SMS Stop Command | Stop Means STOP ALL
A decision has just been handed down from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), regarding theSMS stop command, which states that all U.S. carriers will now require that an end user receive one final MT, or message terminated message, when opting out of a program or campaign. As a result of this, if an end user is opted in to more than one program or campaign on a short code, ALL opt-out keywords are to be treated as “STOP ALL”. STOP menus also will no longer be allowed.
This is a change from the old rule which only required carriers to opt the end user out of the specific campaign they are responding to. For example, if Company A is running a campaign on short code 12345, and Company B is also running a campaign on short code 12345, and an end user replies “STOP” to any message sent from Company A, then it USED to be that the end user would only be opted out of Company A’s campaign while they will still receive text messages from Company B on the same short code.
The NEW ruling states that if the end user responds to Company A’s message with “STOP”, then that user is opted out of BOTH Company A’s, and Company B’s campaigns since they are on the same short code, which in this case is 12345.
This change is effective immediately, even though the FCC ruling is officially scheduled to go into effect on October 16, 2013. You can see the full FCC ruling here.
This make zero sense to me. The law seems to suggest that the user understands and or wants to opt out of any alerts that come from a short code vs a campaign. Does it not make sense that I as a user might want to receive alerts from one organization and not another…regardless of the shared short code situation?
We understand what you’re saying, but there have been incidents where people were opted into a short code, then opted-out, but kept receiving messages anyways and they didn’t understand why (we know it’s because there was another campaign that they opted in to, but a lot people don’t remember or understand this and this created problems).
Several complaints were fielded where someone opted out of a campaign, but kept receiving messages anyways and that upset them. This is a big reason this ruling was handed down.
It’s unfortunate, but when some companies are taking advantage of the rules, the rules need to be changed.
It makes sense from the perspective of those that forget that they were part of several campaigns. I think it also makes good sense that governing bodies and service providers err on the side of preventing unwanted messages to be sent. Just seems like, on the surface of it, it will put a shared short code environment at a disadvantage when a prospect is making a decision to invest in SMS marketing.
I agree. Despite all of this unfortunate information, we still feel the obligation to inform all of our clients and customers of such rulings so everyone can better understand how this works and know what’s going on from a legal perspective.
Why don’t use sub-keyword?
No each campaign is separate and each client would have to have their subscribers opt-in through the proper format for each campaign to be compliant. I am available to discuss if need be and I can be reached at 800-984-4242