IMEI and the law

Many countries have acknowledged the use of the IMEI in reducing the effect of mobile phone theft, which has increased exponentially over the last few years^{[citation needed]}. For example, in the United Kingdom under the Mobile Telephones (Re-programming) Act, changing the IMEI of a phone, or possessing equipment that can change it, is considered an offence under some circumstances.

There is a misunderstanding amongst some regulators that the existence of a formally allocated IMEI number range to a GSM terminal implies that the terminal is approved or complies with regulatory requirements. This is not the case. The linkage between regulatory approval and IMEI allocation was removed in April 2000 with the introduction of the European R&TTE Directive. Since that date, IMEIs have been allocated by BABT (acting on behalf of the GSM Association) to legitimate GSM terminal manufacturers without the need to provide evidence of approval.

Other countries use different approaches when dealing with phone theft. For example, mobile operators in Singapore are not required by the regulator to implement phone blocking or tracing systems, IMEI-based or other. The regulator has expressed its doubts on the real effectiveness of this kind of systems in the context of the mobile market in Singapore. Instead, mobile operators are encouraged to take measures such as the immediate suspension of service and the replacement of SIM cards in case of loss or theft.[1]

Blacklist of stolen devices

When mobile equipment is stolen or lost, the operator or owner will typically contact the Central Equipment Identity Register (CEIR) which blacklists the device in all operator switches so that it will in effect become unusable, making theft of mobile equipment a useless business.

The IMEI number is not supposed to be easy to change, making the CEIR blacklisting effective. However this is not always the case: IMEI may be easy to change with special tools and operators may even flatly ignore the CEIR blacklist.