The FCC just dodged a bullet. The lawsuit between text messaging company EZ Texting and T-Mobile flowing from T-Mobile’s decision to block text messages sent from Weedmaps.com ended last week with a whimper. The parties agreed to a super-secret settlement on the courthouse steps. However, unless the FCC acts on our text message petition soon, next time they may not be so lucky.
What, exactly, was the nature of the bullet that the FCC dodged? They almost lost the ability to decide how to handle text messages, those things that American send 5 billion of every day.
When we first filed our petition in 2007 we asked the FCC to clarify the regulatory status of text messaging. Since that time the FCC has essentially turned its back on text messaging, even as text message use has exploded across all demographics.
The EZ Texting lawsuit had the potential to force the Commission out of its indifference. EZ Texting asserted that the FCC has already determined that text messaging and short codes are a Title II service. T-Mobile asserted the opposite – that the FCC has already determined that short codes are Title I services.
Faced with this contradiction, the District Court could have reacted in at least two ways. Each would have removed the FCC’s ability to control text message classification.
First, the court could simply look at the facts and decide the issue. It could finally clarify that text messages and short codes are either Title I or Title II services and simply end it there. The FCC would be cut out of the process entirely.
Second, the court could send the question to the FCC as the expert agency and require it to determine the correct classification. Again, this removes control from the FCC. The Commission would have to answer the court’s questions in the time the court demands and in the way the court demands. Instead of being able to guide the regulatory process, the FCC would simply be following orders.
Of course, neither of these options would even exist if the FCC had found a moment since 2007 to formally recognize the regulatory status of text messages. Now, its “close your eyes and pray” strategy has worked again. However, I have to wonder how long it will be, with carriers shaking down text messaging companies, text messaging growing at an incredible rate, and innovative companies built on text messaging taking the tech world by storm, until the FCC loses control for good.
stdClass Object
(
[nid] => 5396
[type] => blog
[language] =>
[uid] => 2258
[status] => 1
[created] => 1286285868
[changed] => 1286286445
[comment] => 2
[promote] => 1
[moderate] => 0
[sticky] => 0
[tnid] => 0
[translate] => 0
[vid] => 5591
[revision_uid] => 2258
[title] => FCC’s “Do Nothing” Text Messaging Strategy Succeeds . . . For Now
[body] =>
The FCC just dodged a bullet. The lawsuit between text messaging company EZ Texting and T-Mobile flowing from T-Mobile’s decision to block text messages sent from Weedmaps.com ended last week with a whimper. The parties agreed to a super-secret settlement on the courthouse steps. However, unless the FCC acts on our text message petition soon, next time they may not be so lucky.
What, exactly, was the nature of the bullet that the FCC dodged? They almost lost the ability to decide how to handle text messages, those things that American send 5 billion of every day.
When we first filed our petition in 2007 we asked the FCC to clarify the regulatory status of text messaging. Since that time the FCC has essentially turned its back on text messaging, even as text message use has exploded across all demographics.
The EZ Texting lawsuit had the potential to force the Commission out of its indifference. EZ Texting asserted that the FCC has already determined that text messaging and short codes are a Title II service. T-Mobile asserted the opposite – that the FCC has already determined that short codes are Title I services.
Faced with this contradiction, the District Court could have reacted in at least two ways. Each would have removed the FCC’s ability to control text message classification.
First, the court could simply look at the facts and decide the issue. It could finally clarify that text messages and short codes are either Title I or Title II services and simply end it there. The FCC would be cut out of the process entirely.
Second, the court could send the question to the FCC as the expert agency and require it to determine the correct classification. Again, this removes control from the FCC. The Commission would have to answer the court’s questions in the time the court demands and in the way the court demands. Instead of being able to guide the regulatory process, the FCC would simply be following orders.
Of course, neither of these options would even exist if the FCC had found a moment since 2007 to formally recognize the regulatory status of text messages. Now, its “close your eyes and pray” strategy has worked again. However, I have to wonder how long it will be, with carriers shaking down text messaging companies, text messaging growing at an incredible rate, and innovative companies built on text messaging taking the tech world by storm, until the FCC loses control for good.
[log] =>
[revision_timestamp] => 1286286445
[format] => 1
[name] => Michael Weinberg
[picture] => files/pictures/picture-2258.png
[data] => a:5:{s:7:"contact";i:0;s:15:"googleanalytics";a:1:{s:6:"custom";i:1;}s:14:"picture_delete";i:0;s:14:"picture_upload";s:0:"";s:14:"wysiwyg_status";a:1:{i:7;i:7;}}
[path] => blog/fcc’s-“do-nothing”-text-messaging-strategy-su
[print_display] => 1
[print_display_comment] => 0
[print_display_urllist] => 1
[print_mail_display] => 1
[print_mail_display_comment] => 0
[print_mail_display_urllist] => 1
[print_pdf_display] => 1
[print_pdf_display_comment] => 0
[print_pdf_display_urllist] => 1
[last_comment_timestamp] => 1286286445
[last_comment_name] =>
[comment_count] => 0
[taxonomy] => Array
(
)
[files] => Array
(
)
[iids] => Array
(
)
[page_title] =>
[nodewords] => Array
(
)
[build_mode] => 0
[readmore] => 1
[content] => Array
(
[print_links] => Array
(
[#weight] => -101
[#suffix] =>
[#value] =>
[#prefix] =>
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[#content_extra_fields] => Array
(
[title] => Array
(
[label] => Title
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => -5
)
[body_field] => Array
(
[label] => Body
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 0
[view] => body
)
[revision_information] => Array
(
[label] => Revision information
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 20
)
[author] => Array
(
[label] => Authoring information
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 20
)
[options] => Array
(
[label] => Publishing options
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 25
)
[comment_settings] => Array
(
[label] => Comment settings
[description] => Comment module form.
[weight] => 30
)
[menu] => Array
(
[label] => Menu settings
[description] => Menu module form.
[weight] => -2
)
[taxonomy] => Array
(
[label] => Taxonomy
[description] => Taxonomy module form.
[weight] => -3
)
[path] => Array
(
[label] => Path settings
[description] => Path module form.
[weight] => 30
)
[attachments] => Array
(
[label] => File attachments
[description] => Upload module form.
[weight] => 30
[view] => files
)
[image_attach] => Array
(
[label] => Attached images
[description] => Image Attach module form.
[weight] => 0
)
[itunes] => Array
(
[label] => iTunes feed information
[description] => iTunes specific information.
[weight] => 0
)
[page_title] => Array
(
[label] => Page Title
[description] => Page Title form.
[weight] => -4
)
[path_redirect] => Array
(
[label] => URL redirects
[description] => Path redirect module listing
[weight] => 30
)
[print] => Array
(
[label] => Printer, e-mail and PDF versions
[description] => Print module form.
[weight] => 30
)
[xmlsitemap] => Array
(
[label] => XML sitemap
[description] => XML sitemap module form
[weight] => 30
)
[nodewords] => Array
(
[label] => Meta tags
[description] => Meta tags fieldset.
[weight] => 10
)
)
[#pre_render] => Array
(
[0] => content_alter_extra_weights
)
[body] => Array
(
[#weight] => 0
[#value] => The FCC just dodged a bullet. The lawsuit between text messaging company EZ Texting and T-Mobile flowing from T-Mobile’s decision to block text messages sent from Weedmaps.com ended last week with a whimper. The parties agreed to a super-secret settlement on the courthouse steps. However, unless the FCC acts on our text message petition soon, next time they may not be so lucky.
What, exactly, was the nature of the bullet that the FCC dodged? They almost lost the ability to decide how to handle text messages, those things that American send 5 billion of every day.
When we first filed our petition in 2007 we asked the FCC to clarify the regulatory status of text messaging. Since that time the FCC has essentially turned its back on text messaging, even as text message use has exploded across all demographics.
The EZ Texting lawsuit had the potential to force the Commission out of its indifference. EZ Texting asserted that the FCC has already determined that text messaging and short codes are a Title II service. T-Mobile asserted the opposite – that the FCC has already determined that short codes are Title I services.
Faced with this contradiction, the District Court could have reacted in at least two ways. Each would have removed the FCC’s ability to control text message classification.
First, the court could simply look at the facts and decide the issue. It could finally clarify that text messages and short codes are either Title I or Title II services and simply end it there. The FCC would be cut out of the process entirely.
Second, the court could send the question to the FCC as the expert agency and require it to determine the correct classification. Again, this removes control from the FCC. The Commission would have to answer the court’s questions in the time the court demands and in the way the court demands. Instead of being able to guide the regulatory process, the FCC would simply be following orders.
Of course, neither of these options would even exist if the FCC had found a moment since 2007 to formally recognize the regulatory status of text messages. Now, its “close your eyes and pray” strategy has worked again. However, I have to wonder how long it will be, with carriers shaking down text messaging companies, text messaging growing at an incredible rate, and innovative companies built on text messaging taking the tech world by storm, until the FCC loses control for good.
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#children] => The FCC just dodged a bullet. The lawsuit between text messaging company EZ Texting and T-Mobile flowing from T-Mobile’s decision to block text messages sent from Weedmaps.com ended last week with a whimper. The parties agreed to a super-secret settlement on the courthouse steps. However, unless the FCC acts on our text message petition soon, next time they may not be so lucky.
What, exactly, was the nature of the bullet that the FCC dodged? They almost lost the ability to decide how to handle text messages, those things that American send 5 billion of every day.
When we first filed our petition in 2007 we asked the FCC to clarify the regulatory status of text messaging. Since that time the FCC has essentially turned its back on text messaging, even as text message use has exploded across all demographics.
The EZ Texting lawsuit had the potential to force the Commission out of its indifference. EZ Texting asserted that the FCC has already determined that text messaging and short codes are a Title II service. T-Mobile asserted the opposite – that the FCC has already determined that short codes are Title I services.
Faced with this contradiction, the District Court could have reacted in at least two ways. Each would have removed the FCC’s ability to control text message classification.
First, the court could simply look at the facts and decide the issue. It could finally clarify that text messages and short codes are either Title I or Title II services and simply end it there. The FCC would be cut out of the process entirely.
Second, the court could send the question to the FCC as the expert agency and require it to determine the correct classification. Again, this removes control from the FCC. The Commission would have to answer the court’s questions in the time the court demands and in the way the court demands. Instead of being able to guide the regulatory process, the FCC would simply be following orders.
Of course, neither of these options would even exist if the FCC had found a moment since 2007 to formally recognize the regulatory status of text messages. Now, its “close your eyes and pray” strategy has worked again. However, I have to wonder how long it will be, with carriers shaking down text messaging companies, text messaging growing at an incredible rate, and innovative companies built on text messaging taking the tech world by storm, until the FCC loses control for good.
[#printed] => 1
)
[links] => Array
(
[comment_forbidden] => Array
(
[title] =>
[html] => 1
)
[print_html] => Array
(
[href] => print/5396
[title] => Printer-friendly version
[attributes] => Array
(
[title] => Display a printer-friendly version of this page.
[class] => print-page
[rel] => nofollow
)
[html] =>
[query] =>
)
)
)
