Common Short Codes Like 900/976 Numbers? Huh?
The CTIA is baffling me again. This time it is with their non-sequitur response to the whole issue of Common Short Codes, which the folks at Public Knowledge are petitioning the FCC to make the act of choosing to not allow a particular short code on their network illegal.
If I follow the CTIA’s reasoning, I think they are trying to say that short codes are like 1-900 or 976-xxxx numbers in the U.S. with a high potential for fraud and abuse. Only when the phone carriers were allowed to block access to 900 and 976 numbers did the fraud and abuse problems associated with these numbers go away.
While I’m all for reducing fraud, I think this is a bogus reason. I took a look at the rules for 900 numbers as per the Federal Trade Commission, and they are fairly straightforward. There are rules about the ads for these numbers, which make it fairly clear they have to disclose the possible costs of the call and some other pertinent facts. There are also rules about when you call the 900 number:
When you dial a 900 number that costs more than $2, you should hear an introductory message or “preamble.” You can’t be charged for this message. It must briefly describe the service, the name of the company providing the service, and the cost of the call. It also must state that anyone under age 18 needs parental permission to complete the call. Once this information is provided, you must be given three seconds to hang up without incurring a charge.
So if I were to translate this rule for, say, a premium common short code, I might write the rule like this:
When you send a text message to a common short code with a charge above and beyond the usual and customary fee your operator charges, the short code operator must respond with a text message that describes the services you are about to receive, the cost of said services, and require a confirmation text message to be sent confirming acceptance to the terms. If there is no response to this confirmation message, the short code operator should not charge the specified fee.
I’m not a lawyer, and I’m sure one could drive a Mack truck through the above statement, but you get the idea.
Furthermore, the carriers themselves should be able to provide to customers the ability to disable all premium SMS services at a particular customer’s request, much like you can request 900 number blocking on your landline. Should carriers get the right to unilaterally decide to block short codes they find objectionable? I don’t think so.
Bookmark with: del.icio.us Digg it Furl iFeedReaders ma.gnolia Maple.nu RawSugar reddit Simpy StumbleUpon
Tags: common short codes, ctia, mobile network operators, short codes, SMS, text messaging Fnord
Comment by spg
why not mandate that they must allow short codes that are charged at regular rates but block any codes with a surcharge above your normal SMS cost? i have never been a believer that phone companies should be financial transaction companies. actually chargeable SMS numbers should perhaps be 1-900 numbers since consumers are most aware of what that means.
Comment by PhoneBoy
@spg that’s actually an excellent idea. SMS a 1-900 number if you want to pay. Or, if you want to make it short, make it 976xxxx
Of course, that means the mobile network operators have to be bill collectors, which they seem to resist doing for some reason when it comes to 900 numbers. Hm…
Comment by spg
i will you something that i would rally like the CTIA to do. i would like to see a law passed that require telemarketer companies to present a unique type of caller ID(such as SALES CALL) on every call so that they can be identified as marketing calls prior to answer. we could than do away with all the no call lists etc. phone companies could also offer services that reject all calls with the unique type of caller ID.
Comment by PhoneBoy
@spg as far as I know, telemarketing to a mobile # is still illegal in the U.S. because the recipient pays to receive the call (though I’ve heard rumors that may have changed). Most of the landline telemarketer calls I get come from an 800 number with something generic like “toll free number.” I ignore those if I get them.
The number I typically give out for work purposes is a GrandCentral number, which filters out all telemarketers because of how they operate.
Pingback by StumbleUpon - Your page is now on StumbleUpon!
Pingback by 976 NUMBERS - Dogpile Web Search
Comment by Lisa
I am 81 years old so I do not understand much about this 900/976 numbers. If someone calls me on a 900 no. do I have to pay for that phone call even though I dd not ask them to call. Is that why I am told I should block those numbers? I called the government no. and the lady could not answer my questions. If she couldn’t help me, who can?
Comment by PhoneBoy
If someone calls you from a 900 or 976 number, it won’t cost you anything. You only pay if you call the 900 or 976 numbers from your phone. The reason you want to block those numbers is to prevent other people in your household from calling those numbers and running up a large phone bill.