Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road...
by rosser on Friday October 10, 2014 @07:42PM
(#8440632)
No, subsidized phones aren't the carrier's property while you're in contract. You're liable for an early termination fee if you break the contract (barring the case of "adverse changes" or the like), but you own the phone — or at least the atoms in it.
You still have a reduced "expectation of privacy" in your mobile communications, however, in that you're using your carrier as an intermediary to those communications. Consider pen registers, for example.
Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road...
by TrevorJ on Saturday October 11, 2014 @12:40AM
(#8441273)
I reviewed the legal argument that the CTIA made in favor of disallowing end users from unlocking phones and it turns out I was mistaken and you are correct.
You still have a reduced "expectation of privacy" in your mobile communications, however, in that you're using your carrier as an intermediary to those communications. Consider pen registers, for example.