The Mobile Marketing Association has released the latest version of its “U.S Consumer Best Practices Guidelines for Cross-Carrier Mobile Content Services.  More simply, its the latest iteration of guidelines in terms of cross-carrier mobile content services such as SMS, MMS, shortcode services, Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and the mobile Web.

Dubbed version 4.0, the new guidelines represent the first time the individual mobile marketing guidelines and codes of conduct, known as “carrier playbooks,” of the four largest U.S. wireless service providers: Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile USA have been consolidated into one integrated “rule book” so to speak.

Read the rest

Share This

Rules, regulations and industry best practices are put in place for a reason, and nowhere are they more important then when it comes to anti-SPAM cases.  An emerging number of cases are being filed for violations of anti-SPAM laws regarding not only landline and cellphone call violations, but for SMS SPAM as well.

One such case is one involving a woman by the name of Laci Satterfield who, in 2007, sued Simon & Schuster in federal court in the Northern District of California for sending an unsolicited text message to her son’s cell phone that advertised the Stephen King horror book Cell.  Her attorneys claimed such text messages violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act because they were sent through an automatic telephone dialing system. The suit, brought on behalf of a potential class of 60,000 people, sought between $500 and $1,500 for each unsolicited text message Simon & Schuster sent, meaning the publisher faced damages of up to $90 million.

While specific rules and regulations regarding SMS messages are still a bit ambiguous, Simon & Schuster claimed that it didn’t use an auto-dial system, and that no “calls” took place as defined by the federal law.  The company also claimed that Satterfield and other users had given consent by agreeing to the terms of ringtone downloads, and thus had opted-in to receiving further marketing messages.  Originally, Oakland federal district court judge Claudia Wilken sided with Simon & Schuster, though she did not rule on the question of whether a text message constitutes a telephone call- the most important aspect of the case.

Read the rest

Share This

The 2009 Mobile Marketing Association (MMA)’s Forum opened yesterday in New York City to bring together industry experts and executives to discuss a wide range of topics related to the mobile channel.

While discussing all aspects of mobile, this year’s event will focus on consumer engagement, branding in the mobile channel and social media, among others.  Hearing from executives from a wide array of mobile-based companies, the forum will emphasize marketer’s case studies and discussions around privacy, location services, and creating opportunities through the evolution of the market.

While some have argued that mobile marketing as a whole is seeing slowing growth this year, those familiar with the industry see it differently.  In March, for example, the MMA announced that the four largest U.S. wireless service providers – Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile USA – had agreed to incorporate their mobile marketing guidelines within the MMA’s best practices, resulting in a transparent, consolidated playbook of consumer best practices.  This alone shows the dedication to the advancement of mobile best practices and the overall evolution of the mobile marketing industry as it moves forward.

Read the rest

Share This

The government of Norway has stepped in to put a stop to many SMS plans that charge consumers an on-going premium after they purchase certain things such as ringtones and minor applications for their devices.  Through a crack-down on the industry and the people who regulate it, SMS content providers will be forced to be upfront with consumers about the cost of “on-going messaging plans” from here on out.  If all goes well, other countries, including the US and many European countries, will adopt the same regulation

Hoping to make the entire industry more transparent, the government is forcing providers to come clean about their subscription plans and advertising, as well as allow consumers to bar ongoing services from July 1, 2010.  Beyond that, new regulation will force consumers to verify their acceptance of certain plans twice under a new “double opt-in” policy that will soon take effect.

In Norway, the testing ground for the new policies, the Mobile Premium Services code, jointly created by government and the industry body the Communications Alliance, will require all premium SMS operators to register on a list, and could see repeat offenders fined up to A$250,000 (US$188,718) in the Federal Court.  Having a central registry of operators will make tracking and punishing offenders of the policies much easier and more effective than it has been in the past.  In addition, providers will be banned from dealing with operators not registered on the industry list.

This new code and subsequent policies will be reviewed for a 12-month period to see how everything plays out.  These kind of deceptive practices are ruining legitimate SMS marketing tactics and bringing bad light, one again, to SMS as an advertising medium that in reality is a huge asset to mobile marketing as a whole.

Share This

We’ve talked a lot about Bluetooth marketing in the past.  Still, many users and even industry experts are still confused with the technology and the surrounding regulation and anti-SPAM laws that enter the picture anytime marketing messages are “pushed” to users via a Bluetooth connection.

Despite its relatively low-cost of deployment and high conversion rate, many advertisers shy away from the medium- fearing angered users and a lack of long-term customer interaction.  While this may be true for many campaigns that weren’t well thought-out, education on the ins and outs of the technology and the subsequent regulation goes along way.

I came across an interesting article written by Mark Brill of the Direct Marketing Association Mobile Marketing Council, who laid out the basics of marketing via Bluetooth, and the changes marketers must make- now that the ambiguity of Bluetooth Marketing regulation has become more clear.

As a new and underdeveloped marketing channel, there’s been significant confusion within the industry as to the issue of securing consent from consumers to reach them via Bluetooth.  Until recently, it was widely assumed that Bluetooth was covered by the Privacy & Electronic Communications Regulations of 2003.  However, in 2007 the Information Commissioner ruled that Bluetooth is not part of the “mobile network” and therefore is exempt from the 2003 Regulations.

Furthermore, the rules that require opt-in for email and SMS campaigns don’t even apply to Bluetooth.  This means that there’s little to prevent seedy marketers from bombarding every consumer in the vicinity who happens to have Bluetooth enabled on their phone.  It’s been this lack of regulation that has let Spammers run wild with Bluetooth, and therefore ruined the public’s opinion on the medium.

The ASA’s CAP Code is also vague on the matter, as Bluetooth is not covered by the code’s data section. Furthermore, if the advertiser is not using a private network or paid advertising space, Bluetooth may not even be covered by other areas of the CAP Code.

The DMA’s Mobile Marketing Council produced the first set of best practice guidelines for Bluetooth proximity marketing to help fill in the grey area, and give some form of regulation to the industry.  The guidelines stress the need to gain clear consent from mobile users and provide the opportunity to opt-out, as well as setting out the terms for broadcast range and the management of contact retries. These guidelines currently stand in lieu of government regulations. While they hold no legal power, the Direct Marketing Commission - the independent body responsible for monitoring compliance with the DMA Code of Practice - could impose sanctions on member companies found to be in breach of the guidelines.

While it’s just a first step, it’s a step in the right direction to getting Bluetooth Marketing regulated enough to become a major tool in any mobile marketer’s tool-chest.  As more and more Bluetooth campaigns are conducted within the guidelines that have been set fourth, the public will slowly realize the benefits of the medium, instead of seeing it as just another avenue for SPAM.

Share This

A California-based mobile marketing firm has agreed to pay the Florida Attorney General’s office $1M to avoid legal charges stemming from a variety of mobile content campaigns that were deemed “deceptive and misleading” after several complaints were filed with the AG’s office.

The company in question, “Mobile Messenger,” operates several online campaigns that direct mobile users to sign up for a variety of mobile content subscriptions such as horoscopes, “flirting tips,” and other content targeted more for younger users. The problem lies in the disclosure methods used by Mobile Messenger when signing up its users.

According to the Florida AG, many of the ads and subsequent transaction pages they pointed to failed to conspicuously disclose the true cost of the content. To avoid being faced with charges of violating state “CyberFraud” laws, the company decided to pony up the dough. You may remember, other mobile and online marketing firms have faced similar settlements from the state of Florida- M-Qube, AzoogleAds, and even AT&T have all payed settlements to the tune of $500k, $1M, and $2.5M respectively to the state of Florida. In other words, Florida is serious about its CyberFraud laws, and it intends to send a loud message.

Things like this always shed a bad light on mobile marketing as a whole and feeds in to the criticism that mobile marketing is plauged by deceptive practices and methods when in reality it’s far from the truth. While industry regulation is still evolving, it’s definitely there, and more times than not mobile campaigns are fully compliant, non-obtrusive, and abide by all rules and regulations.

Share This

Remember the AT&T text-spam fiasco, which I said was especially egregious because it seemed the cellular company violated its own opt-in requirements? Well, the Mobile Marketing Association has launched an investigation–thanks to a complaint system that, frankly, is news to me.

If you ever receive a mobile marketing message that you think violates best practices and consumer privacy, click here. This is where you’ll find an MMA email address set aside for complaints, as well as a list of information you should provide when reporting unsolicited or inappropriate mobile marketing messages. The association will consider investigating–and possibly sanctioning–the offending party.

I heard about this MMA process today thanks to ClickZ, which interviewed new Chief Executive Mike Wehrs. One notable excerpt from the ClickZ article: “Complaints about the AT&T and ‘American Idol’ text promotion triggered an MMA probe within two hours. Wehrs contended that no federal regulators would ever respond that quickly.”

And I think that’s why mobile marketing should be as self-regulated as possible. Sure, major laws (such as an equivalent of the U.S. CAN-SPAM statute that applies to commercial email) should be set, if not to let consumers–and marketers–know their basic rights. At the same time, laws can sometimes be over- or under-reaching, or else merely pander to certain fears without offering true protection.

Thus the marketing industry should vigorously stick to agreed best practices, and require compatriots to do the same. We know the space best, we know the benefits best, and we know the detriments best. And like Mr. Wehrs said, law enforcement would never act as quickly as an industry association like the MMA could.

In the short term, I’m looking forward to seeing what comes of the MMA’s investigation into AT&T. More important, though, is how this investigation might help prevent future offensive mobile marketing campaigns.

Share This