Re: Is Verizon Wireless Sabotaging Older Cell Phones?

[snip]

Hypothesis 2, the more paranoid one: Some people have been suggesting
> that Verizon have been deliberately breaking these phones. The reason > given is that they aren't E911 compliant, and if they were still > functional, Verizon would have to *give* you another one in order to > be in compliance with the minimum 85% that the FCC wants. Now that > it's "broken", they can *sell* you another one, or lock you in to a > new 2-year contract. (Note that this doesn't necessarily contradict > the first theory.) > So: What do y'all think about this? Is there any evidence for one or > the other scenario?

I just went through some of the same trouble, but for a different reason: I left my phone behind at my folk's house, which is about an hour's drive away, and tried to activate a spare Motorola 120C that a friend gave me a couple of months ago.

Verizon flat-out refused to turn it on, saying that it isn't E911 compliant, and that their system won't activate any phone that doesn't comply.

FedEx solved the short term problem: I now have my original 120C back and am able to use it. However, this episode raises lots of questions.

E911 has been simmering for years now, and I don't know what happens to non-compliant instruments when the deadline is finally here. A quick web search turned up an FCC date of December 2005, and a requirement that 95% (not 85%) of phones must comply by the end of this year. Verizon has chosen, according to the search results, to use GPS-enabled phones to comply, while other companies are putting the location hardware in their cell sites.

So, the questions:

95% or 85%?
Is December 2005 still the deadline?
What happens to those of us on Verizon's network without GPS-enabled phones (such as, apparently, the Motorola 120C).

William

(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)