The "not a condition of purchase" claim must be true in practice

The requirementstatement

Where the disclosure says consent is not a condition of purchase, the form or checkout must actually complete with the SMS box unticked.

Severityseverity
BlockingBLOCKINGBreaking this rule gets the submission rejected. There is no partial credit.
When it bitesphase
Gates approvalapprovalGet this wrong and the brand or campaign is refused at registration.
What is checkedobject
consent surface behaviour
Where it liveslayer
Consent flowCONSENT_FLOW
How Ekas settles itdetectability
AI · formAI_FORM
A semantic question about what you wrote: whether a description matches a use case, whether a name looks like a filed entity. Judged by a model against written criteria.
What the fix involvesfailureClass
Fix the websiteTERMINAL_WEBSITE
The fix lives on your site. No amount of rewording the form clears it.
Who requires itauthorities
FCCTCRTwilioAWS
When it appliesapplicabilityText
Applies to every 10DLC registration.

Why this rule existsrationale

Ranked #7 most-missed. The sentence is necessary but not sufficient: reviewers test the behaviour, and a form that validates the consent box as required contradicts its own disclosure. Passing the wording check while failing the behaviour is the classic false green.

How to fix itremediation

Remove required-field validation from the consent control and submit the form with it unticked to confirm it completes. Fix the form, not the sentence.

Rules you will hit next

Other consent flow rules at the same severity. A registration is judged as a whole, not rule by rule.

All consent flow rules

CON-074 is one of 101 consent flow rules in the 915-rule 10DLC registry. Free to cite under CC BY 4.0.

Reading the rules is the easy part.

Ekas runs every rule that gates approval, 823 of these 915, against your registration before it reaches the carrier. It reads your site, your policy pages and your opt-in the way a reviewer would, and hands you the fix, not just the verdict.