Talk:SIM lock/Archive 1

Ungarn untitled
I live in Hungary but never heard about SIM unlocking being prohibited by laws. It just violates the warranty, nothing more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.24.191.129 (talk • contribs) 12:04, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

SIM Unlocking Procedure.
I am trying to unlock two Nokia phones, 6200 and 3220. Both are from US, the 6200 is a former ATT Wireless, and the 3220 from T-Mobile. The contract from 6200 expired six months ago. I asked ATTWS for a SIM Unlock code and the Customer Support pretended to never heard of such a thing. T-Mobile has provided an unlock code, without any instructions on how to use it. My repeated requests to clarify the instructions are left unanswered.

I have searched the WWW and there is some much incoherent information without a clear cut instructions, like should the phone have SIM in it during the unlocking process or not. Some sites say it should, some say it should not. Since I have only five attempts( all sites in agreement on that ) I don't want to risk it. Also, what are sll those unlocking codes, up to seven for, each IMEI? No explanation.

Can anyone out there help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.232.2.72 (talk • contribs) 12:04, 10:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


 * well the answer is that you must take out the sim card, it works like that (i have done it before) without any risks or problems
 * Sam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.200.110 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

For what its worth...a free site for unlocking your phone
Due to what seems to me to be overly restrictive Editors, I can't post this link on the main page of this article. I have used this site twice, it worked both times and it's free. If I had known about it before I started trying to unlock my phone it would have saved me some time and hassle- so for what its worth here it is, take it or leave it. http://www.trycktill.com/eng/ --Trounce 11:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I 've just found this article explainig Nokia boxcodes- its not bad. http://www.unlockme.co.uk/codesexplained.html --Trounce 12:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually the whole website seems fairly sound- But I haven't used it. http://www.unlockme.co.uk --Trounce 12:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Bogus link?
Just a note from a random passerby. The second link under External Links links to some guy's opinion on Motorola's ring tones. Other than the header it offers nothing about unlocking anything. Just a FYI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.209.140.19 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC) yeah it is but hard as hell to find a code — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.4.146.227 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

USA-centric
this article is USA centric, e.g. in Italy almost no cellphone is locked
 * Disagree - Most countries DO have SIM Locked phones. Australia, for example, has lots of phones that are locked to a certain carrier, but allmost all of those carriers will let you unlock the phone for no, or a small, fee. Xrobau 09:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The "Laws on SIM locking" section has information on different countries. If you have references about Italy or other places, you can add them to the article. Shawnc 07:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Illogical statement
The text has the following sentence: "At this time in most countries it is either mandatory or voluntary for the provider to unlock the customer's mobile phone."

I don't get the intention of the original writer since it is of course either mandatory or voluntary to do something. Could it be otherwise? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.116.59.13 (talk • contribs).


 * I agree, and have added a "clarify me" tag. It was either that or removing the statement. Fourohfour 19:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I changed the statement to say that in most countries it is legal if not mandatory to do so, which I believe was the original author's intent. --69.123.165.15 23:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Dutch law
I just added a reference to a statement by the Dutch telecommunication authority (OPTA) on the 12-month period for simlocks in the Netherlands.

Literally the statement says: "SIM-lock - System wherein a code is used to couple a SIM card to a certain mobile phone. Operators may use a SIMlock for subscriptions that include payoff for the phone over the course of several months (at most 12). The SIM-lock actually is a protection against theft." (I don't know what that last sentence means either) 194.171.252.100 12:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge of "Subsidy lock (cellular)" and "Unlocked gsm phone" into this article
I support the merge proposed by user:IlyaHaykinson. I can't see any reason for having three separate articles all covering fundamentally the same thing.

Note that the two articles above do not appear to be referenced at all, and in parts have an air of original research about them. I'd be wary when merging the material in. Fourohfour 12:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. Magioladitis 07:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I disagree - 'SIM Lock' is what it's referred to pretty much everywhere in the world. It would be better to merge 'Subsidy Lock' into -this- article, and redirect subsidy to here. Xrobau 09:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * "SIM lock" does have a lot more hits than "subsidy lock". Shawnc 07:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Either way, I note that no-one has opposed merging in itself. Fourohfour 13:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Why are they not all merged under Cellular/Mobile Phone? B.Soto 04:18, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that you are a bunch of experts discussing a highly technical subject. The unwashed masses, such as myself in this case, don't understand what the heck a "SIM lock" is, much less what GSM is, or, that CDMA doesn't have "unlocked" phones (or does it?). When I searched Wikipedia, I searched for "unlocked cell phone" so please don't confuse the ignorant. An encyclopedia should have general entry titles that explain the technicalities in the body of the article, not the reverse. Don't merge under "SIM lock." 71.161.218.208 18:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be unanimous consensus for the 3-way merge. The wish to be able to find "unlocked cell phone" is met by a redirect. To get the ball rolling I will simply replace "Subsidy lock (cellular)" and "Unlocked gsm phone" with a redirect to SIM lock, following Wikipedia's injunction "Be bold". I haven't incorporated any of the material from the other articles. Please fell free to revert or to continue the task. Best wishes Pol098 20:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Error: Vodafone unlocks for free
The article says:


 * In Australia [...] Most carriers except Vodafone charge a fee for the unlock code / instructions, [...] The Vodafone network will unlock a handset free of charge after 48 hours of ownership via this page on their website.:

So I bought a phone on eBay that was locked to Vodafone, thinking I'll unlock it for free when I get it. But when I go to that page, it wants to charge me $25AUD.

So it's worth saying again, always double-check your facts on Wikipedia. Maybe somebody can clarify or fix this Rfwoolf (talk) 12:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Controversy section?
As seen in the case of the iPhone, there is much controversy surrounding this subject; I think that this article can be expanded that way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiknerd (talk • contribs) 15:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Could more info about the new protections implemented by Nokia be added?
I would like to know more about what Nokia is doing to make their locks stronger than they were in the past --TiagoTiago (talk) 00:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

More details about the different unlocking processes?
I would like to read more about how the different unlocking processes are done (including both the ones that only require a code to be typed ont he device aswell the ones that require specific hardware). Also would be interested in learning the differences between the unlocking techiniques used by DIYers/third-party companies and the ones used by the operators that locked the devices --TiagoTiago (talk) 00:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Error? Regulations on unlocking
The article says this:

(In many markets, it is also unlikely that a customer would prematurely unlock a pay-as-you-go phone over the counter, since they are legally bound by any such contract anyway).

Should it not read pay monthly (Contract) rather than pay-as-you-go. It seem perfectly reasonable that someone would unlock a pay-as-you-go phone as soon as it bought. But with a pay monthly (Contract) phone, you'd have to pay the monthly fee even after unlocking it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.169.190 (talk) 19:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[Iphone in France] Isn't the french Iphone still simlocked to country? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.223.209 (talk) 14:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Ofcom and unlocking pay-as-you-go handsets in the UK
I just removed a section including this text: In the United Kingdom, government regulator OFCOM dictates that networks must release the unlocking information to customers for non-contract handsets (e.g. Pay as you go) on request. I can find no such information on the Ofcom site. The closest I found was a ruling from 1998 saying Oftel (as it was at the time) believed (not regulated) that "unsubsidised phones should not be sim-locked unless an operator can demonstrate an objective justification for doing so".

Additionally, Ofcom appear to have stopped providing guidelines on the practice of SIM unlocking. Currently, their consumer advice section only mentions that unlocking is available, but is subject to the networks' terms. &mdash; Christopher (talk) @ 14:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

to me their statement is quite clear (although perhaps it's new?): ... mobiles should be able to be unlocked once the subsidy has been recovered. This should generally be within a year if not before. Charging for the associated admin costs of unlocking a mobile is acceptable, but customers should not expect to pay more than £30 + VAT

Mnbf9rca (talk) 08:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

AT&T unlocks phones?
In the United States, the two national GSM carriers, T-Mobile and AT&T Mobility will unlock your handset if you have an active account in good standing for at least 90 days A citation is provided for T-Mobile... could someone provide a citation for the claim that AT&T does this? TerraFrost 18:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Whoever provided the AT&T cite apparently misread it, as it says "You can also use GSM handsets with different carriers by asking AT&T or T-Mobile to "unlock" the phone. With some exceptions, AT&T will do so once you're out of a contract, T-Mobile after you're 90 days into it". As an AT&T employee I can confirm that that the cited article is correct, the only way AT&T will unlock your phone before the contract is up is for international travel, and only then if you call in and refuse to take no for an answer. 76.3.221.15 (talk) 15:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unlock code from 3rd party...how?
Something I have always wondered is how so many 3rd party vendors are able to sell unlock codes (via email) to people who pay their fee and supply the IMEI number. If anybody works in such a company, or in the cell phone industry, and has an explanation I think that would be a good addition to this section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidy_lock#Unlocking_via_code

For example, is there a database that companies are able to purchase from cell carriers? Or how else can a 3rd party "process" an IMEI to supply the unlock code.

Anyway, I don't know, but if somebody does, it would make a good improvement to the article. Corylc (talk) 05:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. A lot of money is being made with this business. Information about how they do it is very important for this article. 82.229.209.33 (talk) 12:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Over-emphasis on iPhone
I think the article focuses too much on the iPhone; though it is SIM-locked, it is not the first such device, so care should be taken to avoid bias towards the iPhone. nneonneo talk 03:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I do see how the iPhone is mentioned alot in this article, however because of Apple's exclusive deals with carriers it stands out and bring to light the topic of SIM locking. I don't think there is any bias issues, no one claims the iPhone is superior, it just happens to be the driving force behind most of the discussion on SIM locking. Mcmatter (talk) 18:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Reasons for prohibiting SIM locking
Besides consumer protection, the main reason I have heard for prohibiting SIM locking is the environment. With a locked phone, when you change your service provider, you have to discard your old phone and get a new one. This causes electronic waste, which is a major source of toxins in the environment. It is similar to the EU's requirement that all re-chargers follow a single standard, so you don't have to discard those when changing phones.Bostoner (talk) 00:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I think the main reason for prohibiting SIM-locking and/or bundling of cellphones and service, is that it only enables price obfuscation strategies by the service provider. E.g. there is currently no service provider, which provides discounted service for people, which do not want a new cellphone. There is no advantage for the customer. The obvious advantage for the service provider, is that he is able to prohibit certain kinds of usage of the phone, which is not in his interest. I think this is strongly anti-customer. E.g. the service provider is able to charge for services, which should be implied: like being able to connect other devices to the WAN provided by the phone. The service provider can channel the customer to overpriced services provided by him, e.g. downloading ring-tones.

I think any device, which cannot be used with a variety of service providers, should be free of charge. This applies to a lot of services (satellite TV, DSL service, cellphone service, e-book readers). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.108.117.3 (talk) 19:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Article level tags
The overcoverage/globalize tagging was clearly out of date with current state, removed it and opening this thread as the others seem at first glance spurious as well. This is a technical article and reports matters of fact so the OR claim is subject to summary dismissal after review. As far as POV, is the complaint that the article doesn't present the self-evident advantage that entities that use this seek? 72.228.177.92 (talk) 14:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Prohibition of locking the phone in Brazil
Apparently there was a recent prohibition of locking mobiles in Brazil and even tie-in the user to a contract. I couldn't really find anything relevant in English, but please refer to http://chicoterra.com/2012/07/02/justica-proibe-todo-tipo-de-bloqueio-de-celulares/ and http://www.infomoney.com.br/tecnologia/noticia/2500618-operadoras+telefonia+celular+surpreendem+com+decisao+anatel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.1.2 (talk) 17:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Avoid mentioning company names
Unless a company or specific product or brand is so well known in this field that its absence in this article would be glaring, please leave it out. In particular, if two or more companies offer the same or similar product or service or had a similar role in relation to this topic, don't list either one without discussing it on the talk page first. To do so will make you look like a spammer.

I'm writing this because this article has a history of on-and-off abuse by either spammers or well-meaning editors who do not understand that Wikipedia is not promotional, or at least no more promotional than is inherent when talking about certain topics. I just reverted a well-intentioned (WP:AGF) pair of edits that were, in effect, promotional edits. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikibooks how-to-unlock article
Does anyone want to see how-to guides on unlocking cellphones on Wikibook? Shawnc 05:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. Please link to them from this article.


 * Guides for unlocking lots of different handsets

http://www.eunlocked.com - they provide instructions and fast turn around on unlock codes!

http://www.nationunlock.com- Provide cheaper, economic, easy, and reliable unlocks!!! get your phone unlocked today! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.230.222 (talk) 22:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

unlocking your nokia
For Nokia and other brands, use http://www.cheapunlocks.com, if you succeed you could donate some to wikipedia?!

---

I know Wiki isn't meant to be a "how-to", but this tutorial I wrote should help people out. You could also use some of the information for the SIM lock page... http://vitriol.t35.com/html/articles/simlocks.html

If you need help, email me: vitriolist@gmail.com

It's not prohibited in Finland, at least any longer, as there are available certain contracts with locked phones like Elisa Paketti. Dmit 21:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)186.65.87.254 (talk) 13:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete information on unlocked phones in the US
The article states "It is possible to buy unlocked phones in the US. Online retailers such as GSM Nation sell phones that come unlocked from the manufacturer, that is, they were never locked in the first place." What it does not say is that most of these unlocked phones are NOT US phones and as such are not warranted, serviced or supported in the US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DEMcAdams (talk • contribs) 18:50, 6 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Google Play offers US phones to US customers, all unlocked and unbranded. —Zenexer &#91;talk&#93; 23:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Distinguish between SIM card and the Phone
This article could do a better job of distinguishing between the SIM CARD and the PHONE. They are physically separable, so is the SIM card locked? Or is the PHONE locked? Or both? Consumers can remove a SIM card from one phone and insert it in another phone without regard to the original provider of the phone or the card. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.239.186 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Laws on SIM Locking: Hong Kong
The Hong Kong SIM locking law was mentioned in the article. According to the history page, that section reads "In Hong Kong, carriers are not allowed to sell locked mobile phones, with the exception of some PDA phone models, such as those offered by RIM (Research In Motion)." prior to the September 19 revision, and was then changed to "Hong Kong carriers are allowed to sell locked mobile phones. The Hong Kong Telecommunications Authority hasn't revised their 1997 ruling which allowed SIM locking." As far as I am aware of, no discussion regrading this change has been taken place. The cited page provide no support for the change. On the contrary, according to a statement from the OFTA (which, ironically, could be found on the cited page), SIM Locking is forbidden in Hong Kong "if 'SIM Lock' is solely used for the purpose of tying customers to networks". Therefore, I propose that we should change it back to the original version, any objection?GodfreyChan (talk) 23:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Changed.GodfreyChan (talk) 07:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC) someone pls help, vodafone are charging me 45euro to unlock my sim, anyone who can help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.68.26 (talk) 17:22, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

تهكير Dh22005 (talk) 07:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

كيف اهكر Dh22005 (talk) 07:15, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on SIM lock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110303051041/http://www.porta.net:80/porta_web/promociones/postpago/promociones_planes/promociones_planes_214-6612.html to https://www.porta.net/porta_web/promociones/postpago/promociones_planes/promociones_planes_214-6612.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120710010732/http://www.sic.gob.hn:80/transparencia/documentos/Leyes/Ley_de_Proteccion_al_Consumidor.pdf to http://www.sic.gob.hn/transparencia/documentos/Leyes/Ley_de_Proteccion_al_Consumidor.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160105041720/http://www.ancom.org.ro/_3719 to http://www.ancom.org.ro/_3719

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:47, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Tidy up countries
Perhaps we should group countries by it's continents. Would anyone advocate that?Sir Stupidity (talk) 08:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * At this point I don't think it would be prudent as it wouldn't add to the organization of the article. I would maybe go as far changing the heading to Laws and Practices of Sim Locking, since many of the countries seem to lack any actual 'laws' pertaining to sim locking. Mcmatter (talk) 14:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Went ahead and changed the heading Mcmatter (talk) 17:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Missing countries Switzerland and Russia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1205:503A:9280:ACD8:4074:711F:340A (talk) 11:17, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Doesn't explain SIM LOCK-1 message
I have a Model LG 329G TracFone (bottom of the line). Its "SIM LOCK-1" message is not clearly explained by this article (or by the phone itself).

The message is preceded by a plain message "Please wait" occupying the full screen for a few seconds.

I get the message once in a while when pressing buttons to bring the phone out of Keyboard Lock mode, but I have not been able to pin down exactly which sequence of buttons causes the message. Once I get this message, I can't do anything further with the phone until I turn it off then turn it on again. It is very puzzling and I cannot find anything about it through Web searches.

I'm not just asking for help for myself, a senior, but for a new section in the article that would explain why the screen message happens and what to do about it (if there is some other response other than cycling the phone off and on). David Spector (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

False statement
"Note that newer (2016+) high end mobile phones are capable of supporting both CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing customers to use their mobile devices on any network. Examples of these mobile devices are the Apple iPhone 7 and Samsung's Galaxy S8 smart phones"

This statement is not true. There where phones capable of working both networks even before 2016 (I would say circa 2013): iPhone 5c, iPhone 6/6s, Motorola G4/G4 Plus, Motorola X Pure, Samsung S6, Samsung S7, LG G4, etc... mostly all based on Qualcomm radios (Snapdragon chipsets). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SoNic67 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)