FCC proposes 60-day unlock rule after T-Mobile doubles its prepaid lock-in to 365 days

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,595   +1,682
Staff member
In a nutshell: The FCC has proposed a 60-day unlocking requirement for all wireless providers to address consumer frustration with inconsistent phone unlocking policies among mobile carriers. The regulation aims to standardize policies and enhance consumer choice and competition.

Federal Communications Commissioner Geoffrey Starks highlighted the issue, noting that current policies vary significantly, with some consumers facing significant barriers to unlocking their phones while others find it relatively easy. This inconsistency is detrimental to both consumers and competition. The proposed uniform policy would require carriers to unlock phones 60 days after activation unless the customer acquired the handset fraudulently.

"For too long, consumers have faced confusing and disparate cell phone unlocking policies. This lack of consistency across carriers means some consumers can unlock their phones with relative ease, while others face significant barriers," said Starks. "A consistent unlocking policy isn't just good for consumers. For carriers, it'll better reward those offering the most innovative, affordable products and services."

The 22-page proposal, approved in a 5-0 vote, initiates a public comment period before the FCC finalizes the proposed rules. The draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) outlines the requirement for mobile service providers to unlock handsets no more than 60 days post-activation. Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel emphasized in a statement that while the Commission has mandated some unlocking requirements in past spectrum auctions and mergers, unreasonable restrictions on consumers unlocking their phones persist.

"Some [carriers] have recently increased the time their customers must wait until they can unlock their device by as much as 100 percent. Enough!" Chairwoman Rosenworcel exclaimed. "We can put in place a nationwide standard because it is in the best interest of consumers and competition."

Rosenworcel noted that some providers, like T-Mobile, have recently extended their locking periods, making it harder for consumers to switch carriers. T-Mobile's prepaid brand, Metro by T-Mobile, has more than doubled its unlocking period, going from 180 days to one full year, aligning with T-Mobile's other prepaid policies. The Uncarrier also differentiates between prepaid and postpaid unlocking policies, with postpaid devices requiring a minimum of 40 days of active service before they are unlocked. Financed phones are not eligible until paid in full, which is standard policy for most providers.

FCC Notice of Proposed Rule... by FCC

The FCC's draft NPRM is sketchy about how to handle financed phones. Logic dictates that current company unlocking rules would remain status quo since the provider technically owns the device until the customer satisfies the contract. However, the proposal questions whether alternative unlocking timelines would be more effective, such as unlocking upon activation or after the first payment. This idea seems like an invitation for deadbeats to ditch their financing obligations.

The proposal also considers the broader impact on the availability of discounted handsets and term contracts. Verizon's current policy, influenced by past spectrum license conditions, locks phones for 60 days before automatically unlocking them. Likewise, AT&T's policy requires a 60-day active service period for postpaid phones, while prepaid phones must be active for at least six months.

The CTIA, a wireless carrier lobby group, cautioned the FCC to consider the trade-offs of setting a 60-day unlocking period, including potential impacts on digital equity and access to handsets. They suggested that stringent unlocking requirements might reduce the availability of subsidized phones, particularly in prepaid environments.

Consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge welcomed the FCC's move, arguing that phone locking imposes unnecessary burdens, particularly on low-income consumers, by locking them into expensive contracts and preventing them from accessing more competitive plans. They noted that phone locking also limits the secondary market for used phones, reducing affordable options for consumers.

There is still much to consider, especially when prepaid devices often come with very steep discounts. The FCC's next step is to gather public feedback on potential impacts on service providers' incentives to offer discounts, extended payment plans, and any other issue of public concern.

Image credit: Billion Photos

Permalink to story:

 
Where I live carriers universally use a 6 month unlock period for both financed and non financed (but typically heavily discounted) phones. Or you can buy a phone from a retailer that is unlocked from the get go. Carriers are mandated by law to provide in clear visible text the full cost of the phone including the first 6 months subscription and any finance fees applicable as a single number in the format ‘min. Price with 6 months of service is xxxx’.

To my knowledge nobody has any complaints about the system, and I haven’t heard of issues with debtors not paying for their phone after switching to a different provider midway through their finance period.
 
Carriers don’t lock the phones in my country - What they do if you buy a subsidized phone - is to lock you into a subscription. You can go with another carrier, but you have to pay for the other contract for x amount of months
 
This is why you buy an unlocked phone and buy a number from number barn. Can't lock me in if you own literally nothing that I use to utilize your service.
 
I'm going to make a wild guess and predict this gets appealed upwards by corporate until a judge ultimately rules that the FCC doesn't have autorithy to wipe their own posterior.

We live in interesting times.
 
Yeah, I’m going to say I’m in favor of unlocking phones after 60 days

Bought a phone using a carrier promotion from Verizon, traded in 2 broken iPhones from like 7 years ago. They’re completely worthless and got 2 iPhone 15 Pros for free…assuming I stay for 36 months.

That was never going to happen. I’m switching over to T-Mobile who will gladly pay off my device contract but because the phone is unlocked after 60 days, I didn’t need to front the $800 to pay off the device and can wait for T-Mo to send me a prepaid card to pay off the device
 
I've used T-Mobile for almost twenty years now. I use their prepaid service, because of the anonymity. Not even T-Mobile knows my name. I simply purchase a sim card with cash, and pay the monthly bill in cash every six months. I paid $49 for my brand new, TCL Flip Phone, and I pay $16.23 including tax, per month for unlimited calling, and texting to use it!

Like most companies, these cell phone companies in this country today, it's all about money, not usually customer service.

 
Ive never heard of a thing like that before. Kind of crazy that this even exists... Not in my country I guess
 
If you haven't paid off the phone then you don't own it in my opinion. I would be okay with it being locked for a year if that was the only option.
One can have a device unlocked and be required to pay any device agreements in full if you leave/cancel service. Would you really argue that the type of financing is so special? If it were paid with a credit card, it isn’t “paid off” but it would be unlocked from the factory. If the phones were still subsidized then I might agree with you but they aren’t.
 
One can have a device unlocked and be required to pay any device agreements in full if you leave/cancel service. Would you really argue that the type of financing is so special? If it were paid with a credit card, it isn’t “paid off” but it would be unlocked from the factory. If the phones were still subsidized then I might agree with you but they aren’t.
I used the word "if" intentionally.
 
Back