"The National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) is set to crack down on mobile spamming with its issuance today on the Memorandum Circular on rules and Regulations on Broadcast Messaging Services. The Circular was reached after series of consultations and a hearing attended by the general public, telecom service providers, content providers and other interested parties in response to numerous consumer complaints received by the Commission.

Commissioner Ronald Olivar Solis informs the public that under the Rules issued by the Commission en banc, the NTC adopts the OPT-IN REGIME where it is prohibited to send unsolicited commercial messages or spam by SMS or MMS unless the subscriber has given permission or consent. Under the Circular, a subscriber who has not opted-in shall not be charged for received spams. Subscribers who do not reply to these broadcast/push messages shall be considered to have opted-out and such broadcast should be stopped or subscribers may opt-out without being charged.

Other features of the Circular include that, except on paid subscription services, broadcast/push messages shall not be sent between 9:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. NTC also requires broadcast messages to display the names of the senders as well as valid addresses or numbers to which subscribers can send their requests to cease broadcast messages. Mobile companies are to act on spam-related complaints within 30 days after they are received from consumers.

Violators of the Circular shall be subject to the imposition of appropriate administrative and penal sanctions in accordance with the law.

Commissioner Solis has further directed the technical staff of the Commission to prepare draft rules and guidelines for public hearings to address other complaints such as e-loads."

First, let me congratulate NTC for this much delayed action. As they all say: "Better Late than Never".  You may ask, "why only now?"  Well it's a learning process, perhaps.  It's a new technology. Short Messaging Service (SMS) started only three or more years ago. So they are still fine-tuning their regulations,  I think.

Let me tell you my first-hand knowledge (being a member of a content provider myself) on how telecom operators deal with this problem prior to the issuance of this Circular.  They send their content providers (CP) an email containing mobile numbers of their subscribers who complain about text broadcast/spams. They then inform CPs not to send any text broadcast to the numbers; in other words, exclude them from the CP's list of potential clients.  Sometimes we will receive just one number, sometimes 10 to 20 or more.  I'm just wondering how telecom operators check if their CPs comply with their directives.  When the owner of the number excluded makes another complaint?

I have just a few questions, opinions and suggestions on the new directives. So to all the people and institutions concerned, please take this constructively.

1.  The Circular states that "NTC adopts the OPT-IN REGIME where it is prohibited to send unsolicited commercial messages or spam by SMS or MMS unless the subscriber has given permission or consent. Under the Circular, a subscriber who has not opted-in shall not be charged for received spams." This simply means that the telecom providers or CPs can still send at least one broadcast message per promo to inform the mobile owner that there is such a promo.  So how many promos are there? Tell me and I'll tell you how many unsolicited messages I will still receive just to inform me about a new promo.

2.  The directive that the sender's name, address or number should be included so that subscribers can send their requests to cease broadcast messages is rendered useless by virtue of the same statement in the circular which says that if subscribers do not reply to broadcast messages, it shall be considered that the subscribers have opted out.  If the latter will be followed and implemented strictly, why do I need to know who sent the unsolicited message?

What NTC should do is to ask telecom providers to submit their list of CPs and their access numbers.  If a subscriber continues to receive unsolicited messages despite not opting in, the complainant can simply bring his/her mobile phone and show the text broadcast to the NTC complaint desk.  NTC would then be able to know right away who sent that unsolicited message and inform the proper telecom provider about the violation.  This brings me to my third point:

3.  Under the Circular, mobile companies are to act on spam-related complaints within 30 days.  Why that long?  We're now in the information age, right?  Will the procedure be done manually or will it be done electronically?  Okay, let's say they still need to do some investigation. Will a broadcast message containing the access number lie?  Can it be altered or manipulated?  Is it not enough proof that a violation was incurred if a subscriber shows an unsolicited message? Not only that, it would also contain the date and time the message was sent. Once proven valid, telecom providers can implement access suspensions to their CPs as warnings and access number revocation if CPs continue to defy the order.

Here are my suggestions to simplify the procedure:

1.  Ask each telecom provider and CP to send one message asking subscribers if they are interested to receive broadcast messages or not.  If a particular subscriber says "no", then no telecom provider or CP shall ever be allowed to send that number any commercial message until the subscriber changes his/her mind in the future.  This can also be done by asking the question in a registration form for new subscribers.

2.  Change the opting-in procedure.  Subscribers should be given the right to indicate how many of the network's broadcast messages he/she wants to receive per day and for how long.  Therefore, that means if a subscriber decides to join a promo, part of his/her registration should include information about it.  And of course, subscribers should also be given the chance to opt-out anytime.  It should not be a lifetime commitment for subscribers.  Telecom providers and CPs should consider it a privilege that they are allowed to intrude their subscriber's privacy and to serve their subscriber at their preferred conditions.

I repeat: it's a PRIVILEGE, not a right, for companies to send broadcast messages to subscribers. Companies have abused this privilege for a long time.  No doubt, it's a money earner.  But most, if not all, companies have taken advantage of this trust given to them by their subscribers.  Congratulations again to NTC for coming up with this Circular. You can still make improvements on it to better protect mobile consumers and make things more convenient for them.  And to companies who take advantage of their subscribers, if you cannot be professional, at least be honest.

"What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?" (NIV, Matthew 16:26).

*****

For your comments, questions and suggestions, simply email techtvhost@yahoo.com or visit www.infochat.com.ph for more articles.  God Bless us all!

*****