IMEI blacklisting has nothing to do with private information or user of previous phone number, it does not try to do that, it's a technique that attempts to prevent stolen phones to be used by anyone as the operators would refuse to allow that device (identified by the device's IMEI number) to connect to their network.
But the crucial question is when was device stolen; "a priori" of someone using it or "a posteriori" of someone using it.
Samsung refers to TV being stolen "a priori" of consumer using it("A TV blocking system has been activated on Samsung television sets stolen from our warehouse") but if a TV is stolen posteriori of someone using it maybe blocking can come in handy in order to protect consumer's private information on the device. But when remotely disabling someone's TV you should be 100% sure you are doing it for the right reason and you should inform the consumer before you do it.
Samsung explains "a priori" blocking of Smart TV like this:
Samsung Television Block works as follows:
A TV blocking system has been activated on Samsung television sets stolen from our warehouse
The blocking will come into effect when the user of a stolen television connects to the internet, in order to operate the television
Once connected, the serial number of the television is identified on the Samsung server and the blocking system is implemented, disabling all the television functions
Should a customer’s TV be incorrectly blocked, the functionality can be reinstated once proof of purchase and a valid TV license is shared to serv.manager@samsung.com or click here for more information
I think the same question comes into play here as well, what does blocking have to do with protecting private information?
If it actually had some tie-in to the previous users information I'd follow why it's relevant to the conversation better. As is blocking IMEIs and TVs from registering seems completely unrelated to stealing the existing local data so I can't follow the distinction.
I don't think there is really much of a difference for the person buying the device, except they have some degree of recourse.
1. I unknowingly buy a stolen device.
2. I connect it to it's associated network.
3. The device is reported back to some central authority which then black-lists/bricks the device making it fairly useless.
The only difference I see is that Samsung will allow your to provide proof of purchase, and it will function without being connected to that networked system.
They want proof of a valid TV license when I only use my TV for streaming and do not need or have a license? If that's a hard requirement in their system they'll be getting some complaints down the road.
