On May 19, 2015, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology promulgated its Provisions on the Administration of Short Messaging Services (the “Provisions”), which will take effect on June 30, 2015.
Prepared to combat improper texting practices, such as junk short messages, the Provisions were adopted under the July 2014 People’s Republic of China (“P.R.C.”) Telecommunications Rules (“2014 Revision”) and the December 2012 Resolution of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress Relating to Strengthening the Protection of Information on the Internet for purposes of (1) normalizing conduct related to short messaging services (“SMS”), (2) protecting the lawful interests of users, and (3) promoting the sound development of a market for SMS.
The Provisions are important in several ways. First, they establish certain basic operating requirements which SMS providers must observe in their text messaging campaigns. Under these requirements:
- SMS providers must hold a telecommunications enterprise license;
- when SMS providers charge user fees, the charges must be made in accordance with applicable laws, regulations and standards;
- SMS providers must maintain records of the times of transmission, user receipts and when a user unsubscribes; and
- SMS providers must not use SMS systems to circulate or broadcast illicit content.
Second, the Provisions establish more detailed rules (for example, compared to the earlier amendment to the P.R.C Law on the Protection of the Interests of Consumers or its implementing measures published on January 5, 2015) on the manner in which text messages may be sent to consumers. Under the Provisions’ rules:
SMS providers and short messaging content providers must not send commercially-purposed text messages to end users without their consent or request;
- when end users provide their consent, the type, frequency and duration of the planned broadcast campaign must be made clear;
- commercially-purposed text messages must not be sent to certain (non-commercially oriented) ports;
- commercially-purposed text messages must include an expedient and effective method for unsubscribing; and
- SMS providers must establish a system for supervising text messages, and an early warning and monitoring mechanism.
In addition to the foregoing rulemaking, the Provisions establish practical channels by which consumer interests could be protected. These include:
- The Provisions establish a system by which consumers can make complaints and file reports. They establish a reporting and handling center under the auspices of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, through which reports of “nasty” (不良) or junk short messages can be processed. They also clarify procedures under which infringements and violations involving text messages can be handled, and under which punishments can be meted out.
- The Provisions strengthen the oversight and inspection system. They clarify the authority and duty of the regulatory authority to carry out oversight and inspection, and the corresponding duties of SMS providers.
- The Provisions establish penalties for unlawful behavior among SMS providers, short messaging content providers, personnel of the supervisory authority, and personnel of the reporting and handling center. Violations are subject to being recorded in a permanent file, and responsible persons may be subject to “supervisory discussion.”
Apart from regulating conventional SMS, the Provisions also extend to information delivery services similar to SMS that use the Internet. Article 38 of the Provisions provides that delivery services which send information having the characteristics of a short message (for example, text, data, voice or images) to fixed telephones, mobile telephones and other communications end-users, via the Internet, shall be conducted with reference to the Provisions.
By their terms, the Provisions only affect the use and transmission of text messages. This makes them rather specific in their scope and impact. The Provisions have, however, the potential to materially increase operational requirements for those companies which rely on the use of text messages. They also clarify how such companies may be held accountable.
In the abstract, the Provisions are a particularly fine-grained illustration of China’s ongoing reliance on a sector-by-sector approach to the development of its regulatory framework on personal information.
Search
Recent Posts
- Website Use of Third-Party Tracking Software Not Prohibited Under Massachusetts Wiretap Act
- HHS Announces Additional Settlements Following Ransomware Attacks Including First Enforcement Under Risk Analysis Initiative
- Employee Monitoring: Increased Use Draws Increased Scrutiny from Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Categories
- Behavioral Advertising
- Centre for Information Policy Leadership
- Children’s Privacy
- Cyber Insurance
- Cybersecurity
- Enforcement
- European Union
- Events
- FCRA
- Financial Privacy
- General
- Health Privacy
- Identity Theft
- Information Security
- International
- Marketing
- Multimedia Resources
- Online Privacy
- Security Breach
- U.S. Federal Law
- U.S. State Law
- Workplace Privacy
Tags
- Aaron Simpson
- Accountability
- Adequacy
- Advertisement
- Advertising
- American Privacy Rights Act
- Anna Pateraki
- Anonymization
- Anti-terrorism
- APEC
- Apple Inc.
- Argentina
- Arkansas
- Article 29 Working Party
- Artificial Intelligence
- Australia
- Austria
- Automated Decisionmaking
- Baltimore
- Bankruptcy
- Belgium
- Biden Administration
- Big Data
- Binding Corporate Rules
- Biometric Data
- Blockchain
- Bojana Bellamy
- Brazil
- Brexit
- British Columbia
- Brittany Bacon
- Brussels
- Business Associate Agreement
- BYOD
- California
- CAN-SPAM
- Canada
- Cayman Islands
- CCPA
- CCTV
- Chile
- China
- Chinese Taipei
- Christopher Graham
- CIPA
- Class Action
- Clinical Trial
- Cloud
- Cloud Computing
- CNIL
- Colombia
- Colorado
- Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Compliance
- Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Congress
- Connecticut
- Consent
- Consent Order
- Consumer Protection
- Cookies
- COPPA
- Coronavirus/COVID-19
- Council of Europe
- Council of the European Union
- Court of Justice of the European Union
- CPPA
- CPRA
- Credit Monitoring
- Credit Report
- Criminal Law
- Critical Infrastructure
- Croatia
- Cross-Border Data Flow
- Cyber Attack
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
- Data Brokers
- Data Controller
- Data Localization
- Data Privacy Framework
- Data Processor
- Data Protection Act
- Data Protection Authority
- Data Protection Impact Assessment
- Data Transfer
- David Dumont
- David Vladeck
- Delaware
- Denmark
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Justice
- Department of the Treasury
- District of Columbia
- Do Not Call
- Do Not Track
- Dobbs
- Dodd-Frank Act
- DPIA
- E-Privacy
- E-Privacy Directive
- Ecuador
- Ed Tech
- Edith Ramirez
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act
- Electronic Privacy Information Center
- Elizabeth Denham
- Employee Monitoring
- Encryption
- ENISA
- EU Data Protection Directive
- EU Member States
- European Commission
- European Data Protection Board
- European Data Protection Supervisor
- European Parliament
- Facial Recognition Technology
- FACTA
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Fair Information Practice Principles
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Federal Communications Commission
- Federal Data Protection Act
- Federal Trade Commission
- FERC
- FinTech
- Florida
- Food and Drug Administration
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
- France
- Franchise
- Fred Cate
- Freedom of Information Act
- Freedom of Speech
- Fundamental Rights
- GDPR
- Geofencing
- Geolocation
- Georgia
- Germany
- Global Privacy Assembly
- Global Privacy Enforcement Network
- Gramm Leach Bliley Act
- Hacker
- Hawaii
- Health Data
- Health Information
- HIPAA
- HIPPA
- HITECH Act
- Hong Kong
- House of Representatives
- Hungary
- Illinois
- India
- Indiana
- Indonesia
- Information Commissioners Office
- Information Sharing
- Insurance Provider
- Internal Revenue Service
- International Association of Privacy Professionals
- International Commissioners Office
- Internet
- Internet of Things
- IP Address
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Jacob Kohnstamm
- Japan
- Jason Beach
- Jay Rockefeller
- Jenna Rode
- Jennifer Stoddart
- Jersey
- Jessica Rich
- John Delionado
- John Edwards
- Kentucky
- Korea
- Latin America
- Laura Leonard
- Law Enforcement
- Lawrence Strickling
- Legislation
- Liability
- Lisa Sotto
- Litigation
- Location-Based Services
- London
- Madrid Resolution
- Maine
- Malaysia
- Markus Heyder
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Meta
- Mexico
- Microsoft
- Minnesota
- Mobile App
- Mobile Device
- Montana
- Morocco
- MySpace
- Natascha Gerlach
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- National Labor Relations Board
- National Science and Technology Council
- National Security
- National Security Agency
- National Telecommunications and Information Administration
- Nebraska
- NEDPA
- Netherlands
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New Zealand
- Nigeria
- Ninth Circuit
- North Carolina
- Norway
- Obama Administration
- OECD
- Office for Civil Rights
- Office of Foreign Assets Control
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Opt-In Consent
- Oregon
- Outsourcing
- Pakistan
- Parental Consent
- Payment Card
- PCI DSS
- Penalty
- Pennsylvania
- Personal Data
- Personal Health Information
- Personal Information
- Personally Identifiable Information
- Peru
- Philippines
- Phyllis Marcus
- Poland
- PRISM
- Privacy By Design
- Privacy Policy
- Privacy Rights
- Privacy Rule
- Privacy Shield
- Protected Health Information
- Ransomware
- Record Retention
- Red Flags Rule
- Regulation
- Rhode Island
- Richard Thomas
- Right to Be Forgotten
- Right to Privacy
- Risk-Based Approach
- Rosemary Jay
- Russia
- Safe Harbor
- Sanctions
- Schrems
- Scott Kimpel
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- Security Rule
- Senate
- Serbia
- Service Provider
- Singapore
- Smart Grid
- Smart Metering
- Social Media
- Social Security Number
- South Africa
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- South Korea
- Spain
- Spyware
- Standard Contractual Clauses
- State Attorneys General
- Steven Haas
- Stick With Security Series
- Stored Communications Act
- Student Data
- Supreme Court
- Surveillance
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Targeted Advertising
- Telecommunications
- Telemarketing
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- Tennessee
- Terry McAuliffe
- Texas
- Text Message
- Thailand
- Transparency
- Transportation Security Administration
- Trump Administration
- United Arab Emirates
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Unmanned Aircraft Systems
- Uruguay
- Utah
- Vermont
- Video Privacy Protection Act
- Video Surveillance
- Virginia
- Viviane Reding
- Washington
- Whistleblowing
- Wireless Network
- Wiretap
- ZIP Code