Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

T-Mobile says it blocked texts because client didn't follow guidelines, not because of content

Update at 11:44 a.m: with response by EZ Texting below

T-Mobile said Tuesday it didn't not block medical marijuana text message alerts because of the content of the text. Instead, its decision to cease delivery of text came because EZ Texting didn't follow "best practices" guidelines.

T-Mobile was sued in a federal court by EZ Texting, whose clients include, for allegedly blocking text alerts to customers seeking alerts on distributors of medical marijuana.

"Though T-Mobile doesn’t typically comment on pending litigation, we believe it is important to clear up some of the confusion generated by EZ Texting’s allegations," T-Mobile said in a statement.

The firm said it requires content providers like EZ Texting follow the Mobile Marketing Association’s U.S. Consumer Best Practices Guidelines for Cross-Carrier Mobile Content Programs, as well as other regulations applicable to the mobile content business. It didn't specify how EZ Texting, which has supplied text marketing services for T-Mobile users for three years allegedly violated those guidelines (pdfbestpractices.pdf).

"When T-Mobile discovered that EZ Texting had not followed this process for WeedMaps – the text messaging service at issue in the lawsuit – we turned off the short code that EZ Texting was using for these services. The content of the WeedMaps service simply had nothing to do with T-Mobile’s decision."

EZ Texting responded to T-Mobile's statement saying the carrier didn't have the right to block text messages.

"One thing is for sure, however, T-Mobile has never stated that any of its customers have ever complained about text messages from Ez Texting," the firm said. "That’s because T-Mobile’s customers want to exchange text messages with Ez Texting’s customers. Consumers have a right to exchange text messages with whomever they like, just like any other type of call."

The short message code service and public interest group Public Knowledge say text messages should be regulated in the same way phone calls are, with the same rules against blocking.

By Cecilia Kang  | September 22, 2010; 9:30 AM ET
Categories:  T-Mobile  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Gephardt, World Bank president join firm representing China's Huawei telecom
Next: Canada ends probe of Facebook's sharing of data


So, what aspect of the best Practice Guidelines is supposed to have been violated? A technical or a content violation? If you don't know then say that.

Pretty poor reporting.

Posted by: overed | September 22, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Hope T-Mobile loses big time. Whether or not you agree with content, a communication company should not be allowed to block access unless it is used for clearly criminal activity.
And the righties cry about government control. Big business is as bad if not worse.

Posted by: pjohn2 | September 22, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Get the forensic experts in there and make them prove it. It seems really funny that they had to take this much time coming up with something, anything that would make them look innocent.

If it was that. They would have responded with that right off the bat. This is a dodge.

Posted by: DONO51 | September 22, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company