CooperMills

Archive for March, 2009

ACMA issues formal warning to Canberra ISP for failing to comply with the TIO Scheme.

The ACMA have issued a formal warning to ByteCard, a Canberra ISP who was allaged to have failed to comply with the TIO Scheme.

The warning comes after allegations that disputes raised with the TIO by customers remained unresolved, as a consequence of this ByteCard’s refusal to comply with the TIO Scheme. According to the ACMA:

“……Bytecard had failed to cooperate with the TIO in relation to two continuing matters. Both the TIO and ACMA have made attempts to encourage Bytecard to voluntarily comply with the TIO Scheme, without success.”

Part 6 of the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 (’the TCPS Act’) imposes obligations on Carriers and CSPs (who are referred to as eligible carriage service providers, as defined by s127) to (among other things):

1. Enter into the TIO Scheme; and
2. Comply with the TIO Scheme;
   

In this case, the ACMA’s formal warning came about by the alleged failure of ByteCard (who is an eligible carriage service provider) to comply withe TIO Scheme.

Unless a CSP is exempt under s129 of the TCPS Act, they must comply with their obligations under Part 6.

Tags: telecommunications law, Telecommunications Lawyers, TIO
Posted in ISP and Telco Law | No Comments »

Over recent weeks, debate over shonky Premium Services operators has intensified, to the point where there have been public exchanges between the ACCC and CommsAlliance over the adequacy of the industry response.

The latest shots in the debate were fired by ACCC Chairman Graeme Samuels after he criticised the new CommsAlliance C637:2009 Mobile Premium Services Code as not providing enough safeguards for consumers.

In response the CommsAlliance shot back at Mr Samuels criticisms by claiming that the new Code contained:

“….a number of other significant consumer protections built into this Code and we anticipate it will soon be registered with the Australian Communications and Media Authority so consumers can begin realising its benefits”

The argument has over shadowed what is a very important and timely industry response to the growing issues with shonky premium service operators.

As Telecommunications Lawyers we can only wait to see the impact of the Code, and whether it will go far enough to keep the rogue operators  in check.

We hope to bring you a more detailed review of the Code shortly, what this space!

Tags: Industry Codes, Mobile Premium Services
Posted in ISP and Telco Law, IT Law, Trade Practices Law | No Comments »

The ACMA today announced that it has issued a formal warning to Westpac for breaches of the Do Not Call Register Act 2006 (‘DNCRA’).

The ACMA reported that Westpac was the bank that had the greatest number of complaints made against it to the ACMA concerning alleged breaches of the DNCRA. The ACMA claim that although Westpac had a relationship with its customers, ‘its procedures for recording the withdrawal of consent had failed.’

Westpac was reported to have agreed to and implemented a number of measures to resolve the issue including ‘washing’ their call lists against the Do Not Call Register.

The ACMA report that they have had a total of 40,000 complaints since May 2007 concerning the DNCRA, and noted a significant drop in the number of complaints from 2007 to the end of 2008.

It is evident that the message is getting through, that its not okay to call people on the Do Not Call Register – awareness has been assisted by a number of tools available to businesses to help comply including IP Telephony systems that ‘wash’ numbers before they are dialled.

We previously reported on the ACMA’s crackdown on compliance with the TCP Code, it is interesting to note that the ACMA has cast a wide net in its compliance enforcement activities.

Tags: Do Not Call Register, Do Not Call Register Act 2006, telecommunications law, Telemarketing
Posted in General, ISP and Telco Law | No Comments »

Google has announced the beta launch of  ‘interest based’ advertising on their partner sites and YouTube. Will this lead to better advertising ?

Interest based advertising is where advertising content is targeted at internet users based on current and past web surfing history. Typically this is achieved by using ‘cookies’, which are small files stored on the user’s computer, which contain browsing history data. This method of serving advertisements differs to Google’s traditional ‘keyword’ or ‘content’ based advertising, which relies on the keywords or website content to target advertising.

Google believes that:

“…..there is real value to seeing ads about the things that interest you. If, for example, you love adventure travel and therefore visit adventure travel sites, Google could show you more ads for activities like hiking trips to Patagonia or African safaris.“

Criticisms of online advertising sometimes arise from poor quality leads due to the deficiencies in reaching an advertisers target audience. Google’s new interest based advertising may lead to higher quality leads for advertisers and more relevant advertisements for web surfers.

No sooner than Google’s announcement, many people have come out criticising interest based advertising as a threat to privacy, as it relies on tracking the websites an end user visits.

Google claims that it has taken 3 important measures to ensure user choice and privacy, these are:

• Transparency – Users will able to click on advertisement labels to obtain more information about how advertisements are service and what information is used. Google also proposes to expand this in the coming year;
• Choice – Users will have access to the  Ads Preferences Manager tool which lets them “view, delete, or add interest categories associated with your browser so that you can receive ads that are more interesting to you.“
• Control – Users will be able to opt out of interest based advertising. Google have take some significant steps to ensure this by designing a plug in for web browsers to maintain the users choice.

We think Google’s interest based advertising may prove to give advertisers more qualified and better quality leads, while users will now see advertisements which are more relevant to their interests – resulting in a better user experience. Only time will tell, but at least Google has thought through the choice and privacy issues, and it appears to us as IT Lawyers, that they have implemented a sensible and effective process to ensure this.

Tags: Google Advertising, interest based advertising, IT Law, IT Lawyers, online advertising, Privacy, Privacy Law, Privacy Lawyers, technology law
Posted in Domain law and domaining, IT Law, Privacy | No Comments »

In the shadow of the Victorian bush fires, regulations create a new exception to the use and disclosure offences under Part 13 of the Telecommunications Act 1997.

Part 13 of the Act requires that Carriers, CSPs, their employees and contractors protect the confidentiality of protected information such as the content of communications, the affairs and personal particulars of people and namely the integrated public number database. The offences under this part are contained in sections 276 to 278, and can include a penalty of imprisonment against offenders.

s292(1) of the Act allows regulations to be made that provides for circumstances in which there may be exceptions to the offences under sections 276 to 278.

Although the Act already allows disclosure of documents and information in cases of threat to life or health (s287) in very limited situations, the Telecommunications Amendment Regulations 2009 (No.1) provides for an exception for the purpose of:

1. preventing or lessening a serious and imminent threat to the life or health of a person or a class of persons; or
2. ensuring that effective arrangements are in place to deal with such threats

The Explanatory Statement to these new Regulations states that:

The primary purpose of the Regulations is to allow emergency management authorities in each state and territory to obtain phone numbers and personal particulars (including any unlisted telephone or any address) of all the database listings for their respective state or territory for the purpose of ensuring effective arrangements are in place to deal with serious and imminent threats to life and health of persons. Such threats may emanate from natural disasters (such as bushfires and floods), criminal acts and non natural disasters (such as industrial accidents).

The Regulations permit disclosure of either (a) the information in an integrated public number database; or (b) a document that consists or relations to information contained in the integrated public number database.

Before disclosure is permitted there are 3 requirements that an authorised person must meet, these are:

1. certify to Telstra that the disclosure and use of the information is required for the two permitted purposes (as set out above); and
2. identify the recipient of the information; and
3. provide Telstra with an undertaking that (a) any disclosure or use by a person other than Telstra or an employee of Telstra will be fore the same purpose; and (b) reasonable steps will be taken to ensure that any disclosure or use by a person other than Telstra or an employee of Telstra will not adversely affect the operation of Telstra telecommunications network;

There are also a number of safeguards requiring destruction of information when no longer required, and authority for the Privacy Commissioner to monitor the use of the information or documents.

We recently received an emergency communication from the Victoria Police, which we presume took advantage of these new Regulations, by way of an SMS warning of:

Extreme weather in Vic expected Mon night & Tues. High wind & fire risk. Listen to Local ABC Radio for emergency updates. Do not reply to this msg.

This Regulation is a welcome yet long over due regulatory development.

Tags: isp law, ISP Lawyers, Privacy, Telco Law, telecommunications law, Telecommunications Lawyers
Posted in ISP and Telco Law, Privacy | No Comments »

Paul Twomey CEO and President of ICANN yesterday announced that he would not be seeking to renew his contract with ICANN, at the expiration of its term this year, and will move on at this end of the year.

Twomey made his announcement in front of 1200 delegates at ICANN’s 34th International Public Meeting in Mexico City.

Twomey said:

“Last year, I told the Board that I did not want to renew my contract as President and CEO for another 3 year term,” said Twomey. “While I am deeply and personally committed to ICANN and its success, I think this is the right time for me to move on to another leadership position in the private or international sectors.”

Twomey became CEO and President of ICANN in 2003 after 4 years as Chairman of ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), after a distinguished career.

Tags: domain law, domain lawyers, domain name law, domain name lawyers
Posted in Domain law and domaining | No Comments »

According to the Internet Commerce Association (ICA), the US State of New York has incorporated computers within the definition of gambling devices, in a pre-emptive move to avoid legal uncertainty over the definition of ‘gambling device’ in its own gaming laws.

According to the ICA:

The bill, A. 3079, would add a computer used for illegal gambling to the Penal Law’s definition of a “gambling device”.

These changes have been prompted by the long running 141 Domain Names case in Kentucky, that we have eagerly been following. As we reported in our last post on this case, the State of Kentucky had ‘appealed the appeal’ after losing.

Cooper Mills IT Lawyers are in close contact with the ICA who was fortunate enough to be heard by the Court, in the interests of its members, even though it was not directly a party to the proceeding. We hope to bring you more on this case as soon as there are further developments.

Tags: domain law, Domain Law Lawyers, domain name law, domain name lawyers, IT Law, IT Lawyers
Posted in Domain law and domaining, IT Law | No Comments »