Can Spam?

|

The FCC is busy protecting us from mobile phone spam:

But the FCC exempted from its spam definition any short message service, or SMS, messages that go directly to phone numbers, which could create a large loophole through which millions of junk messages may travel.

The agency also exempted "transactional" and "relationship" messages—such as billing statements or simple customer information. But it left the definition of what messages fall under those classifications to the Federal Trade Commission.

[…]

FCC chairman Michael Powell said he was "very proud to have just flatly prohibited spam on wireless devices"

For some definition of "spam" and "flatly".

Advertisement

NEXT: Burning Blog

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The FCC is limited in what it can do by the “You Can Spam” Act, for good or for ill. They interpreted the act as not giving them authority to ban SMS spam. Of course, that’s no excuse for exaggerated claims for having “flatly” prohibited spam.

    The FCC’s regulations also carry the burden of Can-Spam’s defining spam in terms of commercial content, instead of making it a content-neutral matter of burdening recipients with unsolicited bulk mail. Again, it’s stuck with what Congress passed; after all, the politicians wouldn’t want to take away their own right to spam!

  2. If e-mail gets spam, and IM gets spim, what does text messaging get? Spex?

    Kevin

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.