Here is an interesting, possible fiction incident. That tests the integrity of the American government and Corporate America. Business is business, day in and day out. There exist the “Free Market” which is global and has a major influence on the culture of the world. The Free Market, although the majority of the total is the most exclusive. It consists of Giant industries that have merged or have affiliated their interest. Then there is the “Black Market” the black market represent knock offs or stolen products of the Free Market. These items are usually much less in cost, and it to provides a financial contribution to society.

The Free Market industries, due to their expansiveness, often are regulated by the government, at least in the United States. This protection is directly obtained from the
Fact that the Federal Government interest is in the people and not in the private sector of the Capitalistic world. Imagine if the opposite were true, the F.D.A. wouldn’t exist and anybody could put any product on the market, and regardless of it’s effects, the consumer would be at risk. The only role the government has in the FREE MARKET, is that of assuring the protection of people, from the products and services of the Free Market that compromise their civil rights or health in general.

Although this is the matrix of governmental roles in the market. Sometimes this is over looked, and completely disrespected, for some higher goal. For example, the people of the United States have stated through various congressional expressions and legislation of codes, that basically state, the Federal government and local government should not have a integrated interest industry, whereby the citizens may be subject to some civil violation, that results in a felony criminal conviction. For the most part, these incidences that would produce some kind of complaint in the judicial system, would be addressed in civil court. A separations of industry and state, is very necessary. It prevent special treatment, blindness to oblivious concerns, etc.


Point in case, the cell phone industry is currently going through a huge fraudulent accounts period. Several of the new accounts opened, are opened in other persons name and social security numbers. Supposedly the government does require the industry to provide some protective method to prevent this. But the fraudulent incidences continue to rise and rise. When these cases are brought to court, in all incidences, the government requires the state to obtain a warrant, before they request telephone records of any particular case. The warrant gives the state, the right to review their phone records of the accused. All is fair, yet it has come to the attention of many, that while under a warrant for one telephone number and it’s call detail, some enforcer may have escalated their data search and obtained other correlations that were later used for the arrest and conviction of many other persons, who have not association with the original warranted release individual. The only relationship is that of correlated data bases, with different specs.

To make matter worst, recently it was announced to the American public, that some of these cell phone companies, simply just gave PRIVATE call records to government agents. Under normal circumstances, any arrest obtained from such miss use of government power, would be retrailed. Basically there is in existence many felony inmates, arrested and charged by the obtaining of illegal database information. Most of these arrest occurred between 1999 and 2005. Anybody conducting some illegal business over a telephone, may be one of these persons, voided of due process and arrested on information that was not and would not otherwise be linked or obtained by arresting agents. The charges are various in nature and many include other charges.

For example, Mr. Doe bought a cell phone on the black market. More than likely the phone is a fraudulent phone, but due to the cell phone carrier, this account is working fine. Maybe these service providers should be fined for their reckless use of their customers vital information. Anyway Mr. Doe is in possession of large quantities of a drug. Mr. Doe has a son, and his son has a girlfriend, who he often calls on their home phone line.

Sometimes while away from his home, Mr,Doe uses his cell phone to call his home phone. The transfer of calls continue on and on. Then one day, the person who sold Mr. Doe the phone, is arrested for fraud, in his case, he is arrested for selling credit cards. He has a cell phone on him, during the arrest, and it is put into the evidence room. Upon reviewing the evidence of his arrest, enforcers scroll through his cell phone. Some how all of the numbers in the cell phone are entered into a data base. The arrested person does not have Mr. Doe’s phone in his phone, but when the records are reviewed, it is found that Mr.Doe received a call from this phone. There are other people who received phone calls from this phone also. Next, the enforcer cross database that first finding, and he also includes home phone and business phone numbers.

As it turns out, Mr.Doe’s son while on the home line, received a call from Mr. Doe, at the same time Mr. Doe had received a call from the arrested person. His call was documented, but not available he received a busy signal. The enforcer then decided (based on this one incident of accidental occurrence) decided to just run Mr. Does’ cell phone and home line number. And to their accepted surprise they find several correlations to other persons of interest to them, that have no relation to the arrested person. Nevertheless, the papers are processed, and warrants issued. But Mr. Doe’s warrant was issued on the violation of the 4th amendment. First of all Mr. Doe’s relationship with his cell phone carrier is a civil private affair. Second Mr.Doe’s phone records belong only to him, and on their own did not suggest any possible association.





The issue is of great concern, because it is a Bill of Right violation, by which the above example occurred. A question of interest arises, Who owns the data detail of the phone bill? We might assume that since the consumer paid for the service and security of the service, and since the consumer called the phone numbers listed on the bill, or granted usage for those numbers to be called, that the detail and phone numbers listed on the bill, are the property of the account holder, once the account has expired it’s contract, without renewing a new contract, but keeping service to what ever phone number given to them. But seeming that during the contractual period, the account owner is in actuality LEASING the service, the phone number from the phone carrier, of which the only portion of the phone that is actually theirs, is the phone equipment, if it’s was purchased in complete.

But there exist a hidden event by which the about contract would be voided, by the carrier because a portion of the phone equipment was not provided to the account holder, when they purchased the phone. This portion is termed SUBSIDY CODE. I call 3 manufactures during the month of June 2003, of which I had a simple question. Can I purchase a cell phone from you, directly? Two of the three manufactures replied yes. They are Motorola and Nokia. At Motorola I was informed that if I wanted to purchase a cell phone from them directly, I would have to indicate which carrier I intended to receive service from. At the time, Motorola offered service with T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T for the phone in question. I informed the csr employee that how could I purchase the phone without pre-activating it with any carrier? I was informed that this was not possible. I then informed the csr employee that I wanted to purchase the phone for a friend in Mexico and that they don’t offer those carriers in Mexico. Again the csr employee suggested remarks that basically stated, the phones are manufactured by carrier bids and request, thus to purchase a phone for a gift in another country, one would purchase the phone from that country. I asked why? This is America, free business, if you don’t have an exclusive contract with any carrier, then why am I the consumer being pushed into a one year or two year contract by the carrier, when all I want is a Motorola product, made by Motorola, for Motorola customers.

Next I informed the csr employee that I had heard from a third carrier about something called a SUBSIDY CODE, that turns out to be the device placed in the phone, which restricts it to a prescribed carrier before it even leaves the manufactures. After several attempts to get a better understand of the SUBSIDY CODE, I eventually took the well stated advice of the Motorola csr and management team and called the carrier. I called Verizon and Cingular, I asked the Verizon csr employee how could I have the subsidy code remove from my phone? I was informed that the manufacturer places the subsidy code on the phone during the manufacturing process. I informed the representative that I was just informed otherwise. I ended my phone call with both, who claimed that they do not have access to the subsidy codes.

Well the issue with subsidy codes, is that they are not warranted by the manufacturer and only exist as a contractual issue by the carrier. Now upon the completion of a contract with a cell phone carrier, you would think the subsidy code would be provided to the account holder. It seems that not even during this event would the carrier offer the subsidy code. Why would a consumer want the subsidy code, well it is the product that locks your phone into the one or two year contract, thus preventing you the option to have a free phone, which would be avoided of the data ownership issues, and would provide you, the consumer the right to shop carriers. If you were to purchase a cell phone from the manufacturers, you could receive better phone rates as this would cause the carriers to compete more effectively. You could also activate your phone in a foreign country, freely choosing the carrier you want. Perhaps you could use a carrier in Mexico (who offer a low rate) and relocate to United State, still using the same phone. Nevertheless the subsidy code restricts the FREE AMERICAN CONSUMER, choose of carriers, based on phone equipment and it also locks the consumer into a one or two contract for service.

So if I had a cell phone equipment purchased directly from the manufacturer, and it was unlocked, and then I decided to activate service with any carrier, and signed a one year contract anyway (I guess fair business practice) at this point, would I own the detail to the phone bill? It seems that this is one huge confusing mess, of which some innocent people are having their privacy invaded, just because their phone number showed up on someone else’s bill. As a cell phone owner, I always assumed that all the data belonged to me. I was reassured of this in 2004, when Nextel offered copyright services on their phones, providing the customer the opportunity to copyright the detail, conversations, and written properties on their phone. Some people write songs, reports, or dialogue on their phone, or review PRIVATE business issues over the phone, is that what it’s for any way, communication.

It’s only fair that this issue be reviewed, I have submitted similar reports to the A.C.L.U concerning the invasion of privacy that occurs when the ownership of the data detail is in dispute. Consumers have to demand their right to the subsidy code, it is part of the manufactured product, when it leaves the warehouse. Currently many websites and local phone companies offer consumers UNLOCK CODES for their cell phones, which range from $19.99 and up. But why should the consumer have to pay for something they already paid for when they purchased the phone?

› See More: Who owns your cell phone data, you or the phone carrier?