Liable for what? Failing to provide security properties that they never offered? The blame for this situation lies with the banks, who are for the most part already legally responsible for covering the losses.
Sure, but the scales are completely different. Making a telco fully liable for the simjacking itself would result in maybe one thousand dollars of damages due to the administrative hassle, and likely much closer to the story's $80 after the usual lobbying.
I took the comment I responded to as saying that telcos should be on the hook for the banks' losses as well. The bank fraud amounts described in the article are much larger.
