This disturbs me bc I'm a tmobile customer.  Seems like it would cost them business.

in this case T-Mobile. Put yourself in the C-Suite of T-Mobile. Trust me, the discussion was about loss of revenue vs some freaks or advocacy group coming out of the woodwork and making T-Mobile's life a living hell.

If the FCC mandates the same rules for wireline and wireless, then this issue disappears. The revenue loss is probably insignificant.

This smaller adversary is not a competitor as they need the infrastructure of a T-Mobile type company.

This reminds me of our conversation regarding Craigslist. Just not worth the headache right now.

This effects those who operate vertical market texting services. This is an example of the capitalist class attempting to control a smaller adversary for dubious reasons. Your personal texting is a microscopic meaningless bit of data in this environment. If you subscribed to the service in question then you are of course SOL.

So we can add T-mobile to the spineless list huh? T-mobile did have them on a contract violation though. It is probably better for them to let the court decide than to stand up to weirdos.

From what I understand Tmobile was trying "to protect consumers" from receiving unwanted texts and this stemmed from a pot legalization campaign but you have to subscribe to things like that. So how is it "protecting" me?

I don't know SJ. You have to opt in to short code services so in reality you are requesting txts from the provider of the short code.