4 ms·

We are not directly a tmobile customer. We use Twilio. Our relationship with Tmobile is mediated by them. But ultimately we are a customer, and this is not how

We are not directly a tmobile customer. We use Twilio. Our relationship with Tmobile is mediated by them. But ultimately we are a customer, and this is not how you treat customers. 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.

avianlyric 3y ago
Have you read the Twilio Acceptable Use Policy[1]? > 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. [1] https://www.twilio.com/en-us/legal/aup https://www.twilio.com/en-us/legal/aup
- grumple 3y ago
  Sending CBD messages are explicitly forbidden, not necessarily due to actual illegality, but due to SHAFT compliance. CBD derived from hemp is federally legal. Messaging about it can be illegal depending on claims made. I'm not really complaining about that, although the short timeline for new, exorbitant fines is ridiculous. We do not have a relationship with any entity other than the government itself that "fines" us. This is not normal behavior for a business relationship. We do not need to discuss cbd/canibus anymore, although you are welcome to continue arguing for your position that a business can fine their customers anytime they want with effectively no notice to the change in their agreement. 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.
  - avianlyric 3y ago
    > We do not have a relationship with any entity other than the government itself that "fines" us. This is not normal behavior for a business relationship. 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.
maxerickson 3y ago
The message you should take from their code of conduct frustrating you is that they don't care about your business...so you aren't quite spiting them.

avianlyric 3y ago

Have you read the Twilio Acceptable Use Policy[1]? > 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. [1] https://www.twilio.com/en-us/legal/aup https://www.twilio.com/en-us/legal/aup

grumple 3y ago
Sending CBD messages are explicitly forbidden, not necessarily due to actual illegality, but due to SHAFT compliance. CBD derived from hemp is federally legal. Messaging about it can be illegal depending on claims made. I'm not really complaining about that, although the short timeline for new, exorbitant fines is ridiculous. We do not have a relationship with any entity other than the government itself that "fines" us. This is not normal behavior for a business relationship. We do not need to discuss cbd/canibus anymore, although you are welcome to continue arguing for your position that a business can fine their customers anytime they want with effectively no notice to the change in their agreement. 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.
- avianlyric 3y ago
  > We do not have a relationship with any entity other than the government itself that "fines" us. This is not normal behavior for a business relationship. 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.

maxerickson 3y ago

The message you should take from their code of conduct frustrating you is that they don't care about your business...so you aren't quite spiting them.