T-Mobile introduce fines from Jan 1 for "Code of Conduct" violations
support.bandwidth.com
support.bandwidth.com
> Tier 1: $2,000, for phishing, smishing, and social engineering
> Social Engineering refers to the practice of targeting individuals in a way that manipulates individuals to reveal private information like credit card numbers, or social security numbers.
> Tier 2: $1,000, for illegal content (included content must be legal in all 50 states and federally)
> Illegal content includes, but is not limited to, Cannabis, Marijuana, CBD, Illegal Prescriptions, and Solicitation.
> Tier 3: $500, for all other violations including, but not limited to, SHAFT
> Please review the T-Mobile Code of Conduct Section 5.2 for a list of all disallowed content
Section 5.2 mentions, a.o, gambling, payday loans and work from home programs. The code of conduct also discusses opt out, that high opt-out rates will warrant investigation, etc
This is limited to customers using their “bandwidth” service for sending messages en mass. So, I think this is a good change.
(If it weren’t, it would be very bad, as it would mean discussing where one can get an abortion can cost you $1000, because that isn’t legal in all 50 states)
They also don’t mention how they will enforce those rules. Will they read all messages sent through that service?
S: Secually inappropriate content
H: Hate speech or profanity
A: Alcohol
F: Firearms, and depictions or endorsements of violence
T: Tobacco (including vaping), or endorsement of illegal or illicit drugs, including marijuana and cannabis
In addition to the above, the promotion of gambling is not allowed.
https://www.10dlc.org/en/shaft
Edit: Actually the 10dlc.org T-Mobile code-of-conduct links to a 2020 pdf. Somebody should probably tell 'em. =)
Microsoft is doing better now, but it's employment conditions aren't the same as FAANG (and no where near the luxuries of when it was coined).
Amazon didn't look that good on a resume and "we're going to fire you the instant you underperform" Netflix wasn't that great a working environment.
I say we throw Amazon out and replace it with Microsoft. We could also throw netflix out, since they're doing pretty bad these days
Also Netflix got excluded in the new one because "the digital streaming pioneer’s market capitalization has not kept up with the others."
[1]: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/faang-stocks.asp [2]: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/29/cramer-new-acronym-to-replac...
So like, if you send a text with a swear word they will fine you?
This regulational complexity is the same reason why major shippers (FedEx, UPS) generally don't ship alcohol without a special agreement. Spirits, wine, and beer can all be different, by state and even by county. This is why there are special alcohol distributors that specifically deliver and stock alcohol.
I personally would never use the popular platforms like Signal, WhatsApp, etc for my own fundamental and philosophical beliefs but I am probably alone in not trusting them.
If end users start reporting too many messages that are sent from these numbers as spam, a human will eventually review the reported messages and their campaigns. The most likely way the fine itself will work is that T-Mobile charges Bandwidth (or whomever you’re routing messages through), and they pass on the fine to you.
Edit: typo
I guess there is an argument that the service should be a utility, but I don't think there are currently laws that would force them to carry messages that they expect to be a net harm to their business.
A company that refuses to divulge contact information for a company that sent me an unsolicited, unidentified text message (a clear violation of TCPA). Which is really funny... shouldn't this company want me to get in touch with them if I'm interested?
What is more important is that I provided source and destination numbers alongside times and screenshots of their customer violating the law and the response was a 'durrr, ok'.
These providers launder sms and voip spam. I've worked with providers that care about compliance and know when someone DNGAF.
My real name is in my profile; Try filing a police report saying that I engaged in "phishing, smishing, and social engineering". I think you'll find that nothing happens. I can give you some fake evidence if you wanna be extra convincing, but your report will still end up in the junk pile along with the rest
Terminating those relationships after a single violation would simple result in the eradication of all SMS sending services, except physical mobiles phones.
Perhaps I'm just confused about who is using it, and for what; I was under the impression this was for bulk mailing. But either way the whole industry has an abuse problem thats not really being taken seriously, as $2000 is barely a slap on the wrist -- what is a company's incentive to keep their platform clean with such a paltry fine?
But maybe the SMS on ramp shouldn't be so simple? These are businesses and they have undoubtedly calculated the risk of easy onboarding vs scammers getting through
What do you think the average revenue per customer is at Bandwidth or Twilio? A couple thousand dollars in fines for a violation should be plenty of incentive to screen their customers better.
If they start charging them $500k for a violation or something, these senders would just drop them entirely. Sure, you’d get rid of the junk… and everything else too.
Might not be a bad thing... it would stop a lot of spam and stop companies from using SMS for 2FA
The revision looks like a mistake by T-Mobile, or else a calculated risk that a class actions somewhow are unavailable and anyone they "fine" will accept it to avoid drawing law enforcement attention.
1) produce shitty AI voiceover "please don't click email links" videos
2) randomly email, text, etc us with fake stuff trying to get you to click the links.
I always report the emails as phishing to Google just hoping one day something gets flagged somewhere on Google's side, but I doubt it will ever happen.
My company is, but that's me being pedantic.
What I meant "we had to be enrolled in a service" in the "any company that provides this service" and was just giving the current company as an example.
Most companies don't use these tools correctly, and certainly the technical audience here on HN will despise them. But phishing simulations can reduce your risk.
1. They apply to only to messaging gateways for sending mass messaging campaigns, not consumers.
2. This is part of a long running industry process (since at least 2020) for reducing the abuse of SMS messaging in U.S. for the purposes of spam and phishing.
3. T-Mobiles “Code of Conduct” has existed since November 2020.
4. These new fines are just the latest set of fines for abusing messaging services. Since 2020 a number of fines have been introduced, but they’ve focused initially on simple technical violations (sending mass messages without properly registering your source number, or properly registering your campaign).
5. Reading around, it seems industry players are expecting these violations to be detected via customer complaints, rather than actual scanning messages. It seems the networks don’t have the infrastructure or the interest is mass scanning messages. But if they see unusual levels of complaints from customers, associated with a specific gateway or campaign, then they’ll manually review customer complaints, associated messages and issue the appropriate fines to originating gateway.
TL;DR if you’re not mass sending SMS via A2P (application to person) platforms, this has zero impact on. Except you should start getting less spam.
Having worked with quite a few telcos, I’m not surprised. Most of them struggle enough keeping their Lawful Intercept systems running properly (most people would probably be surprised to know how often wiretaps are messed up by service providers). I can’t imagine they’re especially eager to start running content analysis on their SMS traffic.
I refuse to pay, what are you going to do? Would this ever hold in court?
As long as the contract isn’t judged as being unfair (which is very unlikely), then yeah a court will uphold it, and court bailiff will confiscate property to see the fine paid.
Those contract provisions will create a consideration for payment between T-Mobile and their business partner, if their partner breaches the code-of-conduct, and a court will absolutely enforce those provisions. Eventually a court appointed bailiff will be instructed to recover the debt via the confiscation of assets, whether those assets are cash or other property will be entirely down to the solvency of the business the debt is being recovered from.
A court can ultimately do whatever the fuck it wants, sure, but one would expect it not to work.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that gateway providers like Bandwidth don’t all have contracts with T-Mobile which provisions for fines etc in them. I can guarantee you they do, there is zero chance that you can connect to T-Mobile network without entering into an air tight contract with them, which includes clauses to allow T-Mobile to unilaterally bill you for violations of the code-of-conduct.
How on earth are T-Mobile meant to provide any kind of service to gateways if they can’t write contracts with usage billing, and punitive clauses for bad behaviour, which courts will uphold. You’re basically suggesting that T-Mobile aren’t allowed to dictate how gateways use T-Mobile network, they either have to allow people to abuse their network, or simple not allow people to use their network. Which is patently ridiculous.
For example, billboards are illegal in Hawaii and have been since 1920, so if you do anything with a billboard, that is a $1k fine.
Another example, in Hawaii, it is illegal to have more than one alcoholic drink in front of you at once. So if you send a pic like that, it's a $1k fine.
In Hawaii it is illegal to have coins in your ear.
In Hawaii, it is illegal to have a tattoo on your eyelid or behind your ear.
In Hawaii, it's illegal to display captive dolphins or whales. That means almost any depiction of Sea World will get someone a $1k fine on T-Mobile.
In Hawaii, twins are not allowed to work for the same company.
In Texas it is illegal to have wire cutters with you when near ranch land.
In Texas, to hold public office, you must acknowledge the existence of a supreme being.
In Alabama it is illegal to dress as a priest for Halloween.
In Florida, dads that do not work are considered vagrants.
No horse can go faster than 10 MPH on a street in Indiana.
In Texas, squealing your tires when you start off is called "Unsafe Acceleration."
The use of reptiles in religious ceremonies is against the law in Ketucky.
If you buy a pizza for a friend and do not tell them in advance, that's a crime in Louisiana.
Psychics are illegal in Pennsylvania.
I need to find old T-Mobile commercials and start fining these people. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Like if there was a T-Mobile ad shot in a bar, or if there was one where a horse galloped down a public street.
Seriously, I think more and more about building a LoRa network with friends. https://meshtastic.org/
I find the whole thing a little creepy.
5.1 Unlawful, Unapproved, or Illicit Content
No messaging programs can run on the T-Mobile that may promote unlawful, unapproved, or illicit content, including but not limited to:
• SPAM; • Fraudulent or misleading messages; • Depictions or endorsements of violence; • Inappropriate content; • Profanity or hate speech; • Endorsement of illegal drugs
Though I imagine T-Mobile probably doesn't care if you keep paying and customers don't complain.
strange legal system you got there
Meanwhile many of our customers legally sell CBD products. But if one backwards state disallows the content, we could get fined? If one state bans, say, talking about abortion, and our customers in unrelated states discuss it, we can get fined? Since this is already the case, anything health related basically can't use sms on tmobile. And almost no business can safely use sms: we can't track every law in every state.
If you’ve been ignoring those notices, and you’re now going to start getting fines, that’s kinda on you. The rules have existed for years, now they greater consequences if you break them.
We operate numbers for thousands of of businesses. They sell cbd products as some tiny percentage of their business (hell, you can get cbd at convenience stores now). We can ban the word cbd, but we can't stop evasion. And the carriers are not cooperative about sharing techniques for detecting illegal content.
And again, the verbiage saying we can't send content that is illegal in a single state has never been communicated before. As I just stated, the abortion example makes it clear that this is a big problem. It is an unreasonably broad restriction.
These fines are excessive in any case.
What I'm going to recommend to my company is dropping all our tmobile numbers and to stop sending to tmobile customers, while we continue to explore non-sms alternatives for direct messaging.
> Prohibited Activities. Do not use the Services to engage in or encourage any activity that is illegal, deceptive, harmful, a violation of others’ rights, or harmful to Twilio’s business operations or reputation
I mean sending messages about selling CBD products could easily fall under the “encouraging and activity that is illegal”. CBD at the federal level is mostly illegal, depending on exactly how the product was created. The U.S. cannabis industry sits a weird legal gray area. Why are you surprised that large communication firm that operate in every state don’t want to get involved in that business, and the legal mess it comes with.
Get upset with T-Mobile for passing on the costs of that legal risk is foolish. They’re just doing the smart thing. If you’re in the cannabis industry, and you’ve done your due dil, then your business should be prepared for these types of events, because it comes with the territory.
The important change is that the new language prohibits anything that could be illegal in any state, regardless of whether the message originates or terminates in that state. I already gave you the example of abortion - you continue to ignore this example. Several states now ban emergency care for pregnant women that could result in the termination of a pregnancy. But now a California doctor can't message "Your appointment for termination is ready." or "This is a reminder to take pill #2." to a California patient because Texas has passed the Christian equivalent of Sharia law. How many other laws are there that could violate laws in individual states that we don't know about? Sodomy is still on the books as illegal in many states, as are many other laws that exist but are effectively unconstitutional. This app to person messaging can be for individual use as well - a user can send personal messages via a web or app based sms service.
The carriers are doing too much. They are prohibiting legal traffic. And at some point, like me, you have to fight for your customers, or you'll get disrupted. I'm extremely motivated to disrupt this industry at this point, or at the very least push the average American towards services like Whatsapp. Third party messaging apps like whatsapp are extremely popular outside of the US (used far more than SMS) and the ability to send encrypted messages without carrier interference is a big benefit.
That’s where I’m gonna have to disagree with you. They might not be common when a business is offering a fairly commodity product like SMS messaging. But they certainly appear in business contracts all the time. You must be familiar with the concept of a chargeback, and fees/fines business are slap with when chargebacks occurred. I can also tell you that in contracts between payment networks (Mastercard, Visa etc) and issuers/acquirers (banks, stripe etc) there’s a hundreds of rules, and associated fines/fees for non-compliance.
I’ve personally never seen a meaningful contract between two businesses that didn’t include clear expectations of performance, and monetary consequences for failure to perform. It’s a perfectly normal way for businesses to incentivise their partners to uphold their end of the deal, without having to endlessly resort to the courts for redress.
> The important change is that the new language prohibits anything that could be illegal in any state, regardless of whether the message originates or terminates in that state.
It’s not new language, the November 2020 copy of T-Mobile code-of-conduct contains the language, include the explicit requirement that content must be legal in all states.
> I already gave you the example of abortion - you continue to ignore this example. Several states now ban emergency care for pregnant women that could result in the termination of a pregnancy.
Utterly irrelevant. It’s not T-Mobile job to decide which states laws are morally acceptable to ignore, nor is it reasonable for you to expect them to take on that legal liability on your behalf.
Also none of this impacts you anyway. Your relationship is with Twilio, these changes impact Twilio only. Twilio can make their own decisions about how they want to handle the costs and risks, which may include passing on the fees/fines onto their customers, or it may not.
> The carriers are doing too much. They are prohibiting legal traffic.
Welcome to real world. Carriers are allowed to prohibit anything they want, in the U.S., that’s protected by the first amendment. Everything you’re complaining about has been true for years, you just haven’t done your research before. Realistically these changes are a complete nothing burger, carriers aren’t interested in actual scanning messages etc, they’re just looking for a fig leaf to demonstrate they’re doing something about the scrounge of SMS spam and phishing.