Comments on: French Carterphone may halt L’iPhone

By: Steve4322

Steve4322 — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:15:45 +0000

I agree — as an entrepreneur, I want to see innovation expanded, not stifled because some bureaucrat's need some public policy wins with the consumer.

By: Steve4322

Steve4322 — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 03:15:45 +0000

I agree — as an entrepreneur, I want to see innovation expanded, not stifled because some bureaucrat's need some public policy wins with the consumer.

By: Steve4322

Steve4322 — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:15:45 +0000

I agree — as an entrepreneur, I want to see innovation expanded, not stifled because some bureaucrat's need some public policy wins with the consumer.

By: Krist

Krist — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:40:26 +0000

Apple will run in to the same problem in most European countries. Many countries don’t even allow locking phones to a particular network.

However Apple can just sell the unlocked iPhone for a price that covers its costs plus whatever profit it wishes to make on it. In addition Apple still can get into mutually beneficial exclusive deals with phone companies, where people buying a contract with Apple’s phone partner get the phone for a lot less.

By: Krist

Krist — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 08:40:26 +0000

Apple will run in to the same problem in most European countries. Many countries don’t even allow locking phones to a particular network.

By: sccarper

sccarper — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:21:16 +0000

“sccarper- As we’ve explained before on this blog, the Carterfone decision made sense when it was handed down because there was government-protected monopoly for telecommunications. There are no longer any protected monopolies in this marketplace. See http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042060.php“

Thank you for the link. However, your statement in the OP was unqualified, so I feel justified in questioning it.

By: sccarper

sccarper — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 23:21:16 +0000

Thank you for the link. However, your statement in the OP was unqualified, so I feel justified in questioning it.

By: Jerry Brito

Jerry Brito — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:37:51 +0000

sccarper- As we've explained before on this blog, the Carterfone decision made sense when it was handed down because there was government-protected monopoly for telecommunications. There are no longer any protected monopolies in this marketplace. See http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042060.php

By: Jerry Brito

Jerry Brito — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 20:37:51 +0000

sccarper- As we’ve explained before on this blog, the Carterfone decision made sense when it was handed down because there was government-protected monopoly for telecommunications. There are no longer any protected monopolies in this marketplace. See http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042060.php

By: sccarper

sccarper — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:54:59 +0000

“To me it’s clear that forced access laws limit innovation.”

Really, what about Carterphone? Do you really think the explosion of devices for phone lines–from **affordable** direct connect answering machines, fax machines, 56k modems, cordless phones and DLS would have occurred without Carterphone? I think not.

By: sccarper

sccarper — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:54:59 +0000

“To me it’s clear that forced access laws limit innovation.”