Locked Phone, World of Issues: The Push for Cell Phone Unlocking

Over the summer, I went on a long-awaited vacation. I had just taken the bar exam and scraped together graduation gifts and my life savings to leave the country as soon as possible. I would finally get some rest and relaxation after three long years of school and three isolating months of intense studying. I was most excited to get caught up on all my social media, to rekindle all the friendships I strained, and travel carefree without a computer or textbook in sight. One problem, however – I couldn’t really use my phone.

Knowing that I would need my phone while on the go, I purchased a data plan online that came with an installable e-SIM – a digital version of a SIM card that enables you to activate a cellular plan – for my phone so that I could have reliable, cheap, and unlimited internet access abroad. With my U.S. carrier’s international plans, my data use would have been capped far too quickly and the daily fee for international use would have been so much higher than the budget international data plan I found online. I thought the international data plan was a great idea until I arrived at my destination and tried to install the e-SIM. I kept getting an error message. Finally, I connected to airport Wi-Fi to troubleshoot the problem and discovered that I could not use an international data plan because my phone had not been fully paid off. My phone was locked, and I was abroad, alone, with no data. I didn’t expect to be caught in this situation, and for such an important trip, this made my trip a more harrowing experience than I had planned.

Given the fact that I have a good grasp of technology and that I have spent my time in law school and internships learning about various telecommunications policy issues, I was surprised to find myself in this situation. And while this was an inconvenience for me, there is more at stake for millions of consumers who are tethered to services they may not be able to afford, impacting how consistently they are able to maintain access to vital communication.   

There are two kinds of “locked” conditions that affect the devices we use. One comes from a software preinstalled by the device manufacturer that provides the device owner with a mechanism to lock their phones to help deter theft. A great example of this is Apple’s Activation Lock feature through the “Find My” app which prevents the use of the device even after it is completely erased. The other kind of locking, called carrier locking, is similar in form but exists for different reasons. Carrier locks are installed by or at the request of your cell phone service provider and, instead of aiming to prevent your phone from being stolen, they prevent a user from switching service providers. Oftentimes, a consumer must request to have their phone unlocked. And, while device owners can always unlock their devices before upgrading, many are unaware this is an option, forget to make this request, or may have to pay contract fees in order to do so. Providers cite valid reasons for needing to lock devices such as preventing theft and fraud, but for the rest of us, locked devices make it harder to use the phones we own in ways that we want. 

Locked cell phones harm consumers in several ways. These devices restrain consumers, preventing them from having the freedom to switch devices or carriers at their will. Carrier locking also stifles competition in the same manner since consumers get locked into plans and cannot choose among providers freely. Additionally, unlocking policies are sometimes unclear and confusing with hidden termination fees and other restrictions. Not to mention, these locked devices disproportionately impact low-income communities as these consumers are more likely to need payment contracts in order to buy devices, meaning they’re purchasing carrier-locked phones they must arrange (read: pay) to unlock – and these fees hit hard when your budget is already tight. These same consumers are more likely to buy devices secondhand, but fewer devices are on secondhand markets thanks to locking. Additionally, communities of color are impacted as these households over-index as smartphone-only users for home internet connection. In fact, 25 percent of Latinos and 17 percent of African Americans are exclusively smartphone internet users, compared to just 12 percent of white adults. Finally, locked devices contribute so much to the growing heaps of e-waste filling our landfills. These devices cannot be recycled due to their locked-in status and have to be trashed instead of refurbished and resold to other customers. 

Fortunately, the Federal Communications Commission recently initiated a rulemaking to solve this exact problem and Public Knowledge is in strong support. For years, Public Knowledge has advocated for an unlocking rule, arguing that “the practice of locking phones can reduce wireless competition by making it more difficult for consumers to change carriers” and asked the FCC to “investigate the effectiveness of the wireless industry’s voluntary phone unlocking commitments.” We also asked the FCC to consider creating an unlocking rule, noting that phone unlocking had become an issue on an international scale. This summer, we filed a joint letter with the FCC and requested the agency consider a rulemaking for unlocking – and the agency has done just that.

In response to the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we submitted comments supporting the agency’s proposal to mandate that a carrier unlocks a device within 60 days after its purchase. We stressed how unlocking expands benefits to consumers – especially low-income consumers and communities of color – when it is quick, standardized, and automatic. Further, we emphasized the importance of automatic unlocking in order to eliminate the “extraneous step of contacting the provider to have the device unlocked.” The FCC must continue to take action so consumers benefit from increased competition and more choice. 

We are pleased that the FCC is listening to stakeholders by considering an unlocking rule in the first place. In doing so, the Commission must think about consumers first. That means recognizing the impact unlocking has on competition, transparency, secondary markets, the environment, and how these impacts affect everyday cell phone owners. I hope – for me and many others – that devices are unlocked under the FCC proposed rule so that we can have more choice and more competition, and – most importantly – so I’ll finally be able to use the international e-SIM I bought!