Court Order Against German T-Mobile iPhone Sales 195
An anonymous reader writes "In a strange move, Vodafone applied for and was granted a restraining order against T-Mobile to prohibit the sale of iPhone in Germany. A regional court in Hamburg has issued a restraining order. According to CNNMoney.com: 'Specifically, Vodafone is questioning the iPhone's exclusive use in T-Mobile's network and the use of the device being limited to certain fees within T-Mobile's subscription offerings.' Vodaphone says they are not trying to halt iPhone sales completely; they seem to want a court to examine the questions of exclusivity and licensing."
Re:Whats Wrong? (Score:5, Informative)
T-Mobile has stupefying marketshare in Germany. Not total, but stupefying. And it's not just in mobiles (called a 'handy' in Germany) but in WiFi, hotel systems, hotspots, xDSL, and pay-by-packet schemes.
Re:People like to complain. (Score:5, Informative)
news flash: iphone lock in sucks (Score:2, Informative)
2. carrier lock in is the worst of the worst, you don't get to make excuses for it just because it's apple.
3. many EU countries have laws against crapy lock in products like this, it's good for the consumer.
Re:good! (Score:4, Informative)
Court in Hamburg (Score:3, Informative)
Re:good! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:good! (Score:3, Informative)
The thing is though, the plan they offer you is so much worse than other plans available, even other plans from the same provider, that the "free phone" is anything but. It's not a good deal to get a "free phone" pay $20/month and $0.10/minute rather than buying a similar phone yourself for $300, pay $0/month and $0/minute for the first 150 minutes, $0.07/minute thereafter. To take a random (but real) example.
If you use 200 minutes/month (fairly average here) the first plan would, including phone, cost you $480/year.
The second plan would cost you $142/year if you switch phones every 3 years. Even if you switch phones every single year, that'll still be $342/year, so aprox $150/year cheaper than the "free" phone.
Once you include SMS, the picture is even more bleak for the "free" phone.
Summary is misleading (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Whats Wrong? (Score:3, Informative)
It's quite different in the energy market (electricity and natural gas) where we just have a bunch of mini-Enrons.
Re:Sigh (Score:4, Informative)
Who else? AT&T doesn't exist over here and T-Mobile owns the D1 network, which has the most subscribers. Competitors like Vodafone, O2 or E-Plus are big, but not quite as big as T-Mobile, which had a huge advantage as it evolved out of the earlier federal post's telephone service.
T-Mobile really was the obvious choice.
Re:good! (Score:2, Informative)
How good is a phone if you can't make a phone call.
If you have to apply some third party hack in order to unlock the phone, you lose all warranties and can end up with 400 USD brick, if you accidentally upgrade to unsupported firmware.
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:That is not how business works (Score:3, Informative)
As a European, I'm surprised by your assertion that it's illegal, because several operators in a variety of European countries offer crippled phones under exclusive deals, so it does in fact happen. This is because there is no EC directive that makes such tying illegal unless there is a monopoly involved (an EC-wide monopoly, not a monopoly in one or two countries).
Clue stick: there are many laws in various European countries that are specific to those countries. In this case, it is a matter of German law, hence the fact that a German district court was used rather than the European courts. Given the fact that both operators are competitors in several European countries besides Germany, it's highly likely that the European courts would have been used as a "one stop" solution if, as you claim, such activities were actually illegal in Europe itself.
The only actual Europe-wide law that would be of any consequence to exclusive deals between an operator and a phone maker are the ones governing open trade borders. Under these, consumers in a European country where exclusive deals and locked-down products are allowed can freely buy from other European countries where such practices are prohibited (e.g. Belgium or France), and any warranties must be honoured in the country where the consumer lives (unless of course the manufacturer has no authorised service centres in that country). In the case of the iPhone, this means that while Apple can freely enter into tying agreements in countries that permit them, they can't take any action that prevents residents of those countries from buying unlocked versions from EC member states which prohibit it, although they can of course simply refuse to sell iPhones in any country that doesn't allow such exclusive deals.
Re:That is not how business works (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Interesting business in Germany? (Score:3, Informative)
This concept is very clear right now in most of the things in EU policy. It's the same for most products, there should be a separation between manufacturer of a product and the service provider. Or at least have the option to choose service provider, no matter who you purchased the hardware from.
Another example, maybe a bit far fetched, but one I know well. In Europe, transport by train has two distict parts. One is the company who builds the tracks, and other is the company who runs the trains. And they cannot be the same company, and the company who builds the tracks must be open to ANY company running trains in their tracks, if they pay the stipulated track access charges.
The EU is pushing this idea in most areas of the economy. And I think it works.
Re:Sigh (Score:2, Informative)
Re:good! (Score:3, Informative)
In Germany, the iPhone is only sold by T-Mobile, and only in T-Mobile shops, and only in connection with the contract. You can't buy an iPhone at an Apple store, and you can't buy one without signing the contract.
Re:Sigh (Score:3, Informative)
It might also be illegal to require a certain subscription for a certain phone.
As I understand it, this is what is being tested.
If it is illegal, Apple will either have to stop selling their phones in the EU, or let their customers choose operator and subscription freely, like the other mobile-phone manufacturers do.
Also, I haven't seen any subscriptions the last six years or so where data service doesn't come as standard. Probably since MMS and many other mobile services are dependent on this.
Re:Sigh (Score:3, Informative)
Are you smoking a crack pipe?
Lets see - UK Sales of Goods Act 1974. Any goods unfit for purpose can be returned, with no exception. Minimum 1 year warranty on all goods (about to be 2 years to bring in line with rest of Europe) as well - none of this 90 day rubbish
UK Distance Selling regs (applies to companies on Ebay as well
Trades Descriptions Acts - statutory penalties for mis selling goods, including jail time.
Shall I continue?