Unwanted texts: the same law, and why STOP matters so much

By MercPrivacy · Published 2026-08-01 · Updated 2026-08-02

A text is treated as a call under federal law — same consent requirement, same per-message damages. Replying STOP is the single most consequential thing you can do.

## Texts are calls

Under federal law a text message is treated as a call. Three consequences follow.

**Consent is required.** A marketing text to your mobile using automated equipment generally needs prior express *written* consent — a signed agreement clearly disclosing that you will receive automated marketing at that number, and stating you are not required to agree in order to buy anything.

**They have to prove it, not you.** The sender carries the burden. You never have to prove you did not sign up.

**Damages are per message.** $500 per message, which a court may increase to $1,500 where the violation was willful or knowing. A campaign of a few texts a week over a few months is not a trivial number.

## Why STOP is the most important word

Terms like STOP, END, QUIT, UNSUBSCRIBE and OPT OUT are treated as reasonable ways to withdraw consent, and a sender may not force you into some other exclusive method.

Once sent:

- Messages arriving afterwards are much harder to defend - It ends any prior-relationship footing - It triggers internal do-not-call obligations - In several states it **starts a clock a claim depends on**

That last point catches people out. A number of states now require you to ask the sender to stop and allow a set number of days to cure **before a claim exists at all**. Skipping it can end an otherwise strong case — which is why the opt-out log is often the claim itself.

## Why their consent record usually falls apart

Nearly every defence is a version of *you signed up for this*. What the sender holds is usually much thinner.

Marketing texts are overwhelmingly driven by purchased leads. Somewhere upstream a landing page — a quote comparator, a sweepstakes, a "check your rate" form, sometimes a fake job listing — captured a number and attached a consent artifact. By the time it reaches the sender it may have passed through several aggregators, each hop degrading the record.

The questions that break it open:

- Was the disclosure actually shown, on the page **as rendered at that moment**? - Was this sender on the disclosed list, under the name it actually trades as? - Was it even you? Numbers are mistyped, harvested and fabricated at scale. - Was the number **reassigned** after consent, so it belongs to a stranger? - Is the chain intact? Every hop should have a transfer record. Gaps are common, and fatal to their proof.

## What to keep

Screenshots showing the sending number and timestamp — not forwarded copies. The exported thread if your phone allows. Every STOP you sent, with dates. Every message afterwards. And the link, captured but **not clicked** — where it points often identifies the company faster than anything else.