September 19, 2010 – In a case with free-speech and Net-neutrality implications, T-Mobile has been sued by a text-message marketing company for allegedly blocking access to the T-Mobile network because of a client that provided information on medical marijuana.

Ez Texting, a New York-based company that helps businesses send marketing text messages to large numbers of people, filed the suit Friday with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The company is one of those that provide the behind-the-scenes infrastructure for the type of ad that asks consumers to text a specific word to a specific number to get more information on a product–”Text ‘jeans’ to 313131,” for example.

In its suit, Ez Texting says that last week, T-Mobile cut off access to its network after learning of an Ez client of which T-Mobile “did not approve”: legalmarijuanadispensary.com, aka WeedMaps, which describes itself as “a community where medical marijuana patients connect with other patients in their geographic region to freely discuss and review local cannabis co-operatives, dispensaries, medical doctors, and delivery services.”

The suit says T-Mobile pulled the plug even after Ez Texting had informed the carrier that it had stopped providing its service to WeedMaps for fear of being shut out (even though, the suit says, WeedMaps caters to people in states where medical marijuana is legal and is thus itself a legal enterprise). The suit claims Ez Texting will go out of business if access to the T-Mobile network isn’t restored.

“This case is yet another example of a totally arbitrary decision by a carrier to block text message calls between consumers and organizations they want to communicate with,” Gigi Sohn, president of public interest group Public Knowledge, said in a statement. “The FCC should put a fast end to this blocking by issuing the ruling we asked them for three years ago.”

In 2007, Public Knowledge filed a petition with the FCC asking that the same sort of nondiscrimination laws that apply to telephone communications be extended to text messaging.

“As part of the text messaging infrastructure, short codes [such as the "313131" used in Ez Texting's service] are developing into an important tool for political and social outreach,” the petition says. “Mobile carriers currently can and do arbitrarily decide what customers to serve and which speech to allow on text messages, refusing to serve those that they find controversial or that compete with the mobile carriers’ services. This type of discrimination would be unthinkable and illegal in the world of voice communications, and it should be so in the world of text messaging as well.”

The 2007 petition came after Verizon told NARAL Pro-Choice America that it would not let the reproductive rights organization send text messages through a program using Verizon’s mobile network, because, Verizon said, carriers had the right to block “controversial or unsavory” text messages. The company later reversed its position after significant media coverage.

The free speech ideas underpinning the texting issue are not far removed from those involved in the debate over Net neutrality. Opponents of Net neutrality, namely carriers, say that some broadband services tax network resources more heavily than others and that, accordingly, carriers should have the right to manage access to their networks. But Net neutrality supporters say this power could easily be used to discriminate, for any number of reasons, and that the FCC should step in to insure equal access to the networks and to the Internet.

At the beginning of September, the FCC suggested it would delay action on Net neutrality for the time being.

T-Mobile did not respond by publication time to a request for comment on the Ez Texting lawsuit. Link.

July 10, 2010 – The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit against retail giant Wal-Mart for firing an employee who used medical marijuana. The lawsuit argues that firing an employee for lawfully using medical marijuana violates the provisions of the 2009 Michigan Medical Marijuana Act.

Joseph Casias, 30, is a cancer patient who began using medical marijuana on his oncologist’s recommendation. Although he had been named Associate of the Year at the Battle Creek Wal-Mart in 2008 and had an exemplary employment record with the store, Casias was fired after taking a company-required drug test when he injured his knee at work.”Wal-Mart made him pay a stiff and unfair price for his medicine,” said Scott Michelman, staff attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project. It isn’t fair that any “patient should have to choose between adequate pain relief and gainful employment,” he said. “And no employer should be allowed to intrude upon private medical choices made by employees in consultation with their doctors.”

Wal-Mart officials said it defers to federal standards in cases where the law is unclear. Michigan is an at-will employment state, meaning employers can fire an employee for any reason except those barred by federal law, such as discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, or religion. The ACLU will argue that Casias’ firing amounts to medical discrimination.

More than 20,000 Michigan residents are registered medical marijuana patients. The case could have broad implications, not only in Michigan, but in other medical marijuana states that are grappling with the issue.  Source.