By Naushad Huda

Two U.S. senators recently introduced a bill to crack down on unsolicited text messages. This has left me and other mobile marketers wondering just what effect this proposed legislation will have on a mobile marketing ecosystem on the rise.

Brands and users alike are experiencing great ROI on mobile programs and finally beginning to see the value of having a brand message jump from a traditional media such as print into the pocket of the user in variations such as SMS, video, music and offers.

To my understanding, these senators are suggesting that if a mobile user puts his or her mobile number on an mSpam do-not-call list then he or she shouldn't be sent commercial SMS messages (see story). Perhaps we should call it a Do-Not-Text List.

Beyond the technical issues hindering the implementation of such an overreaching plan -- which is another article unto itself -- from a practical and social point of view it is clear that most mobile users do not possess a working knowledge of how mobile marketing works. This is the real problem, one that a no-text list won't solve.

Mobile marketing is 100 percent opt-in, meaning that consumers must request to receive marketing communications. Consumers can opt-out of receiving messages anytime by texting STOP to the short code from which they are receiving messages.

The phrase "Standard messaging charges apply" simply means that users will only incur whatever per-text message charge they normally would under their mobile plan.

Also, an advertiser cannot simply buy mobile phone numbers to send text messages to as they would purchase email addresses to start sending unsolicited emails.

While this may be common knowledge to those within the mobile marketing industry, it isn't yet common knowledge among consumers, no matter how well we try to disclose these facts.

I think the issues that may have sparked this proposed measure is the way in which some brands are sending commercial messages.

<b>To non-opted-in users:<b> This is unacceptable and a breach of the trust that is compounded by the personal nature of a mobile device.

<b>Not from short codes, but actual seven-digit numbers:<b> I actually received a mobile coupon recently from a hair salon from a regular seven-digit number. What's that about?

These two issues should be addressed appropriately and specifically. However a do-not-text list is not the answer.

Suggesting such a broad-gauntlet solution will only prevent consumers from participating in valuable mobile marketing campaigns in the future, when they do become educated about mobile marketing.

Perhaps Congress would be wiser to spend money educating U.S. consumers about mobile than simply cutting them off from this emerging channel altogether.

The reality is that more services in addition to marketing are making the leap to mobile devices.

Take Wireless Amber Alerts, for example, which send Amber Alerts to mobile phones via SMS. There is even a service that will send you updates about the recent Swine Flu epidemic.

How can people take advantage of these services, as well as value-added mobile marketing campaigns, if they don't understand the nature of third-party messaging to their phones?

They can't.

Congress would be far better served educating consumers and allowing them to make their own decisions rather than cutting them off completely.

The measure proposed is too broad and will be a detriment to the power of mobile and hinder innovation that is vital to this country, especially now during this recession.

If passed, the mSpam Act could effectively take the legs out from under this exponentially growing economic fuel called mobile.

Naushad Huda is CEO of Textopoly Inc., a mobile marketing agency in Costa Mesa, CA. Reach him at .