Kids unprotected from cheap phone smut, says ICSTIS

We've learnt that since the messages we previously reported on only cost around 30 pence a throw - they're not 'officially' recognised as premium rate. So they fall outside the net.

The problem is that anybody wanting to complain about the nature of mobile content in the UK has to go to the IMCB. Somebody must have had a weird sense of humour when they named this body the Independent Mobile Classification Body.

Because it is blatantly obvious that the IMCB is made up of people belonging to the ICSTIS - the Independent Committee for the Supervision of Standards of the Telephone Information Services.

So, before you can complain to the official industry body, the ICSTIS, that you disagree about the nature of content you've received, you have to first put your complaint to the IMCB - a body drawn from exactly that selff-same official body.

And both have the word 'Independent' in their title even though they were set up by the UK Industry itself.

But wait. It gets better. The shortcode that the INQ is complaining about belongs not to an independent content provider but to one of the operators - in this case T-Mobile. So strictly speaking, you can't complain to the ICSTIS because they only deal with complaints about 'premium' content.

And the word 'independent' appears in their title because, um, their hands are obviously tied?

We've tried to come up with a comparison. For example, the web's sex industry has a body called the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP). This body claims to have reported to the appropriate authorities some 1,300 web sites possibly offering illicit material.

Guess how many cases the IMCB has adjudicated over since its creation? None. That's right - absolutely zero. µ

See also:
T-Mobile sends smut to eight year old girl
T-mobile denies glam girls represent adult content