yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
Given the fact that your average smartphone user is a techtard, I don't blame them.

Maybe, but the real issue for them is the cost of the customer service to deal with people who mess up their phones and then call in for help.

---------- Post added at 02:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 PM ----------

Well, hacking is a term that is used loosely and everything that people label hacking is not something illegal. But obviously some things are. It just depends on what you are doing.

I don't want to go into this too much but you don't have to prove actual monetary loss for many criminal actions. For instance, conspiracy charges or attempt charges do not have to result in actual harm to a victim. What matters is that you were trying to do harm, not that you were successful in doing harm.

In civil torts it is different - you have to be actually harmed although you can be awarded nominal damages.

What you are saying is that the monetary damages are speculative and that is a civil law concept.

Yeah but it depends on what actions you take to expose the flaw in security. If your actions are legal, then it is fine. There is really no sense in discussing things in general terms though, because what matters are the specifics of what is actually done.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] PerCompLLC:
"techtard" - LOL!
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
[MENTION=5983610]JulesJam[/MENTION] you are quite thorough. as I said initially, it really was a joke. just pushing the envelope of warped logic. I had asked my buddy thar does class action suits if it were possible to make some headway legally, and he also thought that didn't have much hope. ;) gotta mentally explore all options. ;) guess it is time to give up on any means of unlock through legal means. lol. ;) well, or through other means that have a legal consequence.

I too, like the term *techtard*
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
I'm not following you. What did the plaintiff's attorney say this in reference to?

Nothing I said implied that. I know jcase and beaups have given up on Motorola devices, but we can still hope that now that maiko1 has found a way to root, maybe they will change their mind.

I think these bounty threads are a complete waste of time in a post-kitkat world. The OS is just too secure now for anyone to devote the kind of time it takes to find exploits with only a promise of possible payment. I think if people were serious, they would pay the money into a fund to buy devices to give to devs to use to try to find the exploits.

Not following your point here either.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
I mean I asked if we could file one for inhibiting off-contract devices. I had a dev maxx that was replaced (by moto) with the Turbo. The explanation of why it could not be unlocked I received was an agreement with Verizon. My intent was to be the plaintiff.

Not what I mean, at all. I mean there is no legal avenue to persue, and ones that have legal reprocussion are not worthwhile. These guys (and others like them) are literally our only hope.

Yep. I agree. If it makes someone aware of a need, it serves a very small purpose, but ultimately, I think it better to collectively buy the worthy folks devices.

ha ha. duly noted. ;)
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
Why? Why didn't you deal with the manufacturer directly to get a replacement Dev Maxx? Was it out of warranty? As long as you are under warranty, Motorola will deal with you directly to provide you with warranty replacements. It is your choice to go through Verizon rather than Motorola. Why did you make that choice?

The agreement you have with Motorola - the device manufacturer - is the warranty and it is governed by the relevant state laws. Your agreement with Verizon is much different - the contract is the customer agreement to provide phone service. Verizon also independent of the CA, chooses to provide customers with Certified Like New Replacement devices under Verizon's terms and conditions and those T&Cs say Verizon can give you what is in their opinion an equivalent device and they are the ones who define what is equivalent. And when you forgo your option to pursue a warranty replacement from the manufacturer and instead choose to get a replacement device from Verizon, you are agreeing to Verizon's CLNR T&C.

Verizon doesn't have to provide you with replacement devices, BTW, but they choose to for the sake of customer convenience and b/c it reduces their customer service costs.

IMO, you should never go with Verizon and ALWAYS go with the manufacturer warranty if your device is under warranty.

---------- Post added at 03:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:14 PM ----------

Do you mean there is no cause of action you can bring against Motorola for selling you a device with a bootloader that can't be unlocked? Of course there isn't. Why would there be? You don't have any right to force Motorola to design a phone to your specifications.

And as far as Verizon goes, there is no cause of action against Verizon for pressuring Motorola not to sell Verizon devices that have unlockable bootloaders. Why would there be? There is no law that gives any of us a right to a phone with an unlockable bootloader.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
jesus. as I said, there is no case. no need to illustrate a point that is already obvious (and noted understood). I didn't go to Verizon for a replacement. Verizon doesn't "allow non-dev editiion devices to be bootloader unlocked" -[Moto]

Moto replaced my device under warranty and had zero dev maxx (as they still don't and wont). after 2 months of multiple levels of support and bs, they sent a Turbo EE. I wasn't offered anything comparable. I accepted the Turbo when I was literally told it was either that or a 1st gen moto x dev (which is a downgrade from the maxx) it was going nowhere due to [the agreement with Verizon]… I understand how warranty works, but seriously, why would I go to verizon for a device they don't sell (nor ever have).

you are correct in your summation of the law as it stands.

When I say it was replaced (by moto) that should be evident. My angle was (note, again, i said there is no recourse) I had another device that operated in no different way on their network. there is nothing holding me to verizon. no contracts, etc. the limitation of use/access (block c 700mhz) was my angle. obviously, again, as I have said, there was no recourse.

instead of bounty threads, we should really start a donate thread/fund that is used to supply devs. makes way more sense.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
Well I found your posts very difficult to follow so I decided that there was a need, lol!

That is actually a very reasonable outcome for you given that the manufacturer had stopped manufacturing your original device.

Ok now I see, I thought Verizon had replaced the device, my bad.

Yeah, I missed that part.

No offense but the chance that your plaintiff's attorney buddy understood 47 CFR 27.16 is slim to none, lol! The fact that he gave a correct answer doesn't mean he understood it; all it means is that he didn't think there was enough moola in the case for him to bother even trying to understand it.

I do think there is an argument that unless Verizon has published technical standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of their network to justify pressuring the device manufacturers to not sell Dev Eds, then the FCC could intervene like they did when Verizon was pressuring Google to remove tethering apps from the play store. The problem is this - I think Verizon could come up with technical standards that show that unlocked bootloaders pose a risk of causing objectionable interference to other spectrum users or jeopardizing network security and that would satisfy the criteria of the rule.

But even more importantly is the evidence issue - you would have to get the manufacturers to admit they were pressured and the last thing the manufacturers want is to piss off Verizon. Google gets away with pissing off Verizon for obvious reasons. A Lenovo owned Motorola would not.

Another issue that your plaintiff's attorney buddy may not have grasped is what the cause of action would be under 47 cfr 27.16. The cause of action would not be a class action lawsuit for money damages - it would be a writ of mandamus to force the FCC Chairman to enforce 47 cfr 27.16. I doubt a plaintiff's attorney even knows what a writ of mandamus is. They are typically not the best and brightest the legal profession has to offer and not many attorneys are experienced in filing a writ of mandamus.

Yeah but I can see some practical issues with that in that there are no promises of a result. People would have to understand that their money was purely a gift to another person with no promise of anything in return. And it would be up to the dev if they did develop an unlock method if they wanted to charge for it or not and whether or not to give access to their unlock method away for free to those who contributed to the device fund.

I am kicking myself for not snagging a code for a discounted Moto X 2014 yesterday. I thought about it but then I was thinking, what would I do with 2 locked, unrootable Moto X 2014's? So I didn't. It would have been a good price to get a device for this purpose, but then again, I don't want to be the one to hold the money and arrange for the device, etc.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
ba ha ha ha. it only took a *month* for a VZW mod to delete my post. ;) it was another attempt to unlock the bootloader.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] Droidavie:
Be concise. - jhene aiko
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
hahahahahaha, for all of the info I packed into that post it WAS concise!!! Stop trying to lure me into an OT discussion that is going to get the thread cleaners out in force, lol!

The mods here who do the "thread cleaning" remind me of some sci-fi movie or TV show I watched where there were these "cleansers" who could turn back time and remove evil acts and with them the evil people. They come in and the remove all of our funny posts and threaten to remove us!!!!!
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
i cant be the only one incredibly pissed to read this. http://www.engadget.com/2015/04/15/verizon-data-breach-report/
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] LeoD:
Oh yeah! I'm on the same planet as you. Almost threw my phone when I read that. Lol
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
i really wish i knew a lawyer that didnt care about making money. :) as [MENTION=5983610]JulesJam[/MENTION] pointed out, though, there is much more to it than that, and most lawyers arent going to want to touch it. it just utterly pisses me off to know there is no reason. network stability and security were the only "justifiable" (not to me ;) ) reasons. glad im not alone in my thoughts there [MENTION=2648200]LeoD[/MENTION] . :)
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] Ekkoria:
It's never been about network security or stability. In my opinion it's always been about the fact that they can simply stop supporting a phone with a locked bootloader and you have to buy a new one, whereas an unlocked bl phone can receive software upgrades well past eol. And if you're particularly paranoid, they can even push poor software to phones as they get older and you can't do anything about it (I swear my old s3 got slower over time...)
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
you know, i actually agree with this theory. if you look at how long rooted users had awesome phones using the Droid1, the first/last unlocked bl droid, it is a theory that is well supported(i used it rocking pete alfonso and chevyno1's oc uv kernels and it kicked the crap out of everything else until the d3 was out)

the sad thing is selling more phones is advantageous to both moto and vzw, despite moto citing their 'agreement' with verizon as their reason to keep us bl locked. i reference those two bc in threads (possibly this one, too) i have heard that argument made by (incompetent, i imagine) IT people. there is no risk nor danger. i also think the 'free tethering' angle is crud too. i dont tether, but when i am crackflashing, i use about 30gb/month.

i have watched many phones be crippled by their final updates, so i second that as well.

on another note, can you tell me if lxle will work to pull apart system images? I had a pentium 4 machine w/only a gb of ram that i was trying to use on a dual boot (lxle/win7) but terminal didnt work worth a crap in lxle. you seem to know (just a bit lol) [MENTION=5033954]Ekkoria[/MENTION]. i on the other hand only used ubuntu or linux to root bionics, so i never learned about the pros and cons of different distros.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] Ekkoria:
Yeah theoretically that should work. I wrote that tutorial on pulling apart system images on Arch Linux, I just recommended Ubuntu because it's easy to use. Any commands you have to use may be different if you use a different distro though. However I can't vouch for the viability of doing so on a pentium 4 on 1 gb ram. ;)

Since mounting an image doesn't load it to RAM you actually should be OK, I can't see why that wouldn't work. You might just end up waiting around a while. And I definitely wouldn't flash using that machine, mofo pegged my i5 the whole time it was flashing and it took like five minutes, so obviously a slower CPU will take longer.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] LeoD:
While I believe this is true for Motorola I do not believe this to be the reason for VZW. VZW does not care in the least if they sell phones. We all know what smartphones sell for these days no matter if we buy them from VZW, Motorola or elsewhere.

VZW on the other has cares very much about us as paying our monthly bill to VZW and what they have to do to keep us as customers. Tech support, phone exchanges (support on the phones making that determination, shipping charges etc.) that hits their bottom line.

I've been on forums for many years and one thing I notice when we get root and bl unlock is one of the first threads that pop up right after that is HOW DO I RETURN MY PHONE TO STOCK!!!!!! followed by I messed up my phone flashing this or that and need to return it for a new one.

One may argue that our community is small and on the scale of things ... well maybe, but what is small? 10k? 20k? 30? imagine all the tech support involved in that and misc. charges that comes with this. Trust me it is always about the bottom line.

Keep in mind I am by no means saying I agree with either Motorola or VZW for ME not to be able to root and unlock my bl but I can see the why in it.

Also this is just IMHO and observations. ;)

---------- Post added at 10:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 AM ----------
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] Ekkoria:
On the contrary, phones that people buy for subsidized prices make a profit for Verizon. You actually end up paying the carrier more than the cost of the phone. There are some plans that drop in price once you pay off the phone IIRC, but it's to their advantage to sell you a subsidized phone.

I also believe you're right on the tech support thing. People who have no idea what they're doing breaking their phones is very unprofitable to Verizon if they have to replace it. What I think should be done is Verizon should essentially do what Motorola does - you can unlock your bootloader, but you say goodbye to your warranty (and potentially tech support as well).
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] LeoD:
For sure it has nothing to do with network stability and security. As I stated in my other post this is all about the bottom line.

Funny thing is the only interest I see VZW having in this is simply the limiting of data usage, tech support and fees associated.

If you look at the company and what has been going on the past few years. They have been doing everything they can to eliminate tech support.

---------- Post added at 11:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 AM ----------

agree 100% IMO once you root and unlock your bl your on your own.

I know I'm going to get some who are going to say things like well if my screen breaks etc etc. hardly what I am saying here.

The responsibility of what happens to my phone once I start modifying it rests with me period.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] Ekkoria:
Exactly. It's unfortunate that you would have to give up your warranty on terms of hardware defects or broken screens as well, but there's no other way to make it feasible. In fact I'd probably wait to unlock my bootloader until after my warranty expired for that exact reason.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] kitcostantino:
ah ha ha ha ha. yeah, the new one my buddy gave me is an upgrade over that (2003 dell dimension, my first computer. )

ba ha ha again.. on that computer, it took about 45 min to flash the stock rooted.img.

my newer win7 box (thanks again [MENTION=4789347]chuck864[/MENTION] !!! ) takes about 15 min.

the bad thing is the macbook (i7) has so much critical data, etc i just don't want to mess with a virtual environment, even through bootcamp. (it would have blown 60gb for the 64bit version of ubuntu) i just really want to repurpose the old one, even if it is straight linux. i could grab more ram, but i think i have only had one android phone that didnt have a better processor than that dell. maybe i should make it an emulator for the kiddos. perhaps it could handle that. lol. thank you for the advice!
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
First, Motorola can say your warranty is void all they want but what matters is the law of the state that governs the warranty. In many states, even if you do something that the manufacturer says will void your warranty, the manufacturer still has to provide warranty coverage if the issue for which you are seeking warranty service has nothing to do with what you did to void your warranty. For instance, unlocking the bootloader has nothing to do with a failed charging port. But of course, you would have to know the law that governs your case and make that argument to Motorola employees who don't know the law on that I am sure.

Second, the law that applies to Verizon as a wireless carrier is completely different than the law that applies to Motorola as a device manufacturer. The wireless carriers when it comes to voice services are treated as utilities (and for data now too). They have to work with customers to help them to have a working phone. So Verizon simply cannot say to its subscribers - you unlock your bootloader and you are on your own and we won't help you if you have problems with your service. They have to provide support to you no matter what.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] LeoD:
This is totally true and it is actually applied to the extreme. These days you can call Verizon up and ask for help with almost anything and they will spend a little bit of time trying to advise you. Right or wrong I might add lol

sorry to repeat again though there are of course costs involved with this so they are not going to be willing to create a situation that would increase the amount of calls (costs) to the company. It is actually quite the opposite.

I also do realize as well the more a company has to provide to their customers well then the cost just has to be passed onto the customers.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
And if the manufacturer can determine that what you did to the software caused the hardware to fail, then they can refuse to provide warranty service/replacement. But in many states, they cannot simply refuse to honor the warranty unless they have first determined that what you did that caused them to void the warranty is what in fact caused the device to fail.

It's not up to you. There are laws that govern this.

Perhaps but all that matters is that the flashing caused the issue you are seeking warranty coverage for. If it didn't, in many states, the manufacturer cannot refuse to provide warranty service for the issue.

It has always been that way b/c at least for voice services, Verizon is required to do this. They don't do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Verizon is required to provide support to subscribers if they are having issues with their service. Now if Verizon can determine that the issue is due to the phone and the phone is out of warranty, then it falls back on you to get a new phone. BUT Verizon has to at least troubleshoot to the point that they can determine it is the phone that is the problem.

If the phone is in warranty and Verizon determines that the problem is the phone, Verizon will provide you with a (crappy) CLNR but you also have the option of dealing directly with the manufacturer.

Yes, as I and others have stated before, THAT is the main reason they don't want unlocked bootloaders but it is also b/c people can do things with their unlocked devices that Verizon doesn't want you to be able to do, like WiFi tether for free.

That is a choice the company makes - they also have the option to cut their dividends and reduce obscene executive salary/compensation. They don't have to pass it on to the customers, they have other options too.
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] LeoD:
My intention was not to debate law. It was more on the order of why Motorola and VZW does not want to unlock bl.

When it comes to law in my experience just because there are laws in place does not mean it is not going to be broken. If that the case there would be no need for lawyers. (What a wonderful thought)

Most time to have law enforced it costs money. I'm not to willing to spend that much for a $600 phone.;)
[Verizon Motorola Droid Turbo General] JulesJam:
No one is that is why the manufacturers say that your warranty is void b/c they know most people aren't going to do anything about it even when the law is on their side. Anyhow, this could be filed in small claims court w/o a lawyer.

IME, you never have to go that far b/c if you can get through to someone who is in the position to make a decision and sound like you know what you are talking about, they will make an exception for your case if they believe you aren't bluffing about taking them to court.

---------- Post added at 09:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:41 PM ----------

That's my point also - the laws are on place to protect your from a manufacturer across the board voiding your warranty if you unlock your bootloader yet Motorola does it anyhow.

Let me know how you feel after you get a DUI and need a lawyer to keep you out of jail. Or if you are the victim of a drunk driver and need a lawyer to fight with an insurance company so that you can get a decent settlement to pay your medical bills and lost wages due to the accident the drunk driver caused.

Or if your wife divorces you and wants full custody of the kids, full ownership of the house and 1/2 of your income for the rest of your life and you need a lawyer to get a reasonable marital settlement and custody order out of her.

Or if the IRS is coming after you for taxes you don't owe and you need a lawyer to prevent them from levying your bank account and seizing your assets.

Or if you have an employee who steals your business's trade secrets and you need to take action against them.

And so on and so on and so on.