So couple of things.
I have received multiple reports lately from completely legitimate good businesses who have had their traffic shut down or limited by Twilio for completely bogus reasons.
Sometimes Twilio claims some made up “opt out” limit has been hit–there is no federal, state or regulatory rule about campaign opt out limits–and shuts down traffic on that basis.
Sometimes Twilio claims some key word–like “loan”–is being used that somehow can’t be used in their mind (there is no federal state or regulatory limit on communications including the word “loan.”)
Sometimes they seemingly just decide they don’t like the traffic being sent.
This is what I am being told at least.
They seem to blame it on the carriers, or carrier best practices, or carrier restrictions. But I have talked to carriers. The carriers DO NOT SUPPORT this behavior.
Blocking calls and texts on the basis of their content is unconstitutional. And since it is purportedly being done at the behest of carriers/FCC, this is state action.
Text messages are NOT information services–don’t care what the FCC rulings say–and the Courts will find this conduct violates Section 201.
Interfering with legitimate existing contracts constitutes a tort in pretty much every state and even interference with POTENTIAL economic advantage is a tort in many states.
Seems like this could end up in a massive piece of litigation.
Discovery would undoubtedly include a review of all books and records about the seemingly arbitrary post hac decisions being made in terms of whose traffic is getting blocked and why.
Probably records of opt out rates will be demanded across campaigns that are being monitored and it will be asked why certain campaigns and companies were targeted and not others.
Undoubtedly focus will be put on any list of “kill” words and phrases used to target certain companies and campaigns on the basis of the content of their speech.
I’d imagine this would be a big brutal litigation that starts with a slam-dunk TRO and ends with a company-altering judgment.
Someone might even point to this blog post as an indication of the type of ESI that should be preserved ahead of foreseeable litigation…
Or maybe I have been misinformed? Do you have any thoughts on this subject you would like me to share Twilio? Always interested in making sure I have the facts straight.
Because if the facts are as I have been REPEATEDLY told it looks like you are preventing legitimate companies that are trying to send legitimate messages (especially those to existing consumers) on arbitrary and invalid reasons and it is CRUSHING their business.
That’s how it looks to me anyway.
And it is NOT ok.
No one likes a bully.
If I’m wrong let me know. But I don’t think I am.
Related, did you hear the Mobile Ecosystem Forum (some lightweights named TJ Thinakaran and Dario Betti) kicked Puja off a panel on SHORT NOTICE in Miami apparently because of pressure from #TCR?
Now we’re really going to dig in folks…
More to come.
Editor’s note: since I posted already received an avalanche of support on this. Few thoughts:
“100% this is happening… literally this week saw millions of [legitimate] texts blocked… we’ve been charged untold amounts.
The problem is if you complain too loudly, they shut you off. It’s a racket.”
“it is hurting the good players… experience working with twilio and it is very huge revenue loss when they suspend. btw they still charge you for traffic despite suspension and blocking…”
“Loved your Twilio article, Eric! This censorship absolutely is happening… And as you said in your blog, the carriers, acting with the licensing of the government and taking their marching orders from the FCC, is definitely state action.
I hope you find a client to sue the hell out of them… or on behalf of an entire class of injured clients! Such a lawsuit would prevail; I am confident of that fact, given how many folks have been censured…”!
“Prior to September, 2023, our company utilized Twilio exclusively for telephony capabilities. Our user-base is 99% Mortgage professionals… We had explained our use case to our representative numerous times—providing guidance through the loan journey, and answering questions related to the process—but we still were rejected for “forbidden categories” and “high risk financial services.”
Long story short, we had to scramble, working around the clock to migrate all of our non-approved campaigns onto TCR so we could, among other things, actually own our campaigns and have visibility into the process. The intentional obfuscation as a business tactic was particularly damaging.
This is gutting small businesses who rely on communication with their customers and prospects. These are good actors trying to do business the right way—yet they’re restricted from doing so and silenced. It’s not legal, and it’s not right.”
Seems like court intervention here is inevitable.
Discover more from TCPAWorld
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Much of this is being driven by the arbitrary assertions by The Campaign Registry (“TCR”) that certain traffic from Twilio is “impermissible”. The TCR, which has no relationship with any governmental organization (such as the FCC or FTC), simply acts as an arbitrage between carriers and their constituent network partners, and their ipse dixit determination as to what is permissible adversely affects a lot of those who are using the services. Deference does not extend to TCR. But nonetheless, they are acting as if they are operating in a manner that is on behalf of the FCC and that Chevron does.
Anyway, It is rather unfortunate that the TCR has self-delegated itself as an organization with the power to adjudicate, in a manner where there is no rhyme or reason, and with little or no recourse. And the FCC has so far been silent on the issue.
If anyone is interested in reading more about it, the following article contains a vast amount of information, backed up by sources, at the following location:
https://alanquayle.com/2023/09/messaging-monopolies/