Should government end exclusive cell phone deals?
It’s certainly an annoyance for many cell phone users - the idea that you have to switch carriers if you are intrigued by a particular phone. Want an iPhone? You have to sign with AT&T. How about the new Palm Pre? Call Sprint. Maybe you’d like a Blackberry Storm. Welcome to the word of Verizon.
These exclusive deals are certainly popular these days and that doesn’t look to be changing anytime soon - at least not if the wireless carriers can help it.
But maybe they won’t have a choice. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) made a bit of noise in this arena on Tuesday when he raised the subject on a blog post at SaveTheInternet.com.
Here’s the issue I think we need to wrestle with: wireless service providers are largely deciding what phone you can use. We don’t see that happening in similar markets.
Your broadband provider doesn’t decide what kind of computer you can connect to at the end of your DSL or cable wire. And forty years ago, the FCC ruled in the historic Carterfone decision that AT&T couldn’t pick and choose which phones can and can’t connect to its network.
Is the status quo the right model for maximizing innovation, competition and consumer choice? Or do we need a change?
Kerry plans to bring the subject up for discussion during hearings of the Senate Commerce Committee. He’s seeking public comment.
Obviously the wireless carriers aren’t going to be too thrilled by this talk. But wait. If it means wrestling the iPhone away from AT&T, perhaps Verizon and Sprint will become fans of more government intervention.
On the consumer side, I’m having trouble imagining any reason for the average cell phone to oppose an end to these exclusive deals. Who votes against having more choices? But maybe I’m missing something.
Tim has covered a wide range of topics, including tourism, crime, aviation and gambling, since becoming a reporter in 1990. The Oklahoma native joined the Post-Dispatch in 2007 after spending nine years in Orlando. In his spare time, he's often exploring one virtual world or another. He can be reached at tbarker@post-dispatch.com. 
Luckily for me, and the other citizens of the USA, I am “still” able to publicly comment about issues such as this without fear of government control or penalty; but I wonder for how long. I also feel privileged to still be able to, without help from a higher power, decide which type of toilet paper to buy, use and dispose of. And that’s where this idea belongs; disposed of with the toilet paper.
The less we hear from Lurch about ANYTHING, the better.
When will the socialists stop infiltrating this country, where is Joe McCarthy when you need him?
The carriers help pay for R & D, they help pay for advertising and now the government is going to take the benefits away?
Where does this stop? Cable companies going out of business becuase any cable box can be used? DirecTV being forced to allow any manufacturer to use their service?
So I guess all the other pressing problems of the world have been solved?
This is totally stupid. I agree, that for some people who have to have the latest and greatest toy, that these exclusive deals are a pain. But c’mon, the feds need to get involved in the business relationships between cellular providers and the manufacturers of the phones? I guess what we need is a single, government-run cellular provider that will allow all Americans to exercise their constitutionally protected right to have whatever phone they want.
Of course, like most consumers, I’d like to buy the phone of my choice on the network of my choice. Typically, 3G networks vary in quality by location, and one should be able to choose the network of best quality.
To be fair, though, there may be particular adjustments that handset makers and wireless carriers have to make to get specific phones to work on specific networks. For example, Sprint TV may not work the same as Verizon’s. If Palm can get the Pre working on Sprint before they have it ready to work on Verizon, why should they have to wait before making it available on Sprint?
Hey Herb. It’s not Socialist and it doesn’t affect R&D. Does Dell or Apple require an exclusive agreement with an internet provider in order to do R&D? No! The manufacturers will get by just fine and the market, not AT&T or Sprint, will decide winners and losers among the handsets. Limiting the market with exclusivity agreements — now that’s socialism.