Did Google Pre-Emptively Block a 4G iPhone on Verizon?

<i>The rules were inserted at the behest of Google, which was bidding for the spectrum but who some</i> cynics <i>contended got involved not to win but to ensure that whoever got the spectrum couldn’t hamper its business, which requires a free and robust internet.</i><p>Cynics? I'd have thought a cynic would accuse Google of having an ulterior motive <i>other</i> than wanting Internet freedom.

If this interpretation of the rules correct, then by the same logic all carrier-locked-down Android phones would surely also be affected.

Apple isn't a carrier. As long as Verizon (the carrier) doesn't block jail broken phones, I don't see any rules violation.

This is a ridiculous conflation of the facts.<p>"The problem is that the 'open access' rules attached to the so-called 700 Mhz C block require the carrier to allow the use of any hardware or software that it can’t prove won’t damage the network."<p>Put simply, Verizon must allow customers to use "unlocked" phones on their network.<p>How in the world do we go from that to "Verizon must only offer unlocked phones"? Then the author claims that the motivating actor is Google, who only sells one unlocked phone, and it only sells it in a GSM variant. Jump ahead to a quote from Markham Erickson, who just happens to be the executive director of the Open Internet Coalition. I'm sure his view is impartial and objective, right?<p>The biggest "tell" that this is link bait is the fact that they chose the iPhone as the headliner. News flash: every Android phone sold on Verizon is also in violation of this rule interpretation.<p>Apple has no qualms about selling unlocked iPhones. They do it abroad. Apple recognizes the value of a channel partner, and consumers have voted with their wallets. When given the choice between a $600 unsubsidized iPhone (which is still available, by the way) and a $200 phone with a two-year contract, customers go for the cheaper phone. Thus Apple sells phones though the channel that moves units. If Verizon is forced to open their phones, expect prices for Verizon phones to skyrocket, resulting in a significant advantage for their competitors. I find it very difficult to believe that the government would give such an unfair advantage to Verizon's competitors.<p>The overview on Ars Technica is much better (as usual) and doesn't attempt to sensationalize the impact of the ruling. Note that it's from 2007. There isn't much new here other than the fact that someone is attempting to troll Verizon with an old ruling.<p><a href="http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/07/fcc-sets-700mhz-auction-rules-limited-open-access-no-wholesale-requirement.ars" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/07/fcc-sets-700mhz-a...</a>

This wording would also seem to apply to Windows Phone 7 (which also only allows applications to be installed from the default marketplace).

&#62; The problem is that the “open access” rules attached to the so-called 700 Mhz C block require the carrier to allow the use of any hardware or software that it can’t prove won’t damage the network.<p>So if the carrier CAN prove that it won't damage the network, it can block it? That can't be right.

This is potentially great news because it reverses the recent trend that legislature is used to revoke freedom where possible.<p>That the iPhone 4G is hampered by this is just a pill apple has to swallow. As if there weren't more bands that could be used to serve non-free phones.

What would be the alternative then? If apple can't field a 4g phone what would they have to do to get one? Relax app store standards? (That doesn't seem very likely) I seriously doubt that they will never have a 4g phone ever and not releasing one doesn't seem to be an option.

I'm waiting for the Wired article entitled:<p>"Why Wired Uses Titles Referencing iPhone and Verizon and ending in a Question Mark?"<p>As for this case, this appears entirely analogous to the Carterfone decision.<p>Other folks can connect FCC-approved and unlocked gear onto 700 MHz without encountering a carrier prohibition (akin to what we have with wired telephone connections) while paying the 700 MHz carrier(s) for their services.<p>I seriously doubt that Verizon would be denied the ability to sell locked phones out of this. There's no way Verizon lawyers would sign that one.