T-Mobile Claims Right to Censor Text Messages

[EmptyTimCup]

Hmm I don't think so ......

this obviously has 1st Amendment implications .... in the same token, they should not be allowed to be sued because some perv is Sexting 15 yrs olds .... who is to say what "Political" Speech is ok and what is not ....

T-Mobile Claims Right to Censor Text Messages


T-Mobile, the company wrote in a filing (.pdf) in New York federal court, “has discretion to require pre-approval for any short-code marketing campaigns run on its network, and to enforce its guidelines by terminating programs for which a content provider failed to obtain the necessary approval.”

Such approval is necessary, T-Mobile added, “to protect the carrier and its customers from potentially illegal, fraudulent, or offensive marketing campaigns conducted on its network.”

It’s the first federal case testing whether wireless providers may block text messages they don’t like.

The legal flap comes as the Federal Communications Commission has been dragging its feet over clarifying the rules for wireless carriers. The FCC was asked in 2007 to announce clear rules whether wireless carriers, unlike their wireline brethren, may ban legal content they do not support. The so-called “network neutrality” issue made huge headlines last month, when Google, along with Verizon, urged Congress not to bind wireless carriers to the same rules as wireline carriers.

 

[lnmarsh]

Thats just a little bit o' bullshyt.

How about we dont give them that right. Pass a law instead basically saying that whatever text you send, the carrier can in no way be held liable for the content of the message.

There. Problem solved.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

Thats just a little bit o' bullshyt.

I think wired carriers may have that protection already ...


but I do not agree with a business deciding what "Content" is appropriate ....

 

[Floyd2004]

You know you can block calls/texts on most modern phones...
If you dont like it, block it and be done with it.
Makes me glad im on Verizon still

 

[awpitt]

Hmm I don't think so ......

this obviously has 1st Amendment implications .... in the same token, they should not be allowed to be sued because some perv is Sexting 15 yrs olds .... who is to say what "Political" Speech is ok and what is not ....

No 1st Amendment implications in this case. The 1st Amendment says that, "Congress shall make no law......." Says nothing about T-Moble.

 

[donbarzini]

No 1st Amendment implications in this case. The 1st Amendment says that, "Congress shall make no law......." Says nothing about T-Moble.

And a "marketing campaign" is just Madison avenue-ese for a commercial. I believe they certainly have the right to control who advertises and how they do so on their network.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

No 1st Amendment implications in this case. The 1st Amendment says that, "Congress shall make no law......." Says nothing about T-Moble.

so you OK with T-Mobile censoring your ability to communicate ?


and your probably correct ...... but there is something wrong here



besides then a Government could merely allow a 3rd party to do its dirty work, with no repercussions .......

 

[awpitt]

so you OK with T-Mobile censoring your ability to communicate ?


and your probably correct ...... but there is something wrong here



besides then a Government could merely allow a 3rd party to do its dirty work, with no repercussions .......

Please reread my post and point out the section where I expressed agreement with T-Moblies actions.


An assertion was made that this is a 1st Ammendment issue. It's not, unless the govt is requiring T-Moble to do this. Outside of that, if folks don't like it, they can switch carriers.