# BRD-168 — Consent must name the seller whose messages are delivered

> Where a reseller or agency sends, the consent must authorise messages delivered, or caused to be delivered, by the named seller.

- **Rule ID:** BRD-168
- **Layer:** Brand (`BRAND`)
- **Checks:** `the consent text vs the sending entity`
- **Severity:** HIGH — Rejected by at least one carrier or provider, and a common cause of failure at the rest.
- **When it bites:** Gates approval — get this wrong and registration is refused
- **How it is detected:** AI judgement over the submitted form
- **Fix type:** Fix the website — no form edit clears it
- **Required by:** FCC
- **Applies:** Applies to every 10DLC registration.
- **Canonical URL:** https://ekas.io/rules/10dlc/brand/brd-168/

## Why this rule exists

Consent runs to a named party, and the FCC's definition covers messages a seller causes to be delivered as well as ones it sends itself — so consent naming the agency does not authorise the brand, and consent naming the brand does authorise its vendor. Getting this backwards is how a compliant-looking programme ends up with consent that covers nobody who is actually texting.

## How to fix it

Word the opt-in so it names the business the customer knows — the seller — and covers messages sent on its behalf: "…to receive texts from Acme Coffee or its service providers." Done when the name in the consent is the brand on the registration.

## Notes

Applies where an agency or ISV sends on the brand's behalf. The condition lives in the criteria rather than in a tag, because no fact on the registration says who operates the sending — and the criteria open with the PASS boundary for the ordinary case where the brand sends for itself.