Mobile Marketing Can-spam Confusion, Beware The Tcpa Bite

It is startling the number of marketers that come to InvolveMobile to manage a mobile

campaign and ask advice on whether they are in compliance with the CAN-SPAM Act. The assumption that mobile marketing and consumer opt-ins are regulated by the CAN-SPAM Act is largely a result of the high profile it enjoys and the overlap with email to text messaging services offered by wireless carriers. However, its the unexpected Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 whose bite has turned out to be worse than its bark.

Given that text messaging, the main marketing contact channel for mobile phones, was yet to come into existence when the TCPA was enacted in 1991, its not surprising that many marketers believe it is limited to governing telemarketing voice calls. Whilst its true that legislators at the time could not have been aware of SMS, the FCC and several court judgments have taken the view that a call can indeed include a text message, not just voice. There is no doubt we will see future legal challenges, but for now, it appears the case law is becoming increasingly settled and has important ramifications for mobile marketers.

The judgments extend back to 2005, however just last month, the District Court of Northern Illinois in Abbas v Selling Source again upheld the TCPAs application to text messages. It relied in part on what will be seen as an increasingly important judgment, the Federal Court of Appeals decision last year reinstating a $90m lawsuit in Satterfield v Simon & Schuster. In this case, Ms Satterfield signed up to receive a free ringtone and ticked a checkbox opting in to affiliate marketing. Sometime later, Ms. Satterfields young son received a text message in the middle of the night from Simon & Schuster, advertising a novel by Stephen King warning him that the "next call you take may be your last". The Satterfield case is also interesting for its debate on what constitutes mobile opt-in consent, demonstrating that courts will not be so friendly to marketers who are not clear with their intent.

For now, the courts seem content to dole out severe financial penalties to companies that ignore violations of the TCPA. In one of the largest payouts so far, US boots and clothing company Timberland and its ecommerce partners were forced to pay more than $7 million to settle a class action lawsuit brought against them for allegedly sending thousands of unsolicited SMS text messages to potential customers' cell phones. Timberland denied any wrongful conduct and blamed responsibility for securing opt-in consents on its mobile marketing company. What is clear is that at up to $1500 per violation (ie; per text message) it may be an expensive exercise if you or a third party provider get it wrong.

Not all of the TCPA rules necessarily apply to text messaging, but with the courts willing to apply broad interpretations, it may not be worth the risk by ignoring them.

by: simon.vella

POST COMMENT

How to Avoid Get Rich Scam Stock Trading - 3 Tips For Big Profits Five Mistakes You Must Avoid In Your Mobile Marketing Campaign Dynamic Wealth Management Efficient Market Theory Ethics an imperiative in marketing Check Out Affiliate Marketing Reviews Natural Diet Plan - scam? Gov Auctions Scam Water Utilities In Australia - Market Reserach Report On Aarkstore Enterprise. Online Source of Affiliate Marketing Reviews Social Media Marketing for Manufacturing Companies SitePaw is a put to purchase and market sites on the net Water Utilities In Belgium - Market Reserach Report On Aarkstore Enterprise.