Judge ruling on Sprint fees is blow to industry

July 29, 2008 By PAUL ELIAS , Associated Press Writer

(AP) -- The fees that cell phone carriers charge customers who break service contracts took a big hit in a California courtroom when a judge said such charges by Sprint Nextel Corp. likely violate state law.

---

Content from The Associated Press expires 15 days after original publication date. For more information about The Associated Press, please visit www.ap.org .

---

Similar stories from PHYSorg:

Sprint to pay $17.5 million to settle fee suit

Aug 12, 2009 | not rated yet | 0

Sprint to stop selling certain push-to-talk phones

Nov 30, 2009 | not rated yet | 0

Sprint Nextel lowers mobile-to-mobile pricing

Sep 10, 2009 | not rated yet | 0

Sprint and Samsung launch biodegradable phone

Aug 06, 2009 | 3.7 / 5 (3) | 0

Fewer players in wireless could rein in price cuts

Sep 14, 2009 | not rated yet | 2

• snwboardn - Jul 29, 2008
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (1)
  I hate the fact that we even have to have contracts on cell phones in the U.S... With that said, I am more worried about the daily headlines of government interfering with free market. It's really bothersome that the government feels the need to hold my hand and regulate everything.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• googleplex - Jul 29, 2008
  • Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
  US cell phones are way behind the rest of the world. Another example of poor regulation.
  Europe and asia have a much better system. You can walk into any store and buy a pay as you go chip that works in any cell phone. Change cariers by just changing chips. No phone reprogramming or unlocking is required.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• DGBEACH - Jul 30, 2008
  • Rank: 3.3 / 5 (3)
  The solution would be so simple; the 2 or 3 yr contract with the carrier must clearly state that a certain percentage of the monthly fees go towards paying for the phone, and that amount should cover the real cost of the phone.
  Any remaining balance can then be billed, or the phone returned, as with any other product.(ie the phone remains the property of the carrier until it has been completely paid for).
  Personally I prefer the pay-as-you-go scenario since you're not "married" to a carrier.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• holmstar - Jul 30, 2008
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
  I agree with dgbeach. Not only that, it also iritates the heck out of me that if you supply your own phone you still have to pay the same rate as people who have subsidized phones. That is just free money for the carrier that they do not deserve.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• GDM - Jul 31, 2008
  • Rank: not rated yet
  The wireless spectrum is governed (?) for the public's benefit (?) by the FCC to prevent (?) chaos from greedy providers, so some regulation is required. I can't imagine the results of a complete deregulation. Whether the FCC is doing a proper job is debatable. I prefer the pay-as-you-go, but I sure would like to have a phone of my own choice with the PAYG option. Cheers for this new ruling! It is long overdue.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5