Screenshots

While Matrix should be fined by MCMC for not following the STOP guidelines, Mr. Lim should cane his daughter for lying to the daddy.

From looking at the transaction log forwarded by Matrix, it seems a simple case of a user not following instructions.

First the user sent "on starh lib" to 32321.

This caused the user to be registered for the horoscope service. A response was sent back to the user that said "to cancel, send STOP STARH to 32321".

The user never followed that instruction. Instead, he/she tried to converse with the automated system as if it were a human - first asking it to stop in broken SMS-speak, then eventually resorting to foul language. But never did the user send "STOP STARH" as instructed.

The user could have followed that simple instruction, or could have rung the assistance number provided.

I really don't see how the content provider is culpable here. There is no evidence of deceptive or fraudulent conduct.

I presume that the provider has multiple subscription services, so just looking for the word "stop" would be ambiguous in case someone only wanted to terminate a subset of their subscriptions.

I do agree with your suggestion for a global opt-out of subscription services, as this episode demonstrates that many people are given handphones before they have the maturity and sophistication to manage them properly.

JEFF OOI says: Thanks for your observation. I believe your angle is exactly the same assumption a Celco, an ECP or even MCMC would normally take. Whereas, I am thinking from the angle of the consumer, whose only sin is being gullible.

Hence, your assumptions look rather clear to me. But I see it differently: ( 1 ) That it is not a "spoof" in the first place; ( 2 ) That the Registration Confirmation message was actually delivered to the handset -- as we know the SMS(MT) can be dropped, giving rise to "Silent Billing" which was already very rampant in Malaysia; ( 3 ) The reason to provide Sect 5.4C of the industry Guideline is to ensure that, even if a mobile user forgets or plainly stupid, he/she can still send keywords like HELP , STOP and STOP ALL to opt out from the SMS subscription service. This is what we call Consumer Protection, in my language.

Let me repeat: These keywords to opt out must be conveyed to all users when they make mistakes, or forget how to opt out.

Also, in some cases, due to ReUSED Mobile Numbers culled from inactive SIMcards.numbers inactive over an extended period of time; or plain terminated services, old SMS subscriptions may retain as active subscription by previous mobile number owner on the ECP's database..As such, the initial Registration Confirmation is of no use.

Hope this shall reset some of your assumptions in a nutshell.

Steve, Read the information again. Matrix doesn't deserve a fine, the user needs to learn how to read, or be able to dial a customer service number. Confirmation message clearly contains STOP information, and every error message has the customer service number.

Jeff, Looks like you've dropped the ball with this one.

As an industry insider this scenario looks simple. Daughter subscribed and refused to confess to Daddy. This is Daddy's problem not the mobile operator or content provider. No scamming involved, just deliberate ignorance on the part of the user. If Daddy wants to give his daughter a supplementary credit card and she goes off spending on it, thats his fault not the merchant's.

You started by calling Matrix and Maxis scammers, now that they've come up with the goods and produced the traffic logs you're darting around all over the place citing minute violations of MCMC guidelines.

JEFF OOI says: Please go over my other 30 posts in the SMS Scam series. If not for the Screenshots expose, Maxis and all ECPs would have saved the agony of having to put up the MPG, and MCMC needn't have to get the ECP fined through compound after compound. Why do you think MCMC fined MacroKiosk and NextNation, Radius ED and UnrealMind for? The last I checked MCMC's official record, it's for "breaching license conditions".

Since you slipped it out, please elaborate what you mean by "minute violations of MCMC Guidelines" and what the Guidelines have in store -- in black-and-white regulatory jargons -- for such violations you may so define.

So is Matrix still a scammer or simply a content provider caught in your knee jerk reaction post initiated by an intellectually challenged father with a disobedient daughter who can't figure out how to call a customer service number?

JEFF OOI says: You just pointed the flaws in the operators & ECPs' wanton shirking of due diligence amd responsibility in consumer protection. Where is the CSR among these Celcos and ECPs??? I have said it and I am saying it again: The only sin consumers have is being gullible. If you are an industry insider as you claimed, I expect you to know why the MPG didn't add in the STOP and STOP ALL as keyword reminders instead of just putting the Customer Service number for a reason? Is the Matrix landline number given via the MPG-generated MT toll-free? If it ain't Toll-Free, who gets to earn the call-in revenue everytime the customer facing difficulty to opt out has to call the number?

Moral of the story: Consumer Protection does not work to just monetarily benefit the service providers. Apart from making money, a service provider owes its customer the DUTY OF CARE.

With the new MPG platform, the content provider does not respond directly to incorrect keywords. The error message comes directly from the operator. The service provider has not violated any guidelines.

JEFF OOI says: Don't wag the tail and simply bark. Go read Section 5.4C of the Guideline and ask MCMC for the interpretation de facto and de jure. You can't make a good judge by being an industry insider. You can be easily cast an interested party who feed on the supply chain.

Lastly, based on the transaction records, you accuse Maxis of using vulgar language to respond to the user.

JEFF OOI says: Sorry, you lost the plot here, so I won't waste my time on your nonsense.

Was that a poor attempt at a joke? That was clearly a message originated by the user.

JEFF OOI says: Yes and more. It's also shown the utter frustration of the mobile user for being unable to opt out from the service he didn't need.

So what exactly have you achieved with this "expose"? You've uncovered that some consumers need protection from their own stupidity, and that the Maxis MPG is missing a STOP keyword in their default error message.

JEFF OOI says: You are right. We have also exposed how operators and ECPs take advantage over the stupidity of the unassuming mobile users to rake in millions. Are all these millions HALAL MONEY? Shall we call for a total ban of the 3xxxx shortcode, just the same way the MCMC did with the 600 premier voice calls which is now died and dead?

Lastly, the same question I asked MCMC and I am now asking you -- whose side are you on... the Celco or the stupid, "intellectually-challenged", gullible fathering consumer that celcos fleece on?

jponochet,I do have a question directed to you..

Why isn't daddy allowed to bar all ECP numbers for a particular number but instead he needs to cane sweetie so that she would reveal that she's been playing with matchmaking ECP services lately?

JEFF OOI says: perspective. In this particular case, it involved subscription to Matrix's horoscope alert SMS and had difficulty in opting out.

Daddy must have a hard time finding every single ECP 3xxxx number that sweetie subscribed to in order for him to manually bar them one by one.This is exactly the same situation you would encounter as those mini snack bars they have in hotels..

Even worst, how is daddy going to find out if sweetie uses a Hotlink number instead since daddy would not be receiving any bill statement all these years?

Jeff, you have a habit of rampaging against content providers. Some deserve the label of scammers, some do not. In this case I don't see how your original rant against Matrix is justified.

JEFF OOI says: I respect your right to express yourself but it doesn't mean I have to buy what you insist. Wear the hat of a consumer, not an SMS provider, and your perspective will be clear. Now you don't.

Your article should have been about how the Maxis MPG had failed to include the STOP keyword in error message replies and how a consumer was confused by it - not about a content provider trying to rip off a consumer because clearly they weren't.

JEF OOI says: Precisely the case. I used actual transaction logs to pinpoint ( 1 ) the Maxis MPG had failed to include the STOP or ALL STOP keyword in the MT whenever invalid keyword was received by Maxis MPG; ( 2 ) Matrix as a responsible ECP did NOTHING to mitigate the problem and continued to bill the mobile user over the material time. These are undeniable facts.

The only message within the control of the content provider is the confirmation message and they clearly included the STOP keyword in that message.

JEFF OOI says: You speak half-truth. From the transaction logs, there were several attempts on the MO record where the mobile user had wanted to stop the subscription service. But thereafter, the ECP continued unabated to send the horoscope alerts and had the consumers billed accordingly. As a self-proclaimed industry insider, you should know that there are ECPs in Malaysia who operated prior to MPG could even handled "F#$K off", "p$#i XXX", "la#c$u" and a host of other colourful languages in various combinations and STOP the opt out intuitively.

Technically speaking, it is very easy to scan for the keyword STOP within any sentences sent in by user, and it is up to ECP to OPT OUT the subscribers... unless the ECP does not wish the consumer to opt out and wants to earn the extra revenue and take advantage of the situation.

In Visual Basic, the INSTRING command is specifically devised to scan for words within a long
sentence..Any junior programmer should know that.. .and here, we are dealing with industrial experts like you!

Back to this case in hand, the MPG and Matrix did NOT make opting out a transparent process and you have helped me to confirm it. Thank you very much..

You rail against them in one post, and then quote their laudable efforts to introduce new regulation to protect consumers.

You posted PROOF by the way of a scanned bill that showed that Matrix was sending unsolicited chargeable messages to the user. You had a declaration from the father that his daughter could not have possibly requested the service because "she doesn't get out of bed before 10am".

JEFF OOI says: Yes, I listen attentively to a consumer attentively, as always. Why I care if you don't?

Now with the real proof in the form of transaction records available, the reality is that his daughter did subscribe to the service, and did indeed receive a confirmation message with the STOP information.

The only thing missing was the STOP keyword in the error message which is under the control of the mobile operator NOT the content provider.

JEFF OOI says: Thank you again for re-confirming the flaws in the Celco/ECPs' modus operandi. The ECP handled millions of SMS transactions per month, whereas the Celco handled multi-millions of SMS transactions per month. They BOTH share the profit. Hence they BOTH share the duty of care towards the "stupid, intellectually-challenged (your language), gullible" consumers because the anti-consumer modus operandi has enabled certain parties to fleece them>

So in an attempt to construct the world's greatest segue your rant has shifted from unjustly labelling a content provider as a scammer, to now questioning the effectiveness of the MPG.

JEFF OOI says: Your judgmental statement is immaterial as this is for MCMC to decide by virtue of the governing rules of engagement concerning all Licensees. The CMA1998 has made consumer protection a sanctity that no licensees should be allowed to get away.

I'm not making it a secret that I work in the industry. I do deal with mobile services on a regional basis. The lack of comprehension by consumers is not a problem isolated to Malaysia. The efforts by the MCMC to create the guidelines, and the operators who are implementing fraud preventing platforms is streets ahead of other countries.

There are a large number of legitimate companies who provide services to hundreds of thousands of willing customers who want to enjoy these services. There are some companies who do want to take advantage of customers. You unfortunately want to tar them all with the same brush. You allude to some grand conspiracy, a cabal between mobile operators, content providers, and the MCMC. I am sorry to disappoint you, it doesn't exist. The reality is that they generally dislike each other in equal doses.

JEFF OOI says: Well said but this is not the consumers' problem. It's yours. In addition, whether the ECPs are good or bad, whether they love or hate each otheris NOT a consequence to the issue at hand, that the "stupid, intellectually-challenged (your language), gullible" consumers can't even get an easy OPT OUT from a service he needn't have, and the Celcos/ECP are of not much help by including the STOP keyword at every error message. This is not consumer protection.

Companies dealing in mobile services with a long term view want to build up a loyal customer base that stays with them. Belligerent daughters who unwittingly subscribe to services are more trouble than they are worth, and have no value to a content provider who is trying to run a sustainable business.

JEFF OOI says: There goes to show your mantra, that SMS subscription service like yours are spelt with CAVEAT EMPTOR, that is you subscribe to the SMS at your own peril. If 3xxxx shortcode service is this perilous, why don't we have it banned in Malaysia if ECPs want to shirk their duty of care towards their customers of no-value? You don't disclaim them when you bikked them, did you?

The MCMC guidelines were a step forward. The MPG from Maxis bar the teething issues is a great leap forward. The problem before lay with service providers being able to send unsolicited chargeable SMS messages to a list of numbers. This can't happen anymore. This is a success for consumers and real attempt at legitimising the industry, yet you seem to be staunchly against it.

JEFF OOI says: There goes your mantra again. Since the day we exposed this scam -- and some had been finded compounds after compounds while two notorious ones keep repeating the offence, by MCMC official records -- we want the issue of consumer protection be made an integral part of the whole mitigating process. You can come up with any names for any mitigating mechanism, but when you continue to make OPT OUT a difficulty to the lowest common denominator of "stupid, intellectually-challenged (your language), gullible" consumers, you have lost the moral high ground.

I am in agreement that the MCMC needs to raise the penalty bar and step up it's enforcement efforts against companies that deliberately mislead consumers and flout the guidelines.

But in this case you shot from the hip, sprayed everywhere and missed the target. There are issues which need to be resolved, there are stories which need to be told, this unfortunately was a weak issue on what was obviously a slow news day relayed badly.

JEFF OOI says: We are pushing for the REVOCATION of the ASP(C) llicense of the MCMC-proven serial offenders, especially those who have exceeded three times of repeat offence. It is your job as ECP to distinguish yourselves among yourselves. If you choose to stay in the company of those who "deliberately mislead consumers and flout the guidelines", you bear the consequences. Don't blame it on the "stupid, intellectually-challenged (your language), gullible" consumers.

You accused a company of scamming when they clearly weren't. Disappointingly you're scaremongering like a cheap tabloid journalist, instead of making a genuine attempt to provide a comprehensive and well thought out analysis of the real issues. Next time take a breath and aim before shooting, and you may actually hit something.

JEFF OOI says: I strongly suggest you get back to your day time job and leave your demonising me agenda to the professional spin-doctors out there. You are just avoiding the actual issue and play to the gallery.

FAMOUS LAST WORDS: You the ECP share profits with the celco for every SMS wrightly or wrongly billed on the "stupid, intellectually-challenged (your language), gullible" consumers. Have some mercy when you count the money.

We have had past experience with the 600 IVR premier voice calls, where the victims are the same "stupid, intellectually-challenged (your language), gullible" consumers who can't OPT OUT from the service they were lured into. The service his banned and it is now history. Learn the lesson well, my friend, don't wait until the day we lobby for the entire 3xxxx shortcode service banned the same way. That will save taxpayers lots of money employing MCMC to regulate the industry, and so that Malaysia could move on beyond SMS to other value-added service in multimedia.

Sorry, I have to put you back to the hole where you came from.

Just like the voters who voted in the election deserve the government they vote for, mobile users who SMS things they dont know about, deserve the payment they had requested in the first place.

In life, gullibility can be costly.

This is how the scam works. You want to download a ring-tone say from a web-site. You are informed of the charges, but at the bottom of the page (in VERY small letters) is line that says you also agree to subscribe to their SMS service for a certain fee. If you do not see this and click I agree, these ECP will say see we only provide a service that has been requested.

Ironic to find a "FREE" ringtone ad at the very bottom of this page. Google ads do wonders eh.

Out of curiousity, I checked it out and found that its one of those sms scams exposed here.

Once I clicked on the download button it opened up a page prompting me to key-in my phone number to get my "FREE" ringtone. Everything looked fine until I scrolled down to find the following.

"Bonus realtone is for free. Bonus realtone will be sent the first week of subscription. After this the costs are RM 4.00 per msg incl. GST, 3 msg per week, 1 content item per sms. (RM 12.00 per week) Standard operator SMS/WAP/GPRS charges apply. Start up: standard message fee applies. Min. age 18+ with bill payers permission. Helpdesk: 1800 813682 (9am-5pm,Isn-Jum). Celldorado operates according to the Malaysian code of conduct for SMS services. Celldorado offers innovative information and entertainment for your mobile, such as ringtones, Javagames and wallpapers. Celldorado offers original, unique services with the highest standards. Service Provider: Mobile 365 Asia Sdn Bhd. To stop this subscription service? Text BATAL WKASIH to 36999."

Wah lau! All this is so conveniently and nicely hidden, i could have easily become that gullible "naughty" consumer. You all judge yourself.

JEFF OOI says: For the records, Mobile 365 is a subsidiary of Sybase 365 HQ-ed in the US. Both Mobile 365 and Sybase 365 were listed as Guideline offenders by MCMC in April. See this list Caveat emptor.
.

Silversurfer, key in our phone number, eh? Why not try keying in other people's one instead?That's how the scam works.If I don't like someone(no enemies here) just key in his/her number on purpose with a dummy email account.Upon receival of the content will the the poor person be charged? I'm just giving a scenario here.Moreso a few of these would give enough headaches.

Hi jpinochet,

Matrix is supposed to prompt the HELP keyword instead of the customer service number(which will lead to the STOP keyword).

From another perspective(ethically, not about guidelines), it is not fair for the customers to bear the cost of the phone calls to the customer service as not every subscriber are calling within Selangor.