The Federal Aviation Administration officially banned Galaxy Note 7s from being brought onto airplanes earlier this week, and under a new Emergency Restriction / Prohibition Order, it’s now a federal crime to fly with the device.
The FAA issued Emergency Restriction/Prohibition Order No. FAA-2016- 9288 on Friday, which states that as of noon on October 15th, fliers are prohibited from bringing the device onto an aircraft. The order restricts passengers from carrying the phone "on their person, in carry-on baggage, in checked baggage, or as cargo," and says that anyone who inadvertently brings one on a plane must power it down immediately. Carriers are also required to "deny boarding to a passenger in possession" of the phone.
Passengers who bring a Note 7 onto a plane are "subject to civil penalties of up to $179,933 for each violation for each day they are found to be in violation (49 U.S.C. 5123)," and could be prosecuted, which could "result in fines under title 18, imprisonment of up to ten years, or both (49 U.S.C. 5124)."
Comments
He’s dead, Jim.
By RoboticSpacePenguin on 10.16.16 12:53pm
With this, Note 7 has officially became radioactive!
By OpticShape on 10.16.16 1:07pm
Haha. Never imagined you could get arrested and fined for owning a Samsung phone.
By MVEGA on 10.16.16 1:19pm
Your right, just a Note 7
By mstrSirus on 10.16.16 1:38pm
Which is a Samsung phone, so the comment stands.
By parad0x on 10.16.16 1:54pm
If you’re going to correct someone else’s word choice, it is good practice to use correct spelling.
By lusional on 10.16.16 4:42pm
In his defense he could have meant "it’s your right to own a Note 7, you’ll just get arrested for it."
Obviously.
By Uncle Lincoln on 10.16.16 7:15pm
You’re*
By aditya.ravishankar on 10.16.16 10:16pm
You can own one, you just can’t take it on a flight.
By Emelio on 10.17.16 5:36am
I’ve been arguing this should have been the case since the very first Galaxy device. Copycats shouldn’t be allowed to exist.
By Scape3d on 10.17.16 11:37am
I’m wondering how many dumb people don’t even know what phone they have. More than that I don’t get it why samsung doesn’t just brick the phone in 24 hours let’s say and that’s it. End of story.
By raresh on 10.16.16 1:25pm
That will open them up to 10 million lawsuits, even if their intention is public safety
By harvey_dent on 10.16.16 2:41pm
In America that’s doubtful.
By EvilAvatar on 10.16.16 5:47pm
They could have some type of warning pop up on the screens of those phones.
By JBDragon on 10.18.16 12:57pm
Bricking won’t matter. Some of these phones are burning up while turned off anyway.
By wigby on 10.16.16 7:55pm
Bricking would stop people from using them, which would make them more inclined to get rid of them.
By iAmDeathTheKid on 10.17.16 9:14am
They were going to do a mass SMS to all outstanding owners to advise them the handset had been recalled. Not sure what database they are using, but I assume they have the means.
By Smigit on 10.17.16 3:42am
They don’t even need to do that – they could push any message they wanted to the phone as an alert.
By James Pinnell on 10.18.16 1:17am
I read somewhere that in anticipation of that, they are texting everyone who owns one as well. You never know tho, some poor old guy who was super up sold may end up with one of these fines.
By JesseDegenerate on 10.17.16 8:51am
Or just send a unblockable text message every hour. That would drive me insane in any situation. But then again some fool would look at the message while driving and cause an accident.
By Chris Darnell on 10.17.16 5:24pm
Is this the first time it had been a crime to bring a specific phone onto a plane? Is so this is a terrible achievement for Samsung. My mom just had replaced her Note 7 with a S7. I wanted her to move from Samsung entirely really.
By Tratia895 on 10.16.16 1:36pm
Switch to the Sony Xperia XZ then. It has excellent specs and is a great alternative to the Note 7.
By Shamoy Rahman on 10.16.16 10:01pm
I would agree with you if it weren’t for the fact that Song has decided to leave off a finger print reader on the NA version although it’s present in other markets.
By Aleph Ruehl on 10.17.16 5:59am
Honestly, no one really needs a fingerprint scanner on their phone. Why would you want to use a feature that is neither all that secure (hackers can spoof those fingerprints) and opens you up to government interference (because you can be compelled by police to use or provide it in order to look at said phone)?
By Sevenmack on 10.17.16 9:35am
Then don’t configure it if you don’t like it, but you’re in the minority. If you don’t put that feature on your phone in this day and age you deserve to go out of business.
By TK-093 on 10.17.16 10:49am