Sometime this week your elected Senators will vote on the much revised FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) legislation that will exonerate your cell phone companies from any wrong-doing for illegally spying on YOU.  The FISA legislation will essentially legalize the warrantless wiretapping that Bush and Cheney have come to depend on in their quest to strip you of all of your constitutional rights.

As Mr. Galloway says in the accompanying article, they want you to live in fear forever, and you are letting that happen by your inaction.  Call or write to your Senator TODAY and ask them to stop this madness.

How Dare They Rip The Fourth Amendment?

Posted July 5, 2008 | 05:28 PM (EST)

Early next week the U.S. Senate will vote on an extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, with a few small amendments intended to immunize telecommunications corporations that assisted our government in the warrantless and illegal wiretapping it has grown to love.

That such a gutting of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution even made it out of committee is yet another stain on the gutless and seemingly powerless Democratic majority in both houses of Congress.

That a majority on both sides of the aisle — not least of them the presumptive nominees for president of both political parties — intend to vote for such a violation of Americans’ right to privacy and of the sanctity of their personal communications is a stunning surrender to those who want us to live in fear forever.

We are living in a time when the right of habeas corpus — which simply put is your right to be brought before a proper court of law where the government is made to prove that there is good and legal reason to detain you — recently survived by a margin of only one vote at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Now these bad actors are prepared to set aside your right to privacy — written into the Constitution as a key part of our Bill of Rights — with hardly a nod in the direction of the true patriots who rebelled against an English king and his army to guarantee those rights.

That they will do this while the last empty phrases of the political windbags at the Fourth of July celebrations are still echoing across a thousand city parks and the bright red, white and blue bunting and blizzard of American flags still flap in the breeze is little short of breath-taking.

How dare they?

Those denizens of the White House and Capitol Hill and all those gray granite buildings that line avenues with names like Constitution and Independence in the nation’s capitol would have us believe that we must trade our rights, all of our rights, for some measure of security from the terrorists.

They would have us believe that a nation of 300 million people must surrender what a million other Americans gave their lives in war to protect in order to protect us from a couple of hundred fanatics hiding in caves in Waziristan.

Benjamin Franklin himself wrote of such a debate:

"Those who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The fact that British troops, operating on flimsy general warrants handed out by local magistrates, were kicking in the doors of ordinary Americans and rifling through their pantries and papers in search of smuggled, untaxed goods was a prime reason why our ancestors rebelled against their king and went to war.

This is WHY we celebrate the Fourth of July. This is why the vote on renewing the expanded version of FISA and whitewashing the egregious violations of the Fourth Amendment for seven long years by our government is important.

If neither John McCain, the Republican, or Barrack Obama, the Democrat, can find the courage to oppose such a violation of so basic a right, then what are we to do for a president, a successor to George W. Bush, The Decider, who has since 9/11 decided what rights you are entitled to keep, what laws he will or will not obey, and whether you will be protected by these words of the Constitution:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

That’s it. That’s the Fourth Amendment. That is what these folks in Washington, D.C., have violated continuously and in secret for seven long years.

Somewhere across an ocean and a desert, hiding in his cave, a man of hate named Osama bin Laden is laughing up the sleeve of his dirty robe at the thought that he and a small handful of fellow fanatics could tie a great nation in knots — knots of fear stoked by our own leaders.

We have done incalculably more and greater damage to ourselves since September 11, 2001, than a thousand bin Ladens and ten thousand al Qaida recruits could ever have done to us.

Franklin D. Roosevelt famously declared that "we have nothing to fear but fear itself." Now it would seem that we have no one to fear but ourselves and our leaders.

The questions I pose are these:

How can even one senator on either side of the aisle in good conscience vote in favor of this law that does nothing to enhance our security and everything to diminish our rights as a free people?

How can both men who seek to become our next president cast such a vote when both should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder declaring that they would govern by our consent and with our approval, not by wielding the coercive and corrosive and corrupt powers that King George III and his latter-day namesake from Texas thought are theirs by divine right?

This post was originally published by McClatchy Newspapers

[Thanks, Huffington Post]

In spite of veto threats from the lame duck idiot in the White House, the house of Representatives passed the FISA Amendments Act with a 213 to 197 vote last Friday.  Choosing legality over cronyism, the House has send a strong massage to the Bush/Cheney administration that enough is enough.

We may just be able to hold on to a few of our civil and constitutional rights while we wait for a new, Democratic dawn 310 days from now.

Kudos go out to the brave 213 Reps and I hope the other 197 burn in hell.

House Passes Spy Bill, Rejects Telcom Amnesty Despite Veto Threat
By Ryan Singel

Democrats continued their defiance of President Bush on Friday over his secret wiretapping program, passing a spying bill that calls for a commission to investigate the program, and refusing to give amnesty to telecoms that collaborated with the warrantless surveillance.

House Democratic leaders secured passage of the spying bill known as the FISA Amendments Act by a vote of 213 to 197, four weeks after a similar measure was defeated by a coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats. That defeat led to the expiration of a temporary spying measure, setting off a week-long Republican effort to scare the American people with phantoms of lost wiretaps.

Republicans were championing a Senate bill that includes amnesty for telecoms and gives the nation’s spies wide powers to wiretap using facilities inside the United States with little court oversight.

Instead of caving to that rhetoric, the House Democrats doubled down on their original legislation, by including a call for a commission, armed with subpoena power, that would investigate the secret spying. The bill also allows telecoms to defend themselves in court by showing secret documents to federal judge. The Bush administration had blocked them from using classified information in their own defense.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which brought the leading suit against the nation’s telecoms, applauded the House’s moxie.

"Amnesty proponents have been claiming on the Hill for months that phone companies like AT&T had a good faith belief that the NSA program was legal," EFF senior staff attorney Kevin Bankston said. "Under this bill, the companies could do what they should have been able to do all along: tell that story to a judge."

The White House had no such kind words, saying the bill was "partisan" and would be "dead on arrival" in the Senate.

"The House of Representatives took a significant step backward in defending our country against terrorism and passed a partisan bill that will please class-action trial lawyers at the expense of our national security," White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto said in a statement. 

Now the House and Senate bills will need to be reconciled, and sent to the president, which won’t happen for weeks due to the pending Easter recess.

Sen. Kit Bond, R-Missouri, the top Republican on the Senate intelligence committee, said, "While the threat level remains high, some in this country, and in Congress, want us to let our guard down. The Pelosi Democrats are rolling the dice with our national security."

Threat Level would like to point out that Bond clearly hasn’t seen our threat meter, which is now green. Also the official threat level is yellow, or "elevated."

President Bush has repeatedly claimed that there’s an urgent national security need for new spying legislation. But he also says he’ll veto any surveillance bill that does not grant retroactive immunity to the companies that turned over phone records and access to internet cable fibers to the government.

Bush argues that the participating companies were patriots, and that they would stop complying with lawful court orders in the future if not freed from the lawsuits accusing them of conducting illegal surveillance for Bush.

But it will likely be politically difficult to veto a bill containing new spying powers Bush himself says are vital to American’s security, simply because a couple of deep-pocketed corporations are facing lawsuits for violating federal privacy laws.

The bill, H.R. 3773, is not immediately available on that THOMAS website, but when posted it will be here. A draft of the bill is available here (.pdf).

[Thanks, Wired]

Another good read:

EFF Applauds House Passage of Surveillance Bill with No Telecom Immunity

Attempting to block the adoption of the new FISA wiretap bill which would grant immunity to the telephone companies that illegally tapped American citizens phones, Senator Chris Dodd needs your help.

It’s important that your lawmakers know how you feel about the the president, the vice president and the NSA casually defecating on your rights and the Constitution.

They will only know if you stand up and be counted.  The way to do that is to call your elected officials and ask that they pledge their support to Senator Dodd in this important fight for democracy.

Fred Benenson has setup a list on CommitteeCaller.com to help you call those Senators supporting Dodd’s FISA filibuster. Go to CommiteeCaller.com and click ‘Senators for Senator Dodd’s FISA Filibuster’ under ‘Special Lists’ to be automatically connected to every senator, for free, who is supporting Dodd’s important strategy to prevent the telecoms from getting retroactive immunity."

From BoingBoing:

Call your Senator NOW and support Sen Dodd’s fight to save the Constitution

Posted by Cory Doctorow, January 24, 2008 5:11 AM | permalink

Congress is poised to pass the new FISA wiretapping bill, granting immunity to the companies that helped the President and the NSA shred the Constitution while illegally, warrantlessly wiretapping the nation’s phones and Internet traffic. You can stop it.

Rich sez, "Senator Dodd is waging a magnificent fight against the destruction of the Constitution; but he could use support. The link gives the names and phone numbers of senators who have either (a) stood with him previously (b) expressed support for him or (c) opposed telco amnesty. It includes two candidates for president. We need to make it clear to all of them that this is their chance to ‘uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ Right here, right now."

* Barbara Boxer: (202) 224-3553
* Sherrod Brown: (202) 224-2315
* Russ Feingold: (202) 224-5323
* Ted Kennedy: (202) 224-4543
* Bill Nelson: (202) 224-5274
* Ron Wyden: (202) 224-5244
* Joe Biden: (202) 224-5042
* Hillary Clinton: (202) 224-4451
* John Kerry: (202) 224-2742
* Bob Menendez: (202) 224-2742
* Barack Obama: (202) 224-2854
* Ben Cardin: (202) 224-4524
* Norm Coleman: (202) 224-5641
* Dick Durbin: (202) 224-2152

[Thanks, BoingBoing]

The Senate is supposed to begin debate today on the bill that would eventually grant immunity from prosecution to the telecommunications companies, most notably AT&T, for their involvement in the NSA’s domestic spying scandal.

Bill S 2248 would permit ­warrant-less surveillance that targets foreigners overseas, even if they are communicating with someone in the United States and also give the secret court created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the power to approve some aspects of how the surveillance is conducted. The temporary law that S 2248 would replace has fewer court checks.  The bill also would grant retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies alleged to have participated in the National Security Agency’s warrant-less surveillance program.

Thankfully, the average American citizen has a friend in Sen. Chris Dodd.  He has pledged to filibuster and block the proposed law.

Dodd ready to mount filibuster to block telecom immunity

Sen. Chris Dodd has taken to the Senate floor to urge his colleagues to block a proposal to grant legal immunity to telecommunications companies that facilitated the warrantless surveillance of Americans.

"I rarely come to the floor with this much anger," Dodd said. "I’ve never seen contempt of the rule of law such as this."

The Senate is considering an update to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that includes a provision aimed at invalidating some 40 lawsuits that have been filed against telephone and internet companies. Plaintiffs in those suits say the telecommunications industry acted illegally and ignored the constitution in facilitating warrantless government wiretaps aimed at Americans.

Shortly after noon Monday, the Senate voted 76-10 to proceed to invoke cloture and proceed regular debate on a proposed FISA update from the Intelligence Committee that includes telecom immunity; a Judiciary measure without immunity is pending as a substitute amendment. Dodd is expected to mount his filibuster once debate on the measure begins this afternoon.

[Thanks, Raw Story]  More of this article after the jump!

Links to Additional Reading:

• Dodd threatens filibuster on warrantless-wiretap bill
• Surveillance Overhaul Gets Past First Senate Hurdle
• UPDATE 1-Bush’s phone immunity demand wins initial Senate vote

During the first two weeks in October out nations lawmakers tried to slip a bill through that would grant immunity from prosecution to the phone companies that collaborated with the NSA in the recent domestic spying.  I posted on it HERE and HERE.

The response from the ordinary citizen was so strong that the bill was not put to a vote at that time.  After substantial re-work, the bill is bound for the Senate floor this Monday.  On Monday, there will be critical, make-or-break votes in the Senate.  But you can help to stop it!

You all need to click on the graphic below and add your voice to the growing number that doesn’t want to let this become a dangerous precedent of acceptable behavior by big business.  They must be held responsible for spying on YOU!

Yesterday I found this link on the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) homepage. After reading the accompanying text I fired off e-mails to my two Senators and my Congressman. You can find information regarding your elected officials here.

Update: I’ve received a reply from my Congressman already. I’m pretty sure it was sent off by an aide, but at least someone read my e-mail. That’s something, isn’t it?

Voyager VX 10000

Why does anything have to be an "iPhone Killer", or an iPod killer for that matter? Why can’t Verizons new phone rest on its own laurels and force the iPhone to become the Voyager VX 10000 killer. [It’s gonna need a better name, no one wants to be a Voyager VX 10000 killer]

But my point is, why market something to be a killer of anything? Why not market the phone based on it’s feature set.

Verizon claims latest LG offering is an "iPhone killer"

It’s been intense lately, enough to give a hardware guru whiplash; everybody has been calling nearly every new object a potential iPhone killer. One of these days someone’s going to release a land-line phone with a web browser, and for some reason, someone’s going to stand up and call it an iPhone killer. It’s bizarre.

Regardless, today is one of the first times that a company executive, not a fan boy, has actually stood up and claimed that its latest phone is going to "kill the iPhone." The company in reference? Verizon. The phone? Its latest offering from LG, the Voyager VX 10000.

"We think it’ll be the best phone… this year. It will kill the iPhone," Verizon Wireless Chief Marketing Officer Mike Lanman told Reuters while discussing the LG Voyager. The latest phone’s features include a front touch screen, as well as the ability to open up similar to an enV to reveal yet another screen, and a full QWERTY keyboard. It’s packed with Verizon’s usual gamut of serives like V Cast Mobile TV, V Cast Music, and has the ability to play .mp3, .wma, and unprotected .aac files.

In some respects, it does "one-up" the iPhone. For example, it’s on Verizon’s high-speed wireless broadband network as opposed to the iPhone, which runs on AT&T’s rather slow EDGE network. The iPhone recently gained on-board iTunes, but a WiFi connection is required; the Voyager can download music at acceptable speeds whenever it has access to Verizon’s high-speed network. It doesn’t appear that the Voyager supports WiFi like the iPhone does, though.

The Voyager also offers a microSD memory slot which can be fitted with up to 8GB of storage—again, another feature the iPhone doesn’t have. Other features include Bluetooth support, picture, text, and video messaging, as well as a 2.0 mega pixel camera and stereo speakers.

The front touch display offers a 240×320 resolution screen, while the inside non-touch display offers a 320×240 resolution, according to phoneArena.

Although the phrase is so cliché is gives me shudders, I’m forced to wonder if it won’t hurt the iPhone just a bit. I think it might draw the attention of current Verizon subscribers that may be on the edge about switching to AT&T just to grab the iPhone. Verizon told Reuters that the pricing of the Voyager would "range from under $100 to about $400." It will launch sometime in late November.

Cory Doctorow, over at BoingBoing has mentioned an interesting group over at Flickr. Called the Bad Signage Pool, it’s a very large collection of pictures that contain something that’s not quite right.

On the very first page I was chuckling from the get-go. Here’s my favorite from just the first page:

Video What?!?

Bricked!

Earlier this week Apple released a warning that unlocked iPhones "will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed."

That scenario has come to pass. Shortly after the release of the iPhone update 1.1.1 consumers have reported that unlocked iPhones began having problems. The image at left is a photo of the error message received once the firmware update has been installed.

Reportedly, inserting a valid AT&T SIM card will not fix the problem. Have these phones been rendered useless forever? If so, what are the legal ramifications of such a move by Apple?

To intentionally render an iPhone unusable because you have chosen to utilize it on a different carrier seems wrong to me. Don’t we have legislation in place that requires cell phone companies to provide unlock codes for SIM based phones? AT&T is supposed to give you an unlock code for your phone if you have been a customer for at least three months and have not had any billing or payment issues.

I’ll be interested in seeing where this goes. I wouldn’t be surprised if a class action suit is the end result here.

MORE:

• The Forewarned iPhone Bricking Has Begun @ The Consumerist
• iPhone Update — Hackers’ Edition @ Wired
• iBricks will be a PR nightmare for Apple @ ZDNet
• Altered iPhones Freeze Up @ NY Times

Soldiers performed pre-dawn raids on Buddhist monasteries today as the junta tried to gain control of an ever increasingly volatile situation. Not since 1988 has the ruling body faced such a severe challenge to it’s authority. And, like petty dictators everywhere, protests have been met with violence. World leaders gathered at the UN in emergency sessions tried to convince China and India to put pressure on the military junta. China (no surprise here) demurred and blocked attempts to pass a resolution condemning the government and the recent crackdown on free speech and free assembly.

This week has seen the bloodiest confrontations with the anti-junta protesters since 3000 people were executed in 1988 when General Saw Maung, staged a coup. The leadership of the country has changed hands since then with the current despot being General Than Shwe, the Chairman of the laughably named ruling body, the State Peace and Development Council. There have been a reported 5 deaths since this most recent opposition to 45 years of military rule and abject poverty started peacefully a month or so ago. More Stories:

• Myanmar Raids Monasteries Before Dawn @ NYTimes
• Myanmar troops threaten to shoot @ Reuters:Canada
• Myanmar Police Raid Monasteries, Arrest 100 Monks @ AHN
• Myanmar raids Buddhist monasteries @ LA Times

OK, this is what I’ve been afraid of. The aggregate costs have been computed and here’s the hit to the bottom line for all of those waiting in line for the iLaunch. OK, so a very quick comparison: Family plan with Verizon; 2 Razrs $49.99 + $35 activation + $79.00/m = $1,981. Again, I think I’m going to stick with what I have.

iPhone Total Cost of Ownership: Up to $5,914.76

This quick and dirty spreadsheet indicates the total cost of iPhone ownership over a 24 month contract, excluding likely extras such as accessories and hidden charges.

I think the apparent lack of hidden charges is one of the things Apple scores big with: unlike so much in the cellphone game, you know what you’re getting. It’ll be interesting to see the first bills out from AT&T, so we can do an accounting of nickel and diming like the Federal Hogwash Fee and the New Mexico State Chump Charge.

Naturally, most owners won’t be wanting that crazy $220 monthy plan, as detailed at Apple.com when you click the "more minutes" link — you’d have to be on the phone about four hours a day to use up all your daytime minutes! But I can easily see myself racking a good two-and-a-half grand in the next two years.

[Thanks, Wired]

Well, I almost missed this article in Information Week. Reinforcing my claim that Not All That Glitters Is Gold.

iPhone Backlash Misses the Point
Posted by Richard Martin, Jun 20, 2007 06:50 PM

Fake Steve Jobs is not someone to suffer indignity lightly. And lately he’s had plenty to wax indignant about. We refer, natch, to the media backlash that has risen to a veritable tide of negativity in advance of the iPhone launch a mere 9 days away (and no, I am not blogging from a sleeping bag in front of my local AT&T Wireless store).

First there was this week’s cover story in New York magazine, in which John Heileman managed to make it clear what a megalomaniac Jobs (the real one) is while admitting that, yes, the iPhone is likely to be a monster hit. Then things got really nasty.

The Wall Street Journal yesterday quoted multiple business CTOs in concluding that, while employees are salivating over the hot new devices, most companies won’t support them: "Many businesses don’t plan to sync them with internal email systems that use technology from BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd., Microsoft Corp. and Good Technology, owned by Motorola Inc."

London’s Daily Mail weighed in with a negative review, and Forbes called the iPhone "a hacker’s playground." ZDNet bloggers (who seem to multiply like rabbits) weighed in with no fewer than 50 less-than-glowing posts about Jobs’ latest creation. The blogger at Gravitational Pull had the nerve to compare the sleek new quasi-smartphone to a 1994 Saab. How’s that for a backhanded compliment?

[Thanks, Information Week]

As Clara Peller might have asked, Where’s the Beef?

In what must be a high level decision, AT&T announced it’s own video sharing service that will not work on the iPhone. Just what is up with that? We can only imagine that there has been enough lead time to either have Apple tweak the iPhone to play it’s hosts video or for Apple to tweak the video playback standard enough to view the content.

In my opinion, someone in this group is not playing nice and needs a reprimand. Considering the $175.00 service cancellation fee which AT&T is going to insist on charging, my guess is that it’s AT&T.

AT&T Launches Video Sharing Service, But Not For The iPhone

AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson yesterday at the NXTcomm conference showed off AT&T’s new video sharing service. The "first-ever service" in the U.S. allows users to share live video over their cell phones while talking. While this is cool, guess what, it won’t work on the iPhone. And this video service is way too expensive.

Let’s take a look at AT&T’s new video service:

It works only on the company’s 3G, or third-generation, wireless network and requires a Video Share-capable phone, AT&T said. The company said it will offer Video Share service packs for $4.99 and $9.99 a month, depending on included minutes. Without a plan, the service costs 35 cents a minute.

New AT&T Chairman and CEO Randall Stephenson told a telecommunications industry trade show in Chicago that the new service has the potential to expand rapidly beyond wireless-to-wireless.

So you have to buy a special handset — but it doesn’t work on the iPhone because the iPhone doesn’t have 3G. and you have to pay $4.99 a month of $9.99 a month (or $0.35 a minute) in addition to your normal 3G data plan. While the idea is cool, this thing is priced to fail.

During the same keynote where he launched this new video sharing service, Stephenson kept talking about how he sees video as the future of his company. I too share his enthusiasm, but AT&T needs to do a few things better. First, they need to launch new services like this at more reasonable prices. And, more importantly, they need better 3G coverage with cool new devices that take advantage of it.

[Thanks, Information Week]

Ummmmm, like, you’re kidding, right? Please tell me your kidding. Please????

Will you be able to unbox your own iPhone?

Posted Jun 22nd 2007 9:00AM by Michael Rose

You’ve saved your pennies, and then thought better of the whole penny-centric strategy. You’ve moved on to cashing in your savings bonds. You’ve figured out which AT&T store is furthest off the beaten track. (Google Earth, suggests trying Key West, FL.) You’ve considered the delicate balance between on-queue caffeine intake and the likelihood of line jumping when you dodge out to the restroom. You’ve planned, thought, considered, and strategized pretty much everything about getting your hands on that iPhone.

But have you considered whose hands will handle it before you do? Well, have you? Reader Chris Freitag had a panic attack earlier today and did the only reasonable thing. He told us about it.

A horrible, terrible thought crept into my head today as I fantasized about what it will be like to actually get to the counter of my local Apple Store the evening of June 29 and finally get my hands on my iPhone.

What if the first hands to touch *my* iPhone aren’t my hands?

I’ve been a Cingular customer for over 3 years, and every single time I have purchased a new phone the customer service rep opens the box, removes all of the plastic wrapping from the phone, battery, and battery cover. They put the SIM card into the phone, power on the phone, then proceed to futz with the phone for a few minutes while they’re setting it up. This has never been an issue for me because I have never had an attachment to the packaging nor to the product being opened. I like cool new phones but none of them have ever had much of an emotional impact on me.

Now compare that with Apple products. If you’re as into Apple products as I am, then you understand what it means to come home with your shiny new Apple toy and open the packaging. The good folks at Apple always take such great care in packaging that it is a true joy to open the products. Everything about the presentation just leads you to that moment when you actually utter the word "whoa" as you finally get to the product you’ve lusted after for so long. It is without fail sleeker, smaller, slimmer, and sexier than any picture could convey. It’s part of the Apple experience.

And if an AT&T employee unwraps all of that Apple-designed packaging goodness right in front of me, and then mauls my new iPhone with their grubby mitts, I’m going to lose it right there at the store.

Unfortunately, judging by comments on Erica’s post, the contract and activation process will almost certainly involve hands-on time with store personnel. Unless Apple’s magic mojo arrangement with AT&T includes online contract setup and number porting via iTunes (now that would be quite a trick) it looks like the first hands on your iPhone won’t be yours.

Chris, we feel your pain.

[Thanks for the LAUGH, tuaw]

So, it’s not just Apple that’s taking a slightly lower than high road with the immanent release of the much touted iPhone. (See related story) AT&T intends to charge you $175.00 for early cancellation despite the fact you’re not getting any kind of deal on the price of the phone. Isn’t that special!

For years cell phone companies have argued that those early cancellation fees help offset the cost of discounting a new phone to a new subscriber, but we’re not getting a discount this time, are we? We’re just getting the shaft from the man because he knows he can get away with it. It’s the frikkin iPhone for Gods sake. If you want it, you’ll play by our rules. Go forth lemmings and consume.

Canceling iPhone service early will cost $175

AT&T: Fee covers more than just the new device

By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff | June 22, 2007

AT&T Inc. has spent $50 million to beef up its relatively slow wireless network in anticipation of the heightened activity expected to follow the iPhone’s debut next week, but any customer who isn’t wowed by the new gadget will find it costly to cancel the service.

Even though AT&T isn’t subsidizing the iPhone’s hefty price — $499 to $599, depending on the storage capacity a customer chooses — the company will charge a $175 termination fee for iPhone users who want to break their two-year contracts.

Most cellphones sell for less than their true cost, with the cellular network paying the difference. In exchange, customers promise to use the service for a set period, usually two years. When subscribers cancel early, phone companies charge a cancellation fee, usually citing the need to recoup the cost of the subsidized phone.

But AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel said that termination fees pay for more than phone subsidies. "There are certain fixed costs we incur in serving every customer who establishes service with us," Siegel said. He refused to specify those costs.

Michael Gartenberg, vice president of JupiterResearch in New York, called the iPhone termination fee "a little odd," but doubted that many customers would object. "I don’t think for most consumers it’s an issue," he said.

[Thanks, Boston Globe]