On Feb 3, 2011, at 2:20 PM, andrew.wallace wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Scott Brim <scott.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 02/03/2011 10:14 EST, Marshall Eubanks wrote: >>> >>> On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:24 AM, andrew.wallace wrote: >>> >>>> Mobile phone firm Vodafone accuses the Egyptian authorities of >>>> using its network to send pro-government text messages. >>>> >>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12357694 >>> >>> Here is their PR >>> >>> http://www.vodafone.com/content/index/press.html >>> >>> Note that this is entirely legal, under "the emergency powers >>> provisions of the Telecoms Act" >> >> Which is legal, Vodafone's protest or the government's telling them to >> send messages? afaik the agreement was that the operator would have >> preloaded canned messages, agreed on in advance with the government, and >> now the government is telling them to send out arbitrary messages they >> compose on the spot. >> >> > > I wonder if these messages were blockable by the end-user or if they were > being sent as a service announcement from Vodafone. > > Certainly, if the government were sending the messages under the company name > then something sounds wrong about that. > > What I would like is to hear from someone who received the messages and what > their experiences were. >
They were described to me as being "from Vodafone." I assumed that this meant that they were service messages. Marshall > Andrew > > > > >
