TRAI’s new spam rules: Telcos red flag high financial penalties, lack of regulation for OTTs

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (TRAI) latest rules to rein the menace of pesky calls and messages does not address the key issues raised by telecom operators, including bringing over-the-top (OTT) and delivery telemarketers (TMs) under a regulatory framework, an association said on Monday.

“…we are disappointed to notice that the TRAI’s amendment of the Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations (TCCCPR), 2018 to strengthen consumer protection against Unsolicited Commercial Communication (UCC), has been issued without addressing all relevant issues,” said SP Kochhar, Director-General of Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI).

The Delhi-based association represents telecom incumbents such as Reliance Jio, Bharti Airtel, and Vodafone Idea (Vi).

The sector regulator’s new rules against unsolicited commercial communications (UCC) prescribe financial penalties ranging from Rs 2 lakh to Rs 10 lakh for repeated violations in cases where telcos misreport counts of such calls and messages.

These financial disincentives (FDs) will be in addition to the FD imposed on access providers against invalid closure of complaints, and not fulfilling their obligations in respect of registration of message headers and content templates.

Amending the TCCCPR, the regulator allowed consumers to submit complaints against UCC without first registering their preferences for blocking or receiving commercial communications.

The amended regulations, however, only cover communications received through telecom networks. Messages and calls through over-the-top (OTT) apps such as WhatsApp are not covered. This was a key demand from stakeholders during the open house consultation before the release of the amended regulations.

The amendment also empowers access providers to prescribe a security deposit for senders and telemarketers, which can be forfeited in case of violation of regulations by the senders and telemarketers.

The COAI, citing recent media reports, said that the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has already sought the sector regulator’s inputs on the authorisation of telemarketers.

“We had submitted to TRAI that the only feasible and optimal approach to handling UCC can be by bringing the telemarketers under the licensing regime,” said Kochhar. “Moreover, it would also establish that the government and the Authority have legal control over entities responsible for sending such communications, in compliance with TCCCPR-2018.”

According to the association, both OTT communication providers and telemarketers have become major stakeholders in messaging, and it has become crucial to establish a regulatory framework to ensure accountability from all stakeholders in the ecosystem, including OTT platforms and Telemarketers/Principal Entities.

“…further, the Second Amendment does not bring OTT Communication service providers under the ambit of this regulation, nor does it address the UCC issues at its source,” Kochhar said in the statement.

“It is also concerning that the authority has substantially increased the penalty to be imposed over the TSPs…if at all these penalties are required, it should be directed to TM-D or the PEs who are actual originators and beneficiaries of the commercial communications,” he added. “Another important aspect was to reduce subjectivity from the regulation as well as compliances, which are based on relationship between Principal Entities and their consumers, which has not been addressed.”