Okay, some disclosure: first, I am kinda’ excited about getting an iPhone now that it’s finally coming out in Canada; and secondly, I can do so without feeling too awful simply because, thanks to a family member who’s a Rogers employee, I get 50% off the plans. So with those two disclaimers in mind…

When the outrage over Rogers’ iPhone pricing plans spread like wildfire through the Canadian tech blogosphere, I wasn’t at all surprised. In the face of no competition, we all knew that Rogers would gouge their customers and provide significantly less data for more money when compared to other carriers across the world. So, I took it all in stride and even joined in the chorus. I may loosely call myself a marxist but, unfortunately, I am first and foremost a geek.

Things, however, started to turn a bit sour with the arrival of fuckyourogers.com, which has since become ruinediphone.com. In principle, this was democracy and the free market at work – a group of potential consumers using internet’s easy and powerful methods for aggregating and centralising opinion to voice their displeasure. But the tone of the outrage began to change rather quickly, as the comments on blogs and newspaper sites began to shift from frustration to a sense of entitlement, a sentiment captured by Jack Kapica in this column here.

I’m conflicted. On the one hand, I agree with some of Rob’s assertions that the iPhone is a sort of technological and cultural locus for the transition to a fully mobile web. And like Rob, I believe a persistent mobile connection to the internet at high speeds will have profound ramifications for both culture and business/productivity. On top of all this, as a potential customer, I think Rogers’ pricing plans are, well, stupid.

At the same time, something about this feels off to me. During Michael Geist’s keynote at Mesh 08, I (very nervously) asked whether digital advocacy was in danger of becoming co-opted by an emphasis on consumer rights rather than political activism. Geist agreed, suggesting that it is almost inevitable that something like Bill C61 or the iPhone would get more play than political struggle. And it may just be my naivete, but it feels strange that anyone in a position to buy an iPhone and pay for a monthly plan would behave as if the government had just curbed free speech or dismantled the welfare state. Read the comments on the Globe and Mail or elsewhere and you’ll get the sense that these are the complaints of people who have never had to worry about their next meal, or even their kids’ tuition.

Consumer outrage is great. It’s a check and balance on corporate greed, something Rogers is famous for. But is this misplaced activism? An almost petulant sort of frustration about having to pay too much to use Apple’s shiny new toy? Don’t get me wrong: I am not on Rogers’ side here. But at the same time, I think I’ve lost my initial support for the people behind ruinediphone.com. So whaddya’ think? Justified consumer complaint? Or activism turned childish temper tantrum?