T-Mobile, AT&T oppose unlocking rule, claim locked phones are good for users

Locking phones is not at all a requirement for carriers to offer subsidized deals. They could offer phones on installment plans conditional on an N-month contract. The buyer could switch carriers and keep the phone, but be on the hook to pay off the rest of the contract term. The only reason to use technological locks is to further trap a customer into a carrier relationship beyond the legal terms of their contract. It's yet another example of companies violating long-standing rights and norms and getting away with it because there's a computer involved.

What happens when the buyer says "no, I'm not paying" and sells the phone?

Instant money. Meanwhile the telecom company has to sell the debt at a massive discount to a collections agency or spend a ton of money collecting on it. That's assuming it can be collected on at all from someone that might just be running a scam.

With a locked phone, the phone just stops working and loses most of its value.

A rule forcing carriers to unlock phones after the term is up is fine. Forcing them to do it before is illogical. How many people are going to pay for two plans on one phone because they didn't like the first plan? I doubt it's more than those who will immediately abuse this rule and stop paying for the phone. I don't see the benefit to society here.

> What happens when the buyer says "no, I'm not paying" and sells the phone?

This is just like any thing you get a loan for. It goes to collections and your credit gets hurt. Why would normal consumers have restrictions because of bad actors?

AT&T operating income for 2023 was $23.5B and T-Mobile was $8.3B. Carriers are doing just fine.

The point is loans are generally secured with collateral. The bank can repossess your car or your house. It's worth it to go through the expensive repossession process because those items are high-value.

A carrier just eats the loss on a phone they provide but don't get paid for. The kinds of people who skip paying their cell phone bill generally have bad credit to begin with and couldn't care less if it goes to collections. The recovery rate for collections is pennies on the dollar.

And you know who will suffer if more people are able to basically keep phones for free? Not the carriers. They'll just jack up prices for everyone to offset the additional losses. You think they're just going to eat the cost themselves?