Antitheft Switch Essay
“New York Asks Cellphone Carriers to Explain
Why They Rejected Antitheft Switch” (Chen, 2013)
The New York Times article, “New York Asks Cellphone Carriers to Explain Why They Rejected Antitheft Switch” addresses the growing trend of cell phone theft in the United States. The article recaps recent steps taken by government, police officials, cell phone carriers, cell phone manufactures, and trade groups in this sector. The concern presented by government and police is that the cell phone industry is not doing enough to prevent these crimes on society. The two largest issues relating to the course are possible actions resulting in tort law and actions implying collusion on behalf of cell phone carriers.
As we have learned through our lectures a company has the duty of due care to its consumers. If in fact the cell phone carriers denied the use of kill switches on their devices they may have failed this duty. Since cell phone theft is a known concern to consumers it is reasonable to assume that security features would be the …show more content…
They also all share a common trade group and cell phone insurance company which condemn kill switches. The aspect of collusion is difficult to prove as you need direct proof that these companies acted in unison on this decision. If they are not able to provide direct proof they would need a plethora of other factors that all point to collusion. I believe that some of those other factors are easy to see at this point. First, there is a common motive in the form of insurance revenues along with repurchasing of phones. If the firms allowed the kill switch it could easily dry up large portions of both of these revenue streams. Second, would be that all parties were aware that if they were early adopter it would force other firms to follow suit. I see this as a form of tacit knowledge among cell phone
Why They Rejected Antitheft Switch” (Chen, 2013)
The New York Times article, “New York Asks Cellphone Carriers to Explain Why They Rejected Antitheft Switch” addresses the growing trend of cell phone theft in the United States. The article recaps recent steps taken by government, police officials, cell phone carriers, cell phone manufactures, and trade groups in this sector. The concern presented by government and police is that the cell phone industry is not doing enough to prevent these crimes on society. The two largest issues relating to the course are possible actions resulting in tort law and actions implying collusion on behalf of cell phone carriers.
As we have learned through our lectures a company has the duty of due care to its consumers. If in fact the cell phone carriers denied the use of kill switches on their devices they may have failed this duty. Since cell phone theft is a known concern to consumers it is reasonable to assume that security features would be the …show more content…
They also all share a common trade group and cell phone insurance company which condemn kill switches. The aspect of collusion is difficult to prove as you need direct proof that these companies acted in unison on this decision. If they are not able to provide direct proof they would need a plethora of other factors that all point to collusion. I believe that some of those other factors are easy to see at this point. First, there is a common motive in the form of insurance revenues along with repurchasing of phones. If the firms allowed the kill switch it could easily dry up large portions of both of these revenue streams. Second, would be that all parties were aware that if they were early adopter it would force other firms to follow suit. I see this as a form of tacit knowledge among cell phone