Why wan't to join a Right To Root campaign?

[James Freeman6]

Right To Root

Hi Everyone, I am a new member to the forum, and am looking for information on Rooting your phone. I am no newbie to smartphones, an avid user and lover of Android, and the one thing that does my head in.... sacrificing the warranty to actually get the user to do what you want it to. This is a UK only consideration, as I understand other countries do not limit the access of root and the impacts on warranty.

I want to learn more and understand WHY you have to sacrifice one for the other. The reason, I am going to research this, and the hope is that if I can gather enough understanding, and make a fair enough argument, I would like to put together a "Right To Root" campaign. The plan, is to try and get manufacturers to allow users to have more control over their phone, whilst at the same time, allowing the user to keep control of the warranty.

I personally see this as buying a new windows laptop, but the company has set up the administrator account, and they allocate each user a "limited" account. Why? I bought the hardware and the right to use the software, I want to be able to use the whole thing! For too long, I feel manufacturers have gotten away with passing off rightful claims, such as faulty touchscreens, faulty hardware etc because the phone appears to be rooted.

At the end of the day, why should the fact I have unlocked the phone to install software to take control of bloatware, or to keep the phone clean, have any effect on a physical hardware fault.

I dont know if this is the first time anyone has tried to launch a campaign, or if its even worth it, so the more detail I can gather, the better! Would anyone be interested in joining such a campaign?

 

[Rukbat]

Re: Right To Root

Hi Everyone, I am a new member to the forum, and am looking for information on Rooting your phone. I am no newbie to smartphones, an avid user and lover of Android, and the one thing that does my head in.... sacrificing the warranty to actually get the user to do what you want it to. This is a UK only consideration, as I understand other countries do not limit the access of root and the impacts on warranty.

Unfortunately, even though in some cases the manufacturer is violating a federal agreement, only HTC allows rooting to not void the warranty in the US.

I want to learn more and understand WHY you have to sacrifice one for the other. The reason, I am going to research this, and the hope is that if I can gather enough understanding, and make a fair enough argument, I would like to put together a "Right To Root" campaign. The plan, is to try and get manufacturers to allow users to have more control over their phone, whilst at the same time, allowing the user to keep control of the warranty.

In the hands of someone with "enough knowledge to be dangerous", they can turn a rooted phone into a box of parts with a single command, so I can understand the manufacturer's point of view.. OTOH, they could warranty anything not affected by rooting. So if, say, you rooted your phone, then the Home button fell out, that should be covered. Rooting didn't cause it. But if you bring in a phone that's been repartitioned and won't boot, that's your problem.

I personally see this as buying a new windows laptop, but the company has set up the administrator account, and they allocate each user a "limited" account. Why? I bought the hardware and the right to use the software, I want to be able to use the whole thing! For too long, I feel manufacturers have gotten away with passing off rightful claims, such as faulty touchscreens, faulty hardware etc because the phone appears to be rooted.

But you have a Windows partition that can be used to repair any damage you do to Windows. With a phone, sure, you can reflash the ROM, so someone at that level who bricks his phone says "oops" (or a few other words that aren't so nice) and reflashes the ROM. A "just smart enough" user bricks the phone, then returns it for repair, costing the manufacturer labor costs.

At the end of the day, why should the fact I have unlocked the phone to install software to take control of bloatware, or to keep the phone clean, have any effect on a physical hardware fault.

That was my point above. Buttons don't fall out because you rooted the phone. Antenna connections don't become loose from rooting. But the warranty is one size fits all, so we get the one for the most dangerous user.

I dont know if this is the first time anyone has tried to launch a campaign, or if its even worth it, so the more detail I can gather, the better! Would anyone be interested in joining such a campaign?

I'm in the US, not the UK, but if it would help, add me to your list. I have a locked bootloader (that can't be unlocked) so I feel even more pain. Even if I wanted to void the warranty, I can't flash kernels, ROMs (unless they're modifications of the stock ROM), etc. I can't even flash a custom recovery, although that has nothing to do with the phone partition.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Re: Right To Root

There is a good article here that explains why things are the way they are. http://www.androidcentral.com/there-no-magic-root

Sent from my rooted Nexus 7 (2013) using Tapatalk

 

[James Freeman6]

Re: Right To Root

Thanks for the replies.

I agree entirely with you Rukbat. If you try to load a custom ROM or similar, I wholeheartedly expect that when it all blows up, then you have a brick and its a gamble you take. However, why if your a "safe" root user (lets say for arguments sake, you want to be allowed to write files to the SD card, or you want to install a firewall, or just want to be able to plug a USB in to watch your collection of movies) then why on earth can you be expected to lump the full cost when the screen stops responding?

Laura, I read that article a while ago in my research, and it does make sense, but at the same time, its ludicrous for any company to treat you like you ARE going to destroy your phone. Insurance is based on risk, you pay premiums based on the risk to your car being stolen, or your house being flooded. If Insurance can do this and base it on sense and reason why cant manufacturers of hardware? On a laptop, if you uninstall windows and install linux instead, your warranty is still valid, but if you fluff it up, you shouldnt expect the manufacturer to take it back free of charge and get windows back on there, but at the same time, if I am running linux happily for a year of the two year warranty, and the hard drive fails, they would still replace it.

I personally believe users should be given the option of rooting a phone. Like insurance and modifying cars, if you make a change, you let your insurance company know you have installed a tracker, likewise you should let the manufacturer of your device know you have rooted the phone.

If the phone is bricked due to a stuffed up install of a custom rom, you should be on your own. But if the phone is rooted and their is a failure of hardware which the root cannot affect (touch screen, GPS chip, antenna, etc) I think you should be able to still claim a repair under the terms of the warranty. Ideally this is what I want to petition, the fact that just because you add a root user to allow you to take more control of your phone, be that to clean it up, write to the SD card, access USB, enable your phone as mass storage, or whatever other reasonable behaviour you wish to say - why should you be penalised for this?

Am I really thinking so unrealistically here? or does anyone else agree - the right to take a little more control, with some sense and reason - should still grant you an element of protection? the warranty terms should be laid out - leave the phone unrooted, and they take care of everything! root the phone, and if you brick it with a custom ROM, or overclock the CPU to the point it sets the device on fire, and you lose the protection, but root it and you suffer a manufacturing defect and we will cover that defect!

I have raised a petition, and am trying to add the URL