Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > misc.phone.mobile.iphone > #76411
| From | Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android |
| Subject | Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? |
| Date | 2015-07-28 10:03 +0200 |
| Organization | SAP AG |
| Message-ID | <mp7d09$h2i$1@news.sap-ag.de> (permalink) |
| References | (11 earlier) <220720152306200254%nospam@nospam.invalid> <d8269$55b413c1$adb2d18a$1241@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com> <250720152044562996%nospam@nospam.invalid> <mp539c$snc$1@news.sap-ag.de> <270720151733120600%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Am 27.07.2015 um 23:33 schrieb nospam: > In article <mp539c$snc$1@news.sap-ag.de>, Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> > wrote: > >>>> Just altering an IMEI alone doesn't have all five, and, upon first >>>> initial thought, it doesn't even have one of the five. >>>> >>>> I'd have to look at the five things that make up fraud to see if altering >>>> an IMEI *for the purpose* of deceiving the phone company, to see if all >>>> five are encompassed (since certainly *some* of the five are). >>> >>> <http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud> >>> Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved >>> five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) >>> knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, >>> (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged >>> victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the >>> statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result. >>> >>> 1 - false statement. your phone has a false imei. >>> 2 - knowledge - you changed it, so you have knowledge that it's false >>> 3 - intent - you deliberately changed it to get a cheaper service pan >>> 4 - reliance - the carrier relies on the imei to provide service >> >> I have yet to meet one provider binding their services to the IMEI. > > they don't bind the service to the imei. they bind it to the *type* of > phone which is determined by the imei. Definitively not over here in Germany. > there are cases where a sim is tied to a specific device but that's not > that common (however, it does exist). I know, that's the strictest binding of a device to a provider (SIM lock the hardest way, usually here in Germany such devices are only locked to a provider, but any SIM card from that provider will do). >> If >> that were the case with my provider (just as an example), my phone would >> now be out of service as I had it replaced just on the weekend. And I >> didn't tell anybody at the provider about this change, nor do I plan to, >> nor do I have to, nor would they be the least interested in that useless >> piece of information. Their service delivery (and cost allocation, ...) >> is bound to the identification the SIM card provides, and is completely >> agnostic as to the IMEI. They might (some providers do, others don't) >> check the IMEI against blacklists, but that's a different story and not >> the point in question here. > > swapping one phone for another similar phone is not the issue. It would be if it was tied to the IMEI. > the issue is trying to get a cheaper plan of service by falsifying the > imei to look like a different class of device. > > in other words, putting a dumbphone imei into a smartphone so the > carrier sees it as a dumbphone and doesn't automatically upgrade the > service plan to a smartphone plan. that's illegal. Wrong. Illegal means against the law. Which law is prohibiting that? > another reason for altering an imei is to 'clean' a stolen phone that > has been blacklisted. that's also illegal. That's not a point in question, as that would have to be support of fencing (is that the correct term?), if not fencing in the first place. > you do see the difference, do you not? I see it, why don't you? ;-) >>> 5 - injury - the carrier is not being paid for services rendered >> >> Wrong. > > it's not wrong. > > if you sign up for a dumbphone plan and then swap the sim to a > smartphone that has had its imei altered to look like it's a dumbphone, > then the carrier has been financially injured because you're not paying > for the appropriate plan. A plan I never subscribed to, a plan I never wanted in the first place. And the provider will get money for any service I used (billed per minute or per block of data, more expensive than if I had a data plan - but hey, it's my money and I'm free to choose how to throw it of the window!). So where's the damage? > also if the other device ever shows up on the network at the same time, > there can be other problems. Technical problems, yes, but not legal problems. >> I'm not quite sure about the US plans, but here in Germany you >> can go online with a phone without data plan, but in that case you'll be >> charged comparably high prices (per minute usually, sometimes per 1kB or >> 10kB block, in any case this measure carries a high price tag). If the >> situation is anything similar in the US (which I understand from the >> argumentation of the AT&T exec it is), then the provider will get money >> for the service rendered. The customer might not be happy about the high >> bill, but the company will see their money. > > that doesn't matter. It does because there's no damage at all for the provider and as such your claim of 'fraud' is proved to be wrong. >> Bottomline: Even if I don't consider the first three points, points 4&5 >> are not fulfilled, therefore no fraud. > > all of the five items are fulfilled. you are wrong and it is very > clearly fraud. No reliance, no fraud. No injury, no fraud. Best regards, Michael
Back to misc.phone.mobile.iphone | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "M.L." <me@privacy.invalid> - 2015-07-22 09:50 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 10:33 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 17:25 +0100
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 12:45 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "M.L." <me@privacy.invalid> - 2015-07-22 15:29 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 17:07 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2015-08-06 03:25 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 18:54 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 10:30 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "M.L." <me@privacy.invalid> - 2015-07-22 15:32 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 18:54 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 10:27 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 09:28 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "M.L." <me@privacy.invalid> - 2015-07-22 15:27 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 10:04 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 10:04 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-22 20:26 +0000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "M.L." <me@privacy.invalid> - 2015-07-22 15:24 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 18:54 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 10:28 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 14:13 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-23 01:08 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 15:20 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:44 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 13:59 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:44 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 14:02 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 17:33 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:52 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 19:51 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> - 2015-07-28 10:09 +0200
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 20:14 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> - 2015-07-28 10:03 +0200
an imei number is a "statement"? true or false? Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-08-09 10:52 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud (was: Who pays for a phone..) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:44 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud (was: Who pays for a phone..) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 13:52 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:44 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-07-25 19:04 -0700
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 22:06 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-07-25 19:09 -0700
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 22:13 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-07-25 20:04 -0700
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 23:16 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-26 19:46 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-26 15:21 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 10:13 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-26 22:07 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 15:04 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-27 08:02 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:30 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-27 18:48 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 20:11 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-30 05:49 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 07:18 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-30 17:13 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 14:24 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-31 06:48 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-31 20:51 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-01 12:00 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-01 19:18 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-08-01 15:19 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-02 20:15 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-08-02 17:38 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-04 18:20 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-08-04 14:25 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 00:56 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 15:06 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-27 08:03 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:31 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-27 18:51 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 20:12 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-30 05:50 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:31 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-27 18:50 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-28 19:46 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-28 17:02 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-29 19:34 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-29 14:41 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-29 20:27 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-29 15:39 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-07-29 15:42 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-01 19:07 +0000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-08-01 15:14 -0500
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 13:54 +1000
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:44 -0400
Re: IMEI alteration is not fraud "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 13:53 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-22 20:22 +0000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 18:54 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 10:14 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 14:07 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-23 01:08 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 15:18 +1000
Smartphone contracts in the US (was: Who pays for a phone call..) Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201507.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2015-07-23 15:27 +0200
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-23 18:08 +0000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:45 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 14:20 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-26 19:46 +0000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 10:20 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 00:56 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 15:09 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 01:40 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 15:44 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 17:33 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 17:33 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:48 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> - 2015-07-28 10:22 +0200
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 09:15 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 10:10 +1000
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:44 -0400
Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 13:55 +1000
csiph-web