Halt mobile abuse

The growth of the middle class seems to be fuelling the marketing frenzy that breaks out each November, turning what should be the best of times into the worst of times.

The annual avalanche of ads for consumer goods of every conceivable kind in the run up to Christmas has become as traditional as turkey, gammon, boerewors and, in December, it's expected and largely accepted.

However, technology has opened up new channels for use and abuse by ruthless marketers. This form of commercial assault is far more difficult to tolerate, especially as this year there seems to be a resurgence of festive spam being channelled through cellphones.

A quick peek into some Web forums reveals users are divided roughly into two camps: Those who are not at all bothered by SMS spam and those who really are.

Those in the first camp are quite content to delete each unsolicited commercial SMS and move on with their lives. No fuss, no bother. They say there are worse things to worry about. They also obviously have a lot of time on their hands and very little stress.

Those in the other camp, however, see SMS spam not only as annoying, but also as an invasion of privacy. Unlike e-mail, SMS spam is not as easily scanned and deleted. It is also much more personal. The sacrosanctity of the SMS inbox is gone. There is nowhere to hide. SMS spam will find you no matter where you are.

The other big privacy concern is about where the spammers are getting the phone numbers from in the first place. It is an issue of trust. Who can be trusted not to sell mobile contact numbers and other info to spammers?

Also falling into the zero-tolerance camp are those who use mobile phones mainly for business communications. SMS spam is an abuse of that channel. It is difficult not to be bothered by up to 10 spam SMSes a day when each demands the same attention as legitimate messages.

Maybe it's time to sharpen the Santa claws and stop mobile spam in its sleigh tracks.

Warwick Ashford, technology editor, ITWeb

The initial wave of SMS spam at the start of the millennium was followed by all sorts of legislation around the world that seemed to quell public outcry, but it seems that this year a wide range of marketers are having another bite at the cherry.

As recently as August, Verizon Wireless in the US reported that it was blocking up to 50 000 spam messages a day. Despite the US anti-spam regulations, the problem has obviously not gone away.

An informal office poll revealed I was not alone in receiving an increasing number of SMS ads, mostly without opt-out facilities. Many work colleagues had been assaulted in the past few weeks with SMS ads for banking services, nightclubs, ringtones, screensavers, restaurants, parties, and perhaps the most annoying of all: credit.

Driven by the need to grab as much business as they can before the National Credit Act comes into full force in June, credit providers are invading SMS inboxes with increased urgency. They have less than six months before the new rules on credit kick in.

The new Act, which replaces the Usury Act that governs money lending, introduces new rights for consumers, as well as measures that allow consumers to make informed decisions before buying goods and services on credit.

Of particular relevance are the regulations on credit marketing practices. As from June, a credit provider may not harass anyone into entering a credit agreement. At least this and other provisions in the Act should eliminate credit ads via SMS. But what about the rest?

The consensus on the Web seems to be that mobile phone users must unite against SMS spam. Those of us in the zero-tolerance camp will have to get real about the fact that deleting SMS spam each time it arrives is not going to change anything.

The first line of action that is open to us is to visit the anti-SMS spam Web site set up by the Wireless Application Service Providers' Association (WASPA) and the cellular network operators.

The site provides a facility for tracing spammers by entering the SMS number or the SMS short code associated with the spam. A great idea, but only one of the four numbers I tried yielded a result. In that case, all one can do is complain to WASPA.

Even if the search is successful, the onus is still on the spam recipient to lodge a complaint in terms of the Electronic Communications and Transactions (ECT) Act of 2002.

Section 45 of the Act says failure to comply with a request to stop sending unsolicited commercial messages is a criminal offence. Spammers must also disclose how they obtained your contact details. Failure to do so is also a criminal offence.

While this is all fine and well, if the spammers are not members of WASPA and ignore these requests, all one can do is lay a criminal charge. But this is where things fall apart. Imagine going to the local police station to lay a charge against someone for sending you an advert via SMS.

What are the odds of success?

Not great, I would think, unless you chose the charge office very carefully. However, recent experience has shown that the only way to get satisfaction from recalcitrant service providers is to get thoroughly nasty.

Resorting to legal action is often the only way to get people to tow the line. Maybe it's time to sharpen the Santa claws and stop mobile spam in its sleigh tracks. On the hand, perhaps it would be better to put the visit to the charge office on hold until the new year. After all, 'tis the season to be jolly. Nasty can wait.