The lady seated to my immediate right (very close quarters on bench seating) was fairly insistent about using her phone. I asked her to turn it off. She answered: “So don’t look.” I asked her whether I had missed something during the very pointed announcements to please turn off your phones, perhaps a special exemption granted for her. She suggested that I should mind my own business.

    So I minded my own business by utilizing my famously feline agility to deftly snatch the phone out of her hand and toss it across the room, where it would do no more damage. She slapped me and stormed away to seek managerial succor. Eventually, I was visited by a black-suited agent of order, who asked whether he might have a word.

    Williamson tells Gothamist that some rude Googling on the device is what eventually prompted him to remove it from her possession. He was eventually kicked out and says that “there is talk of criminal charges.”

    Whatever happens, we salute you. No, I’m not going to suggest that every annoying movie or theater attendee who refuses to follow simple rules and courtesies should be separated from their iPhones – but if I happened to be one of the crowdmembers enjoying Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812 that fateful night, well, let’s just say the play (which he says was quite good) wouldn’t have been the only thing to receive a standing O.

    Of course, as of now, this is a one-sided story.

  • Mapping While Driving Ruled Illegal in California

    Mapping While Driving Ruled Illegal in California

    Thanks to a recent court ruling by a California appellate court, it doesn’t matter that you were only checking your smartphone to update Google Maps. That’s because the law, as it currently reads, bans any sort of hands-on use of phones while driving.

    The case comes on an appeal from the Superior Court of Fresno County. Last year, Steven Spriggs was cited for violating section 23123, which bans the use of wireless technologies while driving.

    Specifically:

    Section 23123, subdivision (a) provides: A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.

    Spriggs argued that the statute was only enacted to limit talking on a cellphone, and didn’t originally apply to any other use of the device. Also, since the state had to amend the rules later to add language banning texting while driving, it supports his claim that the original intent of the law only applied to conversing while driving.

    But the court rejected that claim.

    “Our review of the statute‟s plain language leads us to conclude that the primary evil sought to be avoided is the distraction the driver faces when using his or her hands to operate the phone. That distraction would be present whether the wireless telephone was being used as a telephone, a GPS navigator, a clock or a device for sending and receiving text messages and emails,” said judge Kent Hamlin.

    Furthermore:

    Neither the plain language of the statute nor the legislative history support the conclusion that section 23123, subdivision(a), was designed to prohibit hands-on use of a wireless telephone for conversation only. Notably, the legislative history acknowledges that the statute as worded does not eliminate a “potentially more significant” distraction of carrying on a conversation while driving. The statute instead focuses on the distraction a driver faces when using his or her hands to operate the phone, specifically including “the physical distraction a motorist encounters when either picking up the phone, punching the number keypad, holding the phone up to his or her ear to converse, or pushing a button to end a call.” That distraction would be present whether the phone is used for carrying on a conversation or for some other purpose.

    Basically, the law in vague enough to cover any sort of hands-on use of the wireless device. This includes mapping in any form.

    Of course, if someone wanted to program their route into Google Maps and then never touch it again while driving, that would be ok. If they wanted to make alterations to the route, they would presumably have to pull over first.

    In the end, the court ruled that the law may have been enacted arbitrarily and could very well need retooling – but that’s a job for the legislature, not the court.

    “It may be argued that the Legislature acted arbitrarily when it outlawed all ‘hands-on’ use of a wireless telephone while driving, even though the legal use of one‟s hands to operate myriad other devices poses just as great a risk to the safety of other motorists. It may also be argued that prohibiting driving while using ‘electronic wireless communications devices’ for texting and emailing, while acknowledging and failing to prohibit perhaps even more distracting uses of the same devices, is equally illogical and arbitrary. Both arguments should be addressed to the Legislature in support of additional legislation barring any use of those other devices in other than a hands-free manner, or in support of a repeal or amendment of section 23123 to allow the ‘hands-on’ use of wireless telephones for other purposes while driving,” says Hamlin.

    As of today, 39 states ban texting while driving for all drivers, and another 6 ban the practice for novice drivers. But a recent survey from AT&T found that nearly 50% of people do it anyway – even though 98% acknowledged that it is indeed wrong to do so. A rule like this banning mapping will likely be ignored by even more people than that.

    [California v. Steven R. Spriggs via Digital Trends]
    [Photo via ~W~, Flickr]

  • White House: “It’s Time to Legalize Cell Phone Unlocking”

    White House: “It’s Time to Legalize Cell Phone Unlocking”

    Less than two weeks after a petition on the We The People site crossed the 100,000 signature threshold, the White House has issued on official response on making cellphone unlocking legal again.

    And they totally support it.

    In a statement that can only be seen as a huge win for activists in this arena, the White House just announced that “it’s time to legalize cellphone unlocking.”

    “The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties,” said Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy David Edelman. “In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren’t bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It’s common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers’ needs.”

    In January, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via a decision from the Library of Congress. In short, they reversed their decision to exempt cellphone unlocking from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

    Edelman goes on to explain that the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) previously made their opinion on the matter known – full support for the concept of cellphone unlocking. But that the NTIA’s recommendation was ultimately rejected by the Library of Congress.

    The Library of Congress also released a statement.

    “The rulemaking is a technical, legal proceeding and involves a lengthy public process,” they said.

    And although they recognize that “rulemaking serves a very important function, but it was not intended to be a substitute for deliberations of broader public policy,” it doesn’t look like the Library is planning on fast-tracking the will of the people here (and now the White House).

    “Clearly the White House and Library of Congress agree that the DMCA exception process is a rigid and imperfect fit for this telecommunications issue, and we want to ensure this particular challenge for mobile competition is solved,” said Edelman, also noting that the White House respects the process performed by the Librarian of establishing and eliminating exceptions – in this case having to do with the DMCA.

    Here’s what the White House says about moving forward:

    The Obama Administration would support a range of approaches to addressing this issue, including narrow legislative fixes in the telecommunications space that make it clear: neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation.

    We also believe the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with its responsibility for promoting mobile competition and innovation, has an important role to play here. FCC Chairman Genachowski today voiced his concern about mobile phone unlocking, and to complement his efforts, NTIA will be formally engaging with the FCC as it addresses this urgent issue.

    Last week, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said that the FCC would be looking into the issue.

  • FCC Will ‘Look at’ the Illegal Phone Unlocking Issue

    FCC Will ‘Look at’ the Illegal Phone Unlocking Issue

    After gaining a lot of traction on the internet, the current illegality of unlocking cellphones will receive a federal investigation.

    Back in January, the Library of Congress decided that the unlocking of cellphones would no longer reside on the exemptions lists for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act – a move that basically turned unlocking cellphones into an illegal activity. As of right now, it’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, but unlocking phones purchased past that date will run you afoul of the DMCA.

    Of course, many feel that unlocking cellphones should be legal in all respects – it’s their device once they buy it, and it’s that simple.

    Late last month, a petition on the White House’s We The People site to make unlocking legal crossed the required signature threshold, which means that the Obama administration is forced (to a certain extent) to issue an official response. While we’re still waiting for that response, today we learn that the Federal Communications Commission will look into the matter.

    “The ban raises competition concerns; it raises innovation concerns,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told TechCrunch.

    “It’s something that we will look at at the FCC to see if we can and should enable consumers to use unlocked phones.”

    At this point, Genachowski isn’t sure about what power the FCC has to enact change in this matter. But they will look into it.

    In the meantime, we will wait on the White House’s response. That petition currently boasts over 112,000 signatures.

  • Petition to Make Unlocking Phones Legal Again Crosses Signature Threshold

    A petition to make unlocking cellphones legal again has crossed the signature threshold on the White House’s We The People petition site, meaning that it will receive an official response.

    Back in January, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via decision from the Library of Congress. It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The basis for the reversal of U.S. federal policy was that only software owners (mostly Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc.) shoudl have the rights to unlock handsets.

    Of course, many consumers strongly disagree and feel as though it’s their right to do whatever they want with a device once they’ve made the purchase. And that’s the feeling behind the petition.

    Here’s the full petition, simply titled “Make Unlocking Cell Phones Legal”:

    The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.

    As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired.

    Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.

    The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.

    We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.

    The petition currently has 101,000+ signatures, which means that the White House is required to respond. In mid-January, the White House upped the signature threshold to 100,000 from the previous 25,000, in the hopes of weeding out “joke” petitions and make the process a little more credible.

    Before this move, there were dozens upon dozens of petitions that hit their goal but were sitting in limbo, waiting for responses.

  • Game Consoles, Phones Make Up The Past 30 Years Of Popular Tech

    What’s popular in consumer technology? If you look at most wanted lists from last Christmas, it seems that tablets and smartphones were all the rage. As it turns out, however, it seems that the most wanted gadgets of our time move in a kind of cycle where one particular product dominates a few years to only concede to something else down the road.

    The cyclical nature of popular tech has been documented in a new infographic from Insurace2go. The information may be popular tech from the UK, but I think you’ll find that it’s largely analogous to popular tech in the U.S. As you’ll see, game consoles and phones have dominated popular tech for the past 30 years with both going in and out of vogue until something new comes out.

    The past few years have been dominated by mobile devices like the iPad and the Galaxy Note, so does that mean that game consoles are going to move back in on their turf? Probably not, unless the next PlayStation or Xbox really wow consumers. I’m with Insuracen2go on this one – the next popular technology will involve wearable computing.

    Game Consoles, Phones Make Up The Past 30 Years Of Popular Tech