Benton RSS Feed

The Federal Communications Commission granted a request by SoundBite Communications, Inc. (SoundBite) and confirm that sending a one-time text message confirming a consumer’s request that no further text messages be sent does not violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) or the FCC’s rules as long as the confirmation text has the specific characteristics described in the petition.

The ruling will allow organizations that send text messages to consumers from whom they have obtained prior express consent to continue the practice of sending a final, one-time text to confirm receipt of a consumer’s opt-out request—a widespread practice among businesses, non-profit organizations, and governmental entities, which many parties in this proceeding, including a consumer group, assert is good consumer policy. The FCC emphasized that the ruling applies only when the sender of text messages has obtained prior express consent, as required by the TCPA and Commission rules, from the consumer to be sent text messages using an automatic telephone dialing system or “autodialer.” The ruling ensures that wireless consumers will continue to benefit from the TCPA’s protection against unwanted autodialed texts, while giving them certainty that their opt-out requests are being successfully processed.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, a huge “The Big Lebowski” fan, said, “Today’s common-sense order ends the legal lacuna and the courtroom arbitrage it has inspired. Hopefully, by making clear that the Act does not prohibit confirmation texts, we will end the litigation that has punished some companies for doing the right thing, as well as the threat of litigation that has deterred others from adopting a sound marketing practice. And consumers want confirmation texts: They want the assurance that that there will be no further intrusions on their privacy. In short, today’s order is a win for consumers and for innovative companies alike.”

The House Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, chaired by Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), held a hearing exploring “The Role of Receivers in a Spectrum Scarce World.” The subcommittee focused on how best to promote innovation and maximize spectrum efficiency in the constantly evolving wireless communications marketplace.

• Ronald Repasi, Deputy Chief of the Federal Communications Commission’s Office of Engineering and Technology, explained that the FCC has largely focused on transmitters as it has worked to limit interference and maximize efficiency with previously allocated spectrum. However, given the rapidly evolving wireless technologies, he said, “Receiver performance is becoming increasingly important as a limiting factor as we move to repurpose spectrum and pack more services closer together on the spectrum chart. The continuing challenge for the Commission will be to maximize the amount of usable spectrum for cost effective deployment of new communication services while sufficiently protecting incumbent receivers.”
• Brian Markwalter, Senior Vice President of Research and Standards at the Consumer Electronics Association, discussed the role device manufacturers play ensuring that their products are void of interference issues and reliable for those that use them. He said, “Equipment manufacturers and mobile providers have a strong self-interest in developing and deploying devices that are resistant to forms of interference and devices that create as little interference as possible. The limited amount of available spectrum combined with the high cost of spectrum and the dynamic interference environment faced by the industry incentivizes the development of efficient and robust receivers.”
• Pierre de Vries, a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the University of Colorado at Boulder, highlighted the need for parties to work together to find the common ground that neighboring spectrum users can tolerate. He testified, “The policy challenge is to ensure that services that are affected by each other’s signals have the appropriate information and incentives to find the appropriate levels of interference and mitigation. The old strategy, which was to avoid any possibility of interference, is increasingly problematic as we need to crunch ever more services ever more closely together. A better approach is to maximize the value of wireless services, taking into account the costs and benefits of interference, rather than simply minimizing interference as an end in itself.” While he advocates for the adoption of “harm claim thresholds,” de Vries argues that those thresholds are best determined by stakeholders rather than government agencies.

The Obama campaign raised $690 million online. The majority of it came from the fundraising emails that peppered inboxes for the last two years. They employed a team of 20 writers and a sophisticated analytics system to measure and improve their effectiveness. Now, they're starting to spill the secrets they learned during the campaign. And as revealed in a new report from Joshua Green, there was a high-powered viral media outfit lurking in Chicago. The lessons from the campaign aren't just a recipe for making money, but for winning eyeballs in the brutal deathmatch to grab your attention on the Internet. What we can learn is how the Obama campaign fine-tuned its content for maximum Internet impact, i.e., how it channeled its inner BuzzFeed.

Syria, the Middle Eastern country in the middle of an especially bloody civil war, disappeared from the Internet.

The research firm Renesys, which keeps track of the status and health of the technical underpinnings of the Internet around the world, just reported that at 10:26 UTC this morning — which, by my watch, would have been 5:26 am ET — effectively all of Syria’s international Internet connectivity shut down. More technically, what happened was that within the global routing table, all 84 blocks of IP addresses assigned to Syria have gone unreachable. That means that Internet traffic destined for that country is going undelivered, and also that traffic coming from within it cannot get out to the world.