PUBLIC CONSULTATION ISSUED BY MINISTRY OF INFORMATION,
COMMUNICATIONS AND THE ARTS: FRAMEWORK DETAILS FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL DO NOT CALL (“DNC”) REGISTRY
SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED AND ITS RELATED
COMPANIES’ RESPONSE
1
2
3
4
5
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 2
GENERAL COMMENTS .................................................................................................... 4
SINGTEL RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION QUESTIONS .................................... 11
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 21
PUBLIC CONSULTATION ISSUED BY MINISTRY OF INFORMATION,
COMMUNICATIONS AND THE ARTS: FRAMEWORK DETAILS FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL DO NOT CALL (“DNC”) REGISTRY
SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED AND ITS RELATED
COMPANIES’ RESPONSE
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
Singapore Telecommunications Limited and its related companies (SingTel) are licensed
to provide info-communications services in Singapore. SingTel is committed to the
provision of state-of-the-art info-communications technologies and services in Singapore.
1.2.
SingTel has a comprehensive portfolio of services that includes voice and data services
over fixed, wireless and Internet platforms. SingTel services both corporate and
residential customers and is committed to bringing the best of global infocommunications to its customers in the Asia Pacific and beyond.
1.3.
SingTel is also a leading Internet service provider (ISP) in Singapore and has been at the
forefront of Internet innovation since 1994, being the first ISP to launch broadband
services in Singapore. It is licensed to offer IPTV services under a nationwide
subscription television licence granted by the Media Development Authority of
Singapore (MDA).
1.4.
SingTel welcomes the opportunity to respond to the consultation paper issued by the
Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts (MICA) in relation to the
framework details for the establishment of a national Do-Not-Call (DNC) registry
(Consultation).
1.5.
This submission is structured as follows:





Introduction
Executive Summary
General comments
SingTel responses to Consultation questions
Conclusion
Page 1 of 21
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1.
This Consultation follows MICA’s recent consultation on the proposed consumer Data
Protection framework. The proposed consumer Data Protection framework will require
consent to be obtained from individuals to use their personal data for stated purposes and
allow for withdrawal of consent whilst the proposed DNC registry provides a means for
individuals to opt-out of all unsolicited marketing messages without having to withdraw
consent from every organisation. SingTel notes that many of its views and comments in
relation to the current Consultation have already been expressed or are similar to those
submitted in relation to the proposed consumer Data Protection framework. However, for
the purpose of completeness, SingTel presents these views and comments in this
submission.
2.2.
SingTel’s key submissions can be summarised as follows:
(a) Organisations should only be regulated by the proposed DNC framework if their
sector is not currently regulated by specific laws and regulations that cover the use
of customer data and sending of marketing messages to customers.
(b) Organisations already regulated by specific laws and regulations covering use of
customer data and sending of marketing messages to customers should be exempt
from the proposed DNC framework.
(c) Customer care contact is useful and is appreciated by customers. As such, messages
sent for customer care contact (even if they include the promotion of a service or
product in a proactive manner) should not be classified as marketing messages.
(d) The proposed DNC framework should contain a specific exclusion where
organisations have a pre-existing business relationship with customers.
(e) The definition of ‘marketing message’ for the purposes of the proposed DNC
framework is unnecessarily broad and restrictive. SingTel has provided suggestions
as to how the definition can be revised in sections 3 and 4 of this submission.
(f) There is inconsistency in the treatment of calls and messages. Calls for the purpose
of promoting charitable causes, political/electoral messages, and obtaining
information or opinions for market research or other types of surveys should be
treated the same way as marketing messages because they involve the same
promotional element.
(g) SingTel agrees that emails should be excluded from the proposed DNC framework
because they are already regulated under the Spam Control Act.
(h) SingTel considers that where a customer provides consent, the organisation should
not be required to check the DNC registry. The customer’s consent should take
Page 2 of 21
(i)
(j)
(k)
(l)
(m)
(n)
(o)
(p)
(q)
(r)
(s)
priority over other instructions. Further, a requirement to check the DNC registry
when consent has been given creates an unnecessary regulatory burden.
SingTel considers that implied consent should be acceptable for the purpose of the
proposed DNC framework.
The proposed DNC framework should allow for consent that has been given before
the implementation of the proposed DNC framework to continue.
Penalties should only be imposed where a customer has suffered harm or damage. A
failure to check the DNC registry should not constitute a breach and should not
attract penalties where no harm or damage has been caused.
The proposed DNC framework should allow customers to target specific sectors
when they register their telephone number so that only messages from nominated
sectors, and not all sectors, are blocked. Similarly, customers who register with the
DNC registry should be able to choose whether they wish to block the receipt of
calls, SMS/MMS or both.
Marketing messages sent without the use of telephone numbers should not be
covered by the proposed DNC framework - this includes location-based messages as
well as any other push-based messages.
The proposed DNC framework should be targeted at the consumer level and should
not apply to businesses.
SingTel agrees that only Singapore telephone numbers should be covered by the
proposed DNC framework.
SingTel is concerned that there could be cases where overseas parties exploit this
requirement by masking the overseas originating number and replacing it with a
Singapore telephone number. Under such circumstances, any enforcement action
should not render the local telephone network operator culpable for a breach of the
proposed DNC framework.
In relation to outsourced parties, SingTel emphasises that where there are joint
promotional efforts, a company should not be held culpable for a breach of the
proposed DNC framework on basis that its joint marketing partner has not complied
with the proposed DNC framework.
SingTel considers that prepaid numbers should not be included within the proposed
DNC framework given their high turnover rate. In addition, clarity is required
around the registration process for customers with more than one (1) telephone
number.
SingTel proposes that instead of a one-time and permanent registration, customers’
registration should lapse after a stipulated period of time at which point they are
given the choice of whether or not to re-register.
Page 3 of 21
(t)
(u)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
3
SingTel notes that the registration of a line with the DNC registry is voluntary. As
such, updating the DNC registry is a responsibility that should rest solely with the
customer.
SingTel believes that organisations should be permitted to assist their customers to
withdraw consent.
Requiring organisations to send messages using identifiable originating numbers
will remove the use of innovative identifiers, such as alphanumeric numbers. These
identifiers should be allowed but a contact number or email address can be given for
the purposes of follow up contact that is separate to the identifier.
SingTel considers that the proposal to have the DNC registry filter out lists of
telephone numbers is not efficient. Instead, the organisation should be allowed to
poll the DNC registry to obtain an immediate response or, alternatively, the DNC
registry could ‘push’ new and updated lists to organisations.
SingTel considers that if organisations are required to pay fees then customers who
register with the DNC registry should also pay fees given that registration is a
voluntary process.
SingTel suggests nominal subscription fees and requests that the final fee structure
and fee values be subject to further consultation prior to implementation.
SingTel anticipates practical difficulties in aligning the requirements under the
Spam Control Act with the proposed DNC framework and suggests that further
review is required.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Proposed DNC framework should not apply where pre-existing sector regulations are
in place
3.1.
Many existing telecommunications and broadcast licensees, like SingTel, already comply
with existing regulatory requirements pertaining to the use of customer data. When
considering the scope of the proposed DNC framework, due attention should be given to
the fact that many organisations already have mechanisms in place to ensure compliance
with existing sector specific regulations in relation to use of their customer data to contact
their customers.
3.2.
SingTel submits that these sectors should be exempt from the proposed DNC framework.
Organisations will then be allowed to retain existing data protection frameworks that they
have put in place and the problems associated with dual regulatory frameworks will be
avoided.
Page 4 of 21
3.3.
In addition, where existing exclusions apply under pre-existing sector specific laws or
regulations, those exclusions should continue to apply.
3.4.
Telecommunications and broadcast licensees are already regulated under existing sector
specific legislation which includes a regulatory requirement to protect customer data.
Specifically, SingTel currently complies with regulatory requirements set by the Infocommunications Development Authority of Singapore (IDA) and the MDA based on
their powers under the Telecommunications Act (Cap 323) and the Broadcasting Act
(Cap 27) respectively.
3.5.
Section 3.2.6 of the Telecom Competition Code 2010 sets out the requirements applicable
to all telecommunications licensees in relation to the use of their customers’ data. Section
3.6 of the Media Market Conduct Code 2010 sets out the corresponding requirements
applicable to broadcast licensees.
3.6.
Both the Telecom Competition Code 2010 and the Media Market Conduct Code 2010 set
out in detail the need for licensees to obtain their customers’ consent for the use of their
data, and the ability of customers to withdraw consent. The Codes also provide that
organisations can contact customers for ‘common-sense’ purposes such as use of
information for billing, fraud management, planning, provisioning, managing bad debt
and, ‘generally to provide their own services to their customers’. In relation to the later,
licensees would generally contact their customers to provide customer care, such as
informing them of contract renewals or expiries and inviting customers to re-sign. To do
so, they need to provide customers with information about prevailing offers and rates.
3.7.
When considering the scope of the proposed DNC framework, due attention must be
given to the fact that organisations have expended significant effort and resources putting
in place mechanisms to comply with existing sector specific regulation.
3.8.
This is particularly important given that the proposed DNC framework does not provide
any exceptions for existing business relationships between an organisation and its
customers. If telecommunications and broadcast licensees are subject to the proposed
DNC framework they would be placed in a situation where they have to comply with two
sets of potentially contradictory regulations (the proposed DNC framework and sector
specific regulations).
Page 5 of 21
Customer contact is important to customers
3.9.
The Consultation identifies marketing messages as an unwelcome source of contact for
customers.
3.10. While there are instances of unwelcome marketing messages, such as cold calls from
telemarketing firms with whom the customer has no established relationship, customers
generally welcome calls where they have a pre-existing business relationship with a
particular organisation. These calls are used as a means to inform existing customers of
ongoing promotions and new products or schemes that would be of interest to them.
3.11. Telecommunications and broadcast licensees rarely contact their customers for the sole
purpose of selling a product or service. Further, it is imperative for licensees to be able to
provide customer care over the telephone (whether the call was initiated by the customer
or the telecoms provider itself) and also to provide information regarding prevailing
services. This ensures that customers are kept up to date about product developments and
do not need to wait for written communication. Similarly, given the rapid development
of technology and service availability, not every new service will be advertised; nor will
customers always check the internet for the latest information.
3.12. By way of example, where there are new features associated with anti-virus scans,
SingTel may proactively contact customers that have previously asked for assistance in
relation to such a service, inform them of the new features and invite them to make use of
or subscribe to the new feature.
3.13. This type of customer care contact is useful and is appreciated by customers. To classify
this type of contact as a marketing message would be detrimental to customers.
3.14. SingTel submits that the proposed DNC framework should take into account the need to
provide customers with information about new and innovative services.
DNC framework exceptions
3.15. SingTel does not support an approach where no exception is provided for customers that
have an existing business relationship with an organisation. The normal expectation of a
customer is that an organisation with which they have a relationship will provide them
with information about new products and services. The proposed DNC framework fails
to take account of this and SingTel recommends that MICA reconsiders its approach.
Page 6 of 21
Definition of ‘marketing messages’
3.16. SingTel submits that the proposed definition of ‘marketing messages’ is unnecessarily
broad and restrictive and requires further consideration.
3.17. The Consultation paper states1:
“Marketing messages can be in the form of telephone calls to fixed line or mobile
phone numbers, SMS/MMS messages, or faxes, which contain marketing or
commercial elements within the message. If, given the content of the message and
the way the message is presented, one of the purposes of the message is to offer to
supply, advertise or promote goods or services, the suppliers or prospective
suppliers of goods and services, that message will be considered a marketing
message.”
3.18. This definition is too broad and unnecessarily restrictive. Most organisations that make
customer care phone calls to their customers invariably end up giving advice to
customers on the services that the customer is currently using, as well as advising the
customer on additional services that are available. The proposed definition would result
in all such customer care contact being classified as a marketing message which is
problematic.
3.19. Organisations will face significant practical difficulties if the proposed definition is
adopted. It will lead to organisations restricting their contact with customers and
customers may end up dissatisfied that they are unable to obtain more information from
their organisations.
3.20. Most customers expect organisations to inform them when their existing contracts are due
for renewal or due to expire, and to provide information about alternative offers over the
same telephone call. This removes the need for a customer to separately seek information
about new rates applicable when their contracts are being renewed.
1 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts, Consultation on Framework Details for the Establishment of a National Do-not-call (“DNC”) Registry, paragraph 3.2.
Page 7 of 21
3.21. The proposed definition will make it infeasible for telecommunications and broadcast
licensees to proactively remind their customers about contract renewal as well as
removing the opportunity for telecoms companies to advise their customers that they
could obtain savings by signing up for new offers. SingTel is concerned that instead of
benefiting customers, the proposed DNC framework may actually place customers at a
disadvantage.
3.22. SingTel submits that the definition of marketing messages needs to be amended to take
account of the following:
(a) a marketing message should not capture situations where the customer and the
organisation have a prior business relationship; and
(b) a marketing message should not include calls or contact where the primary purpose
is to provide customer care, which includes informing a customer that their contract
is due for renewal or due to expire and to provide information about alternative
offers.
3.23. SingTel considers that it would be more appropriate to determine whether or not a call is
a marketing message based on the overall purpose of the call. Such an approach would
avoid customers being disadvantaged as outlined above.
Inconsistency in the treatment of messages and calls
3.24. The Consultation proposes that messages without commercial or marketing elements
should not be included in the scope of the proposed DNC framework. This would include
messages for purpose of promoting charitable causes, political/electoral messages, and
obtaining information or opinions for market research or other types of surveys.
3.25. SingTel considers that this treatment is inconsistent. To the extent that the customer has
no previous dealing with the callers or organisations in question, and does not expect a
call from them for customer care purposes, there is no reason for such calls be excluded
from the proposed DNC framework. SingTel notes that these types of calls also contain
a promotional element and could be more disruptive to a customer than a call from an
organisation that already has a business relationship with the customer.
3.26. SingTel does not agree that calls asking for donations, promoting an electoral message, or
obtaining information for market research and other types of surveys should be excluded
from the proposed DNC framework.
Page 8 of 21
Emails should be excluded
3.27. SingTel agrees that emails should be excluded from the application of the proposed DNC
framework given that emails are already regulated under the Spam Control Act.
3.28. SingTel’s position on emails is similar to that expressed above in relation to existing
sector specific regulatory frameworks. Where there are existing laws in place, the
proposed DNC framework should not apply. In the case of emails, the Spam Control
Act already spells out the applicable requirements and penalties where organisations send
emails with advertising or marketing content. As such, no additional regulation is
required.
Consent
3.29. The Consultation states:2
“MICA is proposing that organisations can continue to send marketing messages to
phone numbers registered on the national DNC registry if the organisation has
obtained explicit consent from the individual, who is contactable through the phone
number for the specific message to be sent, or to be contacted for marketing
purposes in general.”
3.30. In addition:3
“Organisations will be required to periodically check that the numbers they intend
to use to send marketing messages do not correspond to any numbers registered
with the DNC registry, unless the organisation is able to demonstrate that the
owners of the phone numbers have given explicit consent to be sent the marketing
message or marketing messages in general.”
3.31. SingTel considers that the proposed approach directly contradicts the Telecom
Competition Code 2010 and the Media Market Conduct Code 2010. SingTel reiterates
2
3
Ibid, paragraph 3.21.
Ibid, paragraph 3.25.
Page 9 of 21
that telecommunications and broadcast licensees should be excluded from the proposed
DNC framework.
3.32. Where an organisation obtains consent, it should not then have to check the DNC
registry. Clearly, the consent given directly to the organisation by the customer is specific
and should take priority over other forms of instructions. This consent should permit the
organisation to send the necessary messages until such time that the customer chooses to
withdraw consent from the organisation. If an organisation is required to check whether
the customer has withdrawn consent through other means (e.g. the DNC registry), it
renders the consent that has been given redundant.
3.33. In addition, requiring a customer to provide explicit consent is likely to result in a
situation where many customers miss out on attractive promotional offers because they
assume that consent in implicit. The fact that a customer does not give explicit consent
does not necessarily mean that the customer does not wish to receive calls from the
organisation. It is highly likely that the process of seeking explicit consent will lead to
dissatisfaction on the parts of customers and in turn cause problems for organisations.
This is a fundamental flaw in the proposed DNC framework.
3.34. SingTel considers that the approach to consent under the proposed DNC framework
should mirror the approach in the proposed consumer Data Protection framework where
consent can be implied. For example, where organisations outline the need to contact
customers in their terms and conditions of service, as long as a customer does not object
or remove consent, then consent is deemed to have been granted.
3.35. Further, we note that the proposed consumer Data Protection framework allows for
consent that has been given before the implementation of the proposed consumer Data
Protection framework to continue. The same approach should apply under the proposed
DNC framework so that where a customer has given consent to an organisation in any
form / manner prior to the implementation of the framework, that consent should be
viewed as being sufficient for that organisation to send marketing messages to that
customer.
Obligations on Organisations
3.36. The Consultation proposes that an organisation will be found in breach of the
requirements of the DNC registry if it:
Page 10 of 21
(a) sends a marketing message to a telephone number without first checking whether
the number is listed on the national DNC registry;
(b) sends a marketing message to a telephone number listed on the DNC registry; or
(c) misuses lists downloaded from the DNC registry.
3.37. SingTel considers that enforcement should only be taken where there is evidence of
damage or harm to a customer. Therefore, if the proposed DNC framework comes into
effect, penalties (if any) should only be imposed in relation to (b) and (c) above. Failure
to check the DNC registry should not, of itself, constitute an offence. An organisation
may have good reason not to check the DNC registry before commencing a marketing
campaign and no customers will be adversely affected.
4
SINGTEL RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
Question 1: Do you have any views / comments on the types of messages that are
covered under the DNC registry?
Question 2: With reference to paragraph 3.2, do you agree that messages without
commercial or marketing elements should not be included in the scope of the DNC
registry? For example, messages for the purpose of promoting charitable causes,
political / electoral messages and obtaining information or opinions for market
research and other types of surveys would be excluded from the DNC registry.
4.1.
Please refer to our comments in section 3 of this submission.
4.2.
SingTel believes it is necessary to adopt a practical definition for the purposes of
determining what types of messages are covered by the proposed DNC framework. In
particular, the following should not be covered:
(a) welcome messages which also invite the customer to make use of or subscribe to
services;
(b) messages relating to terms and conditions of services;
(c) messages inviting customers to contact an organisation for more information on
services;
(d) messages relating to the renewal or expiry of contracts with invitations to renew
contracts and promotional rates; and
Page 11 of 21
(e) messages following the cessation of a service by a customer informing the customer
of an alternative service.
4.3.
Similarly, after registering with the DNC registry, customers may forget that this could
place them in a situation where they miss out on receiving useful information. Messages
reminding them of the benefits of receiving marketing messages should not be covered
provided that the messages do not contain specific product or service marketing
information.
4.4.
SingTel agrees that messages without any marketing element should not be covered by
the proposed DNC framework.
4.5.
These include:
(a) messages relating to faults, service difficulties, changes in prices, information about
usage of services;
(b) messages relating to credit management, billing, self-help etc;
(c) messages promoting billing options, rewards that customers can obtain; and
(d) reminder messages regarding data-roaming or data usage.
4.6.
We also suggest that the proposed DNC framework should allow customers a degree of
flexibility. For example:
(a) customers may genuinely be interested in hearing from organisations in one sector
(e.g. airlines) and not from another; and
(b) customers may be happy to receive SMS / MMS but not telephone calls.
4.7.
Therefore, we propose that the proposed DNC framework should allow customers to
target specific sectors when they register their telephone number so that only messages
from nominated sectors, and not all sectors, will be blocked. Similarly, customers who
register with the DNC registry should be able to choose whether they wish to block the
receipt of calls, SMS/MMS or both.
Page 12 of 21
Question 3: With reference to paragraphs 3.7 and 3.8, do you have any comments/
views on whether marketing messages sent without the use of phone numbers should
be accorded similar treatment to marketing messages sent to phone numbers? If so, do
you have any suggestions on how such an arrangement can be implemented in a costeffective manner?
4.8.
SingTel agrees with the proposed approach. It is difficult for organisations to identify and
link individual handsets with mobile numbers for location-based broadcasts. These
broadcasts are not customer specific and the messages are generally not customised for
specific customers.
4.9.
Therefore, location-based messages as well as any other push-based messages should not
be covered by the proposed DNC framework.
Question 4: With reference to paragraphs 3.9 and 3.10, do you agree that business
numbers should be allowed to be registered with the DNC registry
4.10. SingTel notes that the DNC registry is part of the overall movement towards protecting
consumers. As such, it is appropriate to focus the framework on consumers rather than
businesses.
4.11. Business-to-business activity will typically involve actual meetings as well as phone
discussions. It is rare, for example, for sales to be concluded solely based on a phone call.
In some cases, discussions (both face to face and / or phone discussions) can be lengthy.
4.12. As such, there would be little utility including calls to business customers within the
proposed DNC framework
Question 5: With reference to paragraphs 3.11 and 3.12, do you agree that only
Singapore Telephone Numbers should be included in the DNC registry? Do you have
any comments / views on the proposed coverage of both the organisations that send the
marketing messages as well as those that outsource the function?
4.13. Only Singapore telephone numbers should be included in the DNC registry. Compiling a
database of non-Singapore telephone numbers would be an inefficient use of resources
given that there is little familiarity with the way overseas telephone numbers are assigned
Page 13 of 21
and used. Non-Singapore telephone numbers are also associated with travellers whose
stay in Singapore could be transient in nature.
4.14. However, SingTel cautions that there could be cases where overseas parties exploit this
requirement by masking the overseas originating number and replacing it with a
Singapore telephone number. This will lead to disputes because receiving telephone
networks in Singapore will not have the means to detect the original sender. In such
circumstances, any enforcement action should not make the local telephone network
operator culpable for a breach of the proposed DNC framework.
4.15. In relation to outsourcing, we generally agree that both the organisation sending the
marketing messages and the organisation that outsources the sending of the marketing
messages should be equally responsible for compliance with the proposed DNC
framework. However, we consider that this approach cannot apply where separate
organisations work in joint promotional efforts. For example, Company A and Company
B may work together to market services to their customers but each company should be
separately responsible only for their own customers. It cannot be that Company A is
liable for a breach of the proposed DNC framework on basis that Company B has not
complied with the requirements of the proposed DNC framework.
4.16. SingTel also notes a number of practical issues that have not been addressed in the
Consultation:
(a) Prepaid mobile numbers are subject to a higher turnover as customers who purchase
prepaid numbers have a different profile from those who use a post-paid number.
Some are happy to switch off the phone and only use it to make outgoing calls. As
such, it is not necessary to include prepaid numbers in the DNC registry.
(b) Where a customer has more than one telephone line, it must be clear that the
customer must register all its telephone numbers with the DNC registry if the
customer wishes not to receive calls on all of the lines.
Question 6: With reference to paragraphs 3.13 to 3.15, do you have any views /
comments on the proposed method of registering with the DNC registry?
4.17. SingTel has no comments on the proposed method.
Page 14 of 21
Question 7: With reference to paragraphs 3.17, do you agree that phone numbers
registered with the DNC registry should not be removed after a fixed period, as long as
they are not terminated or withdrawn by the owner?
4.18. SingTel anticipates practical issues with this proposal.
4.19. The proposal envisages a one-time registration by customers. As long as the customer
who had registered with the DNC registry does not give notice to withdraw the number,
the number remains registered.
4.20. SingTel notes that over time customers will invariably forget about their registration.
Also, their preferences may change. It is therefore preferable that customers are given the
choice of whether or not to renew their registration after a set period of time has lapsed,
for example, three (3) years. This method has been successfully adopted in Canada and
Australia and provides the flexibility and choice that is lacking in a permanent
registration process.
4.21. The proposal also unfairly penalises a customer who takes over the subscription of a
telephone line / number and may be happy to receive marketing messages.
4.22. SingTel therefore proposes that:
(a) the registration lapses after a stipulated period of time for example, three (3) years;
or
(b) the customer is notified that the registration will lapse and is given the opportunity
to renew it; or
(c) the customer is notified that the registration will lapse and is informed that the
registration can be automatically renewed through a simple process, e.g. sending an
SMS.
Question 8: With reference to paragraphs 3.18, do you agree with the proposal to adopt
the same method for individuals to withdraw their phone numbers from the DNC
registry?
4.23. SingTel has concerns about the requirement for Singapore telecommunications licensees
to provide their telephone lists on a regular basis in order to facilitate the DNC registry’s
updating of its database in relation to the removal of terminated numbers from the DNC
Page 15 of 21
registry. SingTel notes that the registration of a line with the DNC registry is voluntary.
As such, the customer who registers clearly has the responsibility to also withdraw from
the same service when it terminates the telephone line.
4.24. Further, it is disproportionate to require telecommunications licensees to submit their
entire list(s) of phone numbers which may number in the millions whereas the number of
customers who withdraw from the DNC registry could be very small in comparison.
4.25. SingTel notes the example of a customer relocating from one premise to another. That
customer is obliged to inform all its correspondents or contacts about its new address.
The Housing Development Board (HDB) is not obliged to help the customer by
populating a central database with the customer’s new address so that all its business
correspondents are updated.
4.26. We propose that updating the DNC registry is a responsibility that should rest solely with
the customer.
4.27. Notwithstanding the above, organisations should be allowed to assist the customer to
withdraw consent. For example, where a new customer is unsure whether their number
may have previously been registered with the DNC registry, the telecommunications
licensee (for example) should have the means to contact the DNC registry to assist with
the withdrawal process.
Question 9: With reference to paragraphs 3.20 to 3.21, do you agree that explicit
consent given by an individual to a specific organization for the purpose of receiving
marketing messages will allow that organization to send marketing messages to that
individual, even if his / her number is registered on the DNC registry?
Question 10: With reference to paragraph 3.22 to 3.23, do you agree with the proposal
not to provide exceptions for existing business relationships between an organisation
and a customer, and that customers who wish to receive such marketing messages from
organizations they have existing relationships with should give explicit consent to these
organizations to send such marketing messages?
4.28. SingTel refers to its comments in section 3 of this submission in relation to the
application of the proposed DNC framework to telecommunications and broadcast
licensees. SingTel believes there is merit in this approach given that telecommunications
Page 16 of 21
and broadcast licensees are already required to comply with existing regulations that
govern the use of customer information to contact the customer and deliver services back
to the customer.
4.29. Nonetheless, SingTel also believes that where a customer has provided consent to an
organisation for receiving marketing messages, that consent is clearly a signal that the
customer intends the organisation to send marketing messages. The consent given to the
organisation should prevail over other instructions. If an organisation is required to check
whether the customer has withdrawn consent through other means (e.g. the DNC
registry), it renders the consent granted redundant.
4.30. SingTel also has concerns over the requirement for explicit consent. As indicated in
section 3 of this submission, SingTel believes that the approach to consent should mirror
the proposed consumer Data Protection framework where consent can be implied. For
example, if organisations outline the need to contact customers in their terms and
conditions of services and the customer does not object or remove consent, then consent
is deemed to have been granted.
4.31. Similarly, we note that the proposed consumer Data Protection framework allows for
consent that has been given before the implementation of the framework to continue. This
approach should also apply under the proposed DNC framework so that where a
customer has given consent to an organisation in any form / manner prior to the
implementation of the framework that is sufficient for the organisation to send marketing
messages to that customer.
Question 11: With reference to paragraph 3.24, do you agree that organizations should
be required to use identifiable originating numbers that can be detected and displayed
to send their marketing messages?
4.32. This proposal will prevent innovative usage of identifiers in marketing messages. For
example, banks that send SMS / MMS to customers do not necessarily send an
originating telephone number that is linked to a physical device. This is because the
originating telephone number is usually only used to deliver messages on a broadcast
basis and is not tied to a physical customer contact officer. Banks will however identify
themselves with the name of the bank on the text of the SMS / MMS.
Page 17 of 21
4.33. These innovative identifiers should be allowed given that organisations have clearly built
up significant goodwill using this method. SingTel also notes that by using a telephone
number instead of the organisation name, customers may be misled into thinking that the
message is fake or bogus in nature. Nonetheless, organisations can provide a contact
number or email address for customers to contact if they require further information.
Question 12: With reference to paragraphs 3.25 to 3.27, do you agree that
organizations should send their lists of numbers to the DNC operator to filter out
DNC-registered numbers from their lists, instead of having organizations download the
entire list of registered numbers from the DNC operator and filter the lists themselves.
Do you have any views /comments on the proposed one-month frequency for filtering
of numbers?
4.34. SingTel considers that this proposal is inefficient and it may lead to delays.
Organisations’ marketing plans may not provide sufficient time for these forms of
filtering to take place.
4.35. SingTel suggests the following alternative proposals:
(a) organisations could poll the DNC registry based on the numbers they have, with an
immediate online response; or
(b) organisations could download an initial list and the DNC registry sends regular
‘push’ messages out to the organisations based on updates.
4.36. Both of these proposals are more efficient and less resource intensive. They also address
problems associated with numbers that were registered with the DNC registry after the
monthly checks.
4.37. However, if the approach proposed in the Consultation is adopted and there is a
requirement for organisations to check and filter their lists no more than one month
before sending messages, SingTel agrees that the organisation cannot be held responsible
for a breach where a customer continues to receive messages up to one month after
successful registration.
Page 18 of 21
Question 13: With reference to paragraphs 3.28, do you agree that a small quantity
number lookup service should be available for organizations with small scale
marketing operation at a nominal fee or for free?
Question 14: With reference to paragraph 3.29, do you have any views / comments on
the proposed annual subscription fees payable by organizations to check with the DNC
registry, and the proposed setting up of an account by organizations that send the
marketing messages as well as those that outsource the marketing functions?
4.38. It is not entirely clear from the Consultation how the annual subscription fees and the
nominal fee for lookup service will work in practice. It appears that organisations will be
treated differently based on the scale of their marketing operations.
4.39. SingTel believes that the proposal unfairly penalises larger organisations that may not
actually be the parties responsible for the bulk of breaches of the framework.
Furthermore, telecommunications and broadcast licensees have already put in place
existing frameworks.
4.40. SingTel also notes that under the proposed approach organisations are expected to pay an
annual fee but customers are not required to pay any fees for registering their numbers
with the DNC registry. SingTel considers that it is reasonable to expect customers to pay
a fee given that they have chosen to register for a service.
4.41. If organisations are required to pay annual subscriptions, the fee should be reasonable and
equitable:
(a) It is not reasonable for all organisations in Singapore to pay an annual subscription
fee of between S$2000 to S$6000. If there are 1000 such organisations in
Singapore, the annual fees to the organisation would amount to between S$2 million
to S$6 million in total.
(b) A nominal subscription fee of no more than S$1000 should be required of all
organisations, regardless of size, given that each organisation is equally responsible
for compliance.
4.42. SingTel also requests that the final fee structure and fee values should first be subject to
consultation prior to implementation.
Page 19 of 21
Question 15: With reference to paragraphs 4.1 to 4.4, do you have any comments /
suggestions on the proposed penalty and enforcement regime for the national DNC
registry?
4.43. SingTel refers to its comments in section 3 of this submission.
Question 16: With reference to paragraphs 4.5 and 4.6, do you have any views /
comments on how the national DNC registry is proposed to work with the requirements
under the Spam Control Act?
4.44. SingTel anticipates practical difficulties in aligning the requirements under the Spam
Control Act with the proposed DNC framework:
(a) first, where a customer has registered its number under the DNC framework,
organisations are prevented from sending marketing messages to that number. This
does not reflect the intent of the Spam Control Act which permits the sending of
unsolicited messages provided that the messages are clearly identified as such and
customers have a means to withdraw;
(b) second, the different requirements could result in organisations misinterpreting the
requirements of both sets of regulations, leading to unintentional disputes and
breaches; and
(c) third, a customer that has sent a request to unsubscribe to a specific unsolicited
message under the Spam Control Act may take the view that this is sufficient in
order to withdraw from the receipt of all marketing messages. Clearly, this is not the
case.
4.45. However, SingTel agrees with the proposal that any unsubscribe request under the Spam
Control Act does not constitute a withdrawal of explicit consent given to an organisation.
Again, this is because any explicit consent given to an organisation should always prevail
over other forms of instructions.
4.46. SingTel believes that there is a need to review the proposed DNC framework against the
Spam Control Act to ensure that the two are aligned.
Page 20 of 21
5
CONCLUSION
5.1
SingTel has set out its views on the proposed DNC registry and made a number of
recommendations in terms of the practical implementation of the proposed framework.
We trust that MICA will give due consideration to our suggestions.
Page 21 of 21