10-22-2016 06:47 PM
82 1234
tools
  1. comestim's Avatar
    You might own the device but you do not own the software. If you read any software agreement you are just renting it so in essence they can do anything they pretty much do anything they want to the software that runs the device.
    TomOfTx likes this.
    10-17-2016 01:51 PM
  2. LeoRex's Avatar
    This is why I say it is ridiculous to think Samsung or any carrier here could legally disable someones private property such as the Note 7 phone. I own my Note 7 and the recall does not make it illegal to possess the device.
    Oh, you can keep the device.. but it doesn't mean it has to work. Your carrier can blacklist the phone and refuse to allow it to function on their network, and Samsung could push an update that cripples it. Now, I have a feeling that, if that were to happen, and you walked into a lawyer's office to complain... he'd simply point to this page and say that you are out of luck.
    Cary Quinn likes this.
    10-17-2016 01:54 PM
  3. Aquila's Avatar
    This is not about politics. It is about the 4th Amendment protection citizens of the USA enjoy which would prevent a private company like Samsung from unlawfully seizing or disabling private property without any judicial review. This is why I say it is ridiculous to think Samsung or any carrier here could legally disable someones private property such as the Note 7 phone. I own my Note 7 and the recall does not make it illegal to possess the device. Sure, it is banned from bringing on an airplane and such, but firearms are banned too. It does not prevent me from legally possessing the Note 7 or a firearm at this time.

    My reference to South Korea not having any constitutional rights was a typo. I meant to say North Korea. Could apply to any country with no constitutional rights against unlawful search or seizure of private property.
    There is no Constitutional application to companies terminating licensed use of their own software. The 4th prevents the government from doing it without warrant, etc.
    Cary Quinn and jpprice14 like this.
    10-17-2016 02:03 PM
  4. Aquila's Avatar
    You guys all realize that Samsung OEMs the software running on their devices and can modify it at their leisure and terminate the license for any individual phone or SKU etc at will and can block access to all its licensed products and services at will? They own it, you paid for the device with terms and conditions.
    ultravisitor, Feldon and jpprice14 like this.
    10-17-2016 02:05 PM
  5. Cary Quinn's Avatar
    This is not about politics. It is about the 4th Amendment protection citizens of the USA enjoy which would prevent a private company like Samsung from unlawfully seizing or disabling private property without any judicial review. This is why I say it is ridiculous to think Samsung or any carrier here could legally disable someones private property such as the Note 7 phone. I own my Note 7 and the recall does not make it illegal to possess the device. Sure, it is banned from bringing on an airplane and such, but firearms are banned too. It does not prevent me from legally possessing the Note 7 or a firearm at this time.

    My reference to South Korea not having any constitutional rights was a typo. I meant to say North Korea. Could apply to any country with no constitutional rights against unlawful search or seizure of private property.
    IANAL but imho the 4th Amendment applies to unlawful Government search and seizure, not to corporate products and services. I can bring up past cases where it was perfectly lawful for a company to change or disable a product to protect their business interests, customer base, or as directed by a regulatory agency. Owning a Note 7 and using the Note 7 are two separate points.

    I'm not saying that Samsung will brick the phones, I think they will exersize every possible reasonable avenue to get the phones replaced and off the market before they go to that extreme. And I think people who speculate right off the mark that they will are also going to an unnecessary extreme. But I would be remiss in not pointing out that the technology and capability are there for such a "nuclear" option.
    TomOfTx likes this.
    10-17-2016 02:07 PM
  6. vasic's Avatar
    What legal basis would Samsung or any carrier use to remotely disable a phone that they do not own...
    There are several legal avenues, and none go against the argument you gave (4th amendment to the US constitution). The action could be done either by Samsung (pushing some update), or if unsuccessful, by carriers (rejecting the phones from connecting). You would still have a fully functional phone, it simply wouldn't be able to connect to any mobile network, regardless of which SIM card you insert. Possibly, you could connect via WiFi for VoIP apps (Skype, Viber, etc).

    The only way to recover any value from this device is to return it for a full refund. If anyone chooses to keep it, it will very soon become a useless brick (for all intents and purposes). And if anything bad ever happens, and that phone was anywhere nearby, the owner could be charged with gross negligence.

    I simply can't possibly imagine a reason why anyone would want to hold onto this device under current circumstances.
    TomOfTx, Fret Madden and tonyr6 like this.
    10-17-2016 02:14 PM
  7. dsignori's Avatar
    10-17-2016 02:14 PM
  8. TomOfTx's Avatar
    Rather than getting deeper into all of the legalities, I will just leave it as my opinion that Samsung would not go to the extreme of bricking a Note 7 without any further government involvement.
    10-17-2016 02:20 PM
  9. worldsoutro's Avatar
    Hopefully they disable all the note 7's
    10-17-2016 05:04 PM
  10. Jude526's Avatar
    Why keep it? Why is anyone questioning this? Don't be stubborn. Dump it
    10-17-2016 05:13 PM
  11. NotAnAppleGuy's Avatar
    Honestly... what will happen? NOTHING... maybe Sammy will disable it, but I doubt it... what they (and carriers) Def will not do is support it.

    For someone like me, that's generally fine, but for someone that wants security updates, and general os updates, it's a stumbling block...

    Basically, the phone will be obsolete in 3 - 6 months...
    I can get by for 9 months with no support for mine.
    10-17-2016 05:23 PM
  12. TabGuy's Avatar
    This is not about politics. It is about the 4th Amendment protection citizens of the USA enjoy which would prevent a private company like Samsung from unlawfully seizing or disabling private property without any judicial review. This is why I say it is ridiculous to think Samsung or any carrier here could legally disable someones private property such as the Note 7 phone. I own my Note 7 and the recall does not make it illegal to possess the device. Sure, it is banned from bringing on an airplane and such, but firearms are banned too. It does not prevent me from legally possessing the Note 7 or a firearm at this time.

    My reference to South Korea not having any constitutional rights was a typo. I meant to say North Korea. Could apply to any country with no constitutional rights against unlawful search or seizure of private property.
    Get real. I fired up an old HTC Incredible the other day. The browser won't connect and it won't connect to the Play Store. It's basically a useless device. The same will happen to the Note 7.
    tonyr6 and Feldon like this.
    10-17-2016 05:31 PM
  13. Jaycemiskel's Avatar
    Well, once the story hit, and the CPSC and Samsung issued the stop order, I assume that a substantial percentage of Note 7 owners powered theirs down.
    They can catch on fire even if they're off though. Also some article not too long ago said something about a million phones were still in use. I know my carrier still hasn't sent me a box so I doubt most have been returned yet.
    10-17-2016 06:24 PM
  14. Morty2264's Avatar
    Samsung may force your phone to power down... But the chances of it exploding are smaller than the chances of it maybe, say, overheating or something along those lines.
    10-17-2016 06:26 PM
  15. zombiejerky's Avatar
    Not sure if it got mentioned here, but IF (that is a big IF) your phone does catch fire, and there was a mandatory recall, you may NOT get compensated for the damage if you were already told to return it. There is a strong case that you willfully accepted the risk by keeping it. I am not an attorney, but I know there is a strong argument to be made there.

    I went into one of the carriers a couple of days ago and mentioned that I didn't want to be without a phone until I got my V20. Her response kinda shocked me. "Keep it, if it lights on fire you can easily sue Samsung." Obviously being kind of young and dumb (not saying your are dumb if you are young, just saying she was young and dumb), she doesn't realize that you don't instantly get a blank signed check that falls into your lap from the heavens if you lose your house or vehicle, that is if you actually live through the ordeal.
    10-17-2016 06:29 PM
  16. 4truegrit's Avatar
    I'm still using mine, Got it on release day, never returned it after the first batch. Paid subsidize price with verizon, so only paid the 299 plus tax . Still running great no heat issues absolutely fantastic phone. I factory reset it yesterday just to see if it would run better and Improve battery performance and sure enough is even running better smoother and battery life is improved. I don't travel, not worried about it Verizon restored my upgrade so I could get the pixel xl now if I wanted to, but don't think so. Going to keep it unless they kill switch it or blacklist imei. If I had paid full price for it probably the decision to return it would be easier for me to make.
    10-17-2016 06:39 PM
  17. jsgiv's Avatar
    Rather than getting deeper into all of the legalities, I will just leave it as my opinion that Samsung would not go to the extreme of bricking a Note 7 without any further government involvement.
    To your point, doubt they'll brick it... they'll just make it completely unusable to use as a phone/digital device.

    Carriers will eventually block all the IMEIs..

    If you leave it on the network, they may push an update to make the device unusable...

    At that point it might as well as be a brick....
    tonyr6 likes this.
    10-17-2016 06:57 PM
  18. iOS Gravity's Avatar
    I still have my Note 7 and Verizon hasn't terminated service. I will get my return box with my Pixel XL on the 28th.
    10-17-2016 10:52 PM
  19. u71n4444's Avatar
    What is i just wanted to use it to take pictures and videos with the 2nd 256GB microsd card I got from them?
    kevinpleasants likes this.
    10-17-2016 11:24 PM
  20. natehoy's Avatar
    Aside from not being able to fly with it... What are the other downsides?
    It will never receive any further Android updates, including security updates.

    At the moment, Samsung is begging people to bring them back, and is offering incentives for you to do so. The instant the recall period is over, all liability for damages (including the value of the phone itself) is off Samsung and on you personally. That means that if you continue using it, you will (a) find it much harder for Samsung to even give a hoot about replacing it for you, and (b) be liable for potentially very large amounts of money in damages, including additional penalties for negligence should it hurt someone else or damage their property, should the unfortunate happen and yours decide to go Thermite on you.

    Carriers are going to need to limit their liability soon, and that means that Note 7s will either be put in banned IMEI databases, or they will send out a kill switch firmware update. While I'm certain some third party will come out with a custom ROM to bypass the kill switch and keep it up to date, the instant you load a custom ROM that becomes a "user modified device" and you own all liability for damages from that point forward.

    Basically, the current guesswork seems to indicate that any specific device has about a 1 in 25,000 chance of going Thermite. If it happens on a nonflammable surface, you and anyone around you will just be sucking in some toxic fumes. But it could start a serious fire and hurt or kill someone - and you would be 100% liable for all damages to property and people.

    It's possible you could load up some third party firmware, go with the odds, use it for several years, and be quite happy with it. But understand that from this point forward it has no resale value whatsoever. It is illegal under US law to sell a recalled product, and the penalties start at $100,000 for attempting to do so. If you do manage to sell it and it blows up on your buyer, you remain personally liable for any damages it causes. So as soon as you tire of it your only legal option is to throw it away.
    tonyr6 and zombiejerky like this.
    10-18-2016 08:11 AM
  21. keepnitreel's Avatar
    But understand that from this point forward it has no resale value whatsoever. It is illegal under US law to sell a recalled product, and the penalties start at $100,000 for attempting to do so. If you do manage to sell it and it blows up on your buyer, you remain personally liable for any damages it causes. So as soon as you tire of it your only legal option is to throw it away.
    Question: So if it's illegal to sell a recalled product, does this mean the carriers cannot charge you full price for the device if you don't return it?
    jgraves1107 and JohnT3 like this.
    10-18-2016 08:29 AM
  22. James Beam's Avatar
    Question: So if it's illegal to sell a recalled product, does this mean the carriers cannot charge you full price for the device if you don't return it?
    I'm guessing so. Of course, they aren't going to come right out and admit it that there probably isn't much they can do if you don't return it. They're likely assuming most people can't wait to send them back with a quickness because of the potential hazard. As it stands for me, I haven't even got any notification that I even need to return it. I got a message saying "we strongly encourage" you to return it and upgrade to something else. I don't want anything they have, so I just reactivated an old phone and haven't heard squat from Verizon since then. Nothing about a return box being shipped and the IMEI on the note hasn't even been blacklisted like I have read about happening for those that initiated the upgrade/return process.
    keepnitreel likes this.
    10-18-2016 08:50 AM
  23. Makad's Avatar
    Thank you
    10-18-2016 09:02 AM
  24. dvarapala's Avatar
    What legal basis would Samsung or any carrier use to remotely disable a phone that they do not own (for those of us who paid full price and not on some payment plan/lease plan with a carrier). Sure, a carrier could block the use of the device based on the IMEI number.
    Well, denying service to the device is pretty effectively disabling it, wouldn't you say?

    As for legality, "we don't have to care - we're the phone company."
    10-18-2016 09:27 AM
  25. natehoy's Avatar
    Question: So if it's illegal to sell a recalled product, does this mean the carriers cannot charge you full price for the device if you don't return it?
    Interesting question. Probably depends on whether you have bought/financed the phone or are leasing it. In either case, either have already purchased the phone, which means they can continue charging you payments on it because the sale happened before the recall, or you are leasing the phone, which means it's not your property to keep.

    Of course, some carriers may choose (and have chosen) to simply cancel the contract so they are absolved of liability quickly. I think several Verizon people have basically had their contracts cancelled and reset, and been told that they can just come in and pick a new phone on a new contract with their same phone number. No mention was made of a requirement to return the old phone, because at that point you are solely liable for damages anyway so they don't really care if it hurts someone - that's your problem.

    That's the big key, though. If you accept compensation for the phone and do not return it, your liability should something go wrong is 100%. Someone gets hurt, they go after your savings account, your checking account, your house, your retirement, your income directly. No one else owns the problem, even your insurance company is going to laugh and hang up on you if you attempt to file a claim after continuing to use a recalled product that you have already been paid to decommission.

    The upshot is that the carrier probably doesn't care whether you return it. The phone is of no value to them - they have to pay to dispose of them. They only care that THEY are off the hook if it hurts or kills someone. As soon as you accept the recall compensation, you are the one who is subject to large negligence lawsuits with it.

    To each their own, but to me carrying that much personal liability? There's not a phone experience in the world that is possibly worth that kind of risk.
    keepnitreel and James Beam like this.
    10-18-2016 09:28 AM
82 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-15-2016, 10:16 PM
  2. If the Note 7 could pick an encore song . . .
    By SteelGator in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 7
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-17-2016, 01:49 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-17-2016, 05:07 AM
  4. What are lollipop trusted certificates
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-16-2016, 09:34 PM
  5. Green box keeps moving around screen how do i get rid of it
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-16-2016, 08:00 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD