Ikigai LawIkigai LawIkigai LawIkigai Law
  • About Us
    • About
    • Our Team
    • FinTales
    • Tech Ticker
  • Practice Areas
  • Blog
  • News & Events
    • Ikigai Law in the news
    • Ikigai Law at events
    • Ikigailaw on the social media
  • Careers

Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part XI of XII): Parity in the data protection norms between TSPs and other communication service providers

    Home Data Governance Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part XI of XII): Parity in the data protection norms between TSPs and other communication service providers
    NextPrevious

    Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part XI of XII): Parity in the data protection norms between TSPs and other communication service providers

    By Ikigai Law | Data Governance | 0 comment | 6 June, 2018 | 2

    This is the eleventh post, in a twelve (12) part series of posts, to map the opinions of all the stakeholders on the basis of their responses to the consultation paper on Privacy, Security, and Ownership of the Data in the Telecom Sector (Consultation Paper) published by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on 9th August, 2017.

     

    In order to address key data privacy and security issues, the TRAI framed twelve (12) questions and invited comments to these questions. In total, fifty-three (53) stakeholders submitted detailed responses. Comments of all stakeholders are available here. Our comments to the Consultation Paper are available here.

     

    The mapping of stakeholders’ opinion, and the analysis of such mapping, is based on the interpretation of all the responses to the Consultation Paper. A few details may have been lost during the interpretation of the responses. All suggestions, requests, and comments, to rectify any such omission(s) or error(s) in this exercise, are duly invited.

     

    “Q10. Is there a need for bringing about greater parity in the data protection norms applicable to TSPs and other communication service providers offering comparable services (such as Internet based voice and messaging services). What are the various options that may be considered in this regard?”

     

    The following table projects the stances of stakeholders on whether there is a need for parity in data protection norms of TSPs and OTT service providers.

     

    Stakeholders Is there a need for bringing about greater parity in the data protection norms applicable to Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) and other communication service providers
    Yes (18) No (23) No Response/Stance (12)
    Industry Associations – 16*

    (IAMAI, ACTO, ASSOCHAM, COAI, GSMA, ISPAI, NASSCOM-DSCI, USISPF, ITI, USIBC, BSA, EBG, BIF, ACT, ISACA, iSPIRT)

     

    4

     

    COAI, GSMA, ISPAI, iSPIRT

    9

     

    IAMAI, ACTO, ASSOCHAM, NASSCOM-DSCI, USISPF, ITI, USIBC, EBG, BIF

    3

     

    BSA, ACT, ISACA,

    Telecom Service Providers – 10**

    (AT&T, RJIL, Bharti Airtel Ltd., Idea Cellular Ltd., MTNL, RCOM, TTL, BSNL, Telenor, Vodafone)

     

    – 9

     

    RJIL, Airtel, Idea, MTNL, RCOM, TTL, BSNL, Vodafone, Telenor

    1

     

    AT&T

    Civil Society Organisations/ Think Tanks – 12***

    (NLUD, IDP, CIS, ITfC, SFLC, FCSO, CUTS, CGS, CPA, Takshashila Institution, Access Now, IFF)

     

    7

     

    NLUD, CIS, ITfC, SFLC, CUTS, CGS, CPA

    3

     

    IDP, Takshashila, IFF

    2

     

    FCSO, Accessnow

    Individuals – 3

    (Sangeet Sindan, Baijayant Jay Panda, Apurv Jain)

     

    2

     

    Sangeet Sindan, Apurv Jain

    – 1

     

    Baijayant Panda

    Companies/Firms – 12

    (SPAN Technologies, TRA, Zeotap Pvt. Ltd.,  IBM, Make My Trip, Sigfox, Exotel, Mozilla, Citibank, Disney India, KOAN, Redmorph)

     

    5

     

    Zeotap, IBM, Citibank, KOAN, TRA

    2

     

    Sigfox, Mozilla

    5

     

    SPAN, MMT, Exotel, Disney, Redmorph

     

    *Industry Associations: IAMAI – Internet & Mobile Association of India, ACTO – Association Of Competitive Telecom Operators, ACT – Association for Competitive Technology, ASSOCHAM – Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India, COAI – Cellular Operators Association of India, GSMA – Groupe Speciale Mobile Association, ISPAI – Internet Service Providers Association of India, NASSCOM-DSCI – National Association of Software and Services Companies – Data Security Council of India, USISPF – U.S. India Strategic Partnership Forum, ITI – Information Technology Industry Council, USIBC – US India Business Council, BSA – Business Software Alliance, EBG – European Business Group Federation, BIF – Broadband India Forum, ISACA – Information Systems Audit and Control Association, iSPIRT – Indian Software Product Industry Round Table.

     

    **Telecom Service Providers: AT&T Global Network Services India Pvt. Ltd., RJIL – Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited, MTNL – Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, TTL – Tata Teleservices Limited, BSNL – Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited.

     

    ***Civil Society Organisations/ Think Tanks: NLUD – National Law University, Delhi,  IDP – Internet Democracy Project, CIS – The Centre for Internet and Society, ITfC – IT for Change, SFLC – Software Freedom Law Centre, FCSO – Federation of Consumer and Service Organization, CUTS – Consumer Unity and Trust Society, CGS – Consumer Guidance Society, CPA – Consumer Protection Association, IFF – Internet Freedom Foundation.

     

    The following table projects the stances of the stakeholders on a solution or option to the issue of parity.

     

    Stakeholder Options that may be considered

     

    Uniform/ horizontal data protection framework (19) Sector Specific regulation

    (6)

    Implementation of government body controlled functions (5) Miscellaneous Answers

    (12)

    No response/options provided

    (13)

    Industry Associations – 16*

    (IAMAI, ACTO, ASSOCHAM, COAI, GSMA, ISPAI, NASSCOM-DSCI, USISPF, ITI, USIBC, BSA, EBG, BIF, ACT, ISACA, iSPIRT)

     

    5+

     

    ACTO, COAI, ISPAI, ITI, EBG

    3

     

    ASSOCHAM, NASSCOM-DSCI, BIF

    3+

     

    IAMAI, COAI, iSPIRT

    3

     

    GSMA, USISPF, USIBC

    3

     

    BSA, ISACA, ACT

    Telecom Service Providers – 10**

    (AT&T, RJIL, Bharti Airtel Ltd., Idea Cellular Ltd., MTNL, RCOM, TTL, BSNL, Telenor, Vodafone)

     

    3

     

    AT&T, Airtel, Telenor

    2++

     

    RJIL, Idea

    2++

     

    RJIL, Vodafone

    2

     

    RCOM, TTL

    2

     

    MTNL, BSNL

    Civil Society Organisations/ Think Tanks – 12***

    (NLUD, IDP, CIS, ITfC, SFLC, FCSO, CUTS, CGS, CPA, Takshashila Institution, Access Now, IFF)

     

    6

     

    CIS, ITfC, CUTS, CGS, Accessnow, IFF

    1

     

    IDP

    –

     

     

    3

     

    NLUD, SFLC, FCSO

    2

     

    CPA, Takshashila

    Individuals – 3

    (Sangeet Sindan, Baijayant Jay Panda, Apurv Jain)

     

    1

     

    Sangeet Sindan

    – – 1

     

    Apurv Jain

    1

     

    Baijayant Panda

    Companies/Firms – 12

    (SPAN Technologies, TRA, Zeotap Pvt. Ltd., IBM, Make My Trip, Sigfox, Exotel, Mozilla, Citibank, Disney India, KOAN, Redmorph)

     

    4

     

    IBM, Mozilla, Citibank, KOAN

    – – 3

     

    TRA, Zeotap, Sigfox

    5

     

    SPAN, MMT, Exotel, Disney, Redmorph

     

     

    +COAI has responded in favour of multiple models, that is, a uniform data protection framework controlled by the government.

    ++ RJIL has responded in favor of multiple models, that is, a sector wise regulatory approach by a governmental body

     

    *Industry Associations: IAMAI – Internet & Mobile Association of India, ACTO – Association Of Competitive Telecom Operators, ACT – Association for Competitive Technology, ASSOCHAM – Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India, COAI – Cellular Operators Association of India, GSMA – Groupe Speciale Mobile Association, ISPAI – Internet Service Providers Association of India, NASSCOM-DSCI – National Association of Software and Services Companies – Data Security Council of India, USISPF – U.S. India Strategic Partnership Forum, ITI – Information Technology Industry Council, USIBC – US India Business Council, BSA – Business Software Alliance, EBG – European Business Group Federation, BIF – Broadband India Forum, ISACA – Information Systems Audit and Control Association, iSPIRT – Indian Software Product Industry Round Table.

     

    **Telecom Service Providers: AT&T Global Network Services India Pvt. Ltd., RJIL – Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited, MTNL – Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, TTL – Tata Teleservices Limited, BSNL – Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited.

     

    ***Civil Society Organisations/ Think Tanks: NLUD – National Law University, Delhi,  IDP – Internet Democracy Project, CIS – The Centre for Internet and Society, ITfC – IT for Change, SFLC – Software Freedom Law Centre, FCSO – Federation of Consumer and Service Organization, CUTS – Consumer Unity and Trust Society, CGS – Consumer Guidance Society, CPA – Consumer Protection Association, IFF – Internet Freedom Foundation.

     

    Insights

     

    Q1. Is there a need for bringing about greater parity in the data protection norms applicable to Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) and other communication service providers?

     

     

    • 34% of all stakeholders including 25% industry associations, 58.33% civil society organisations, 66.66% individuals, and 41.6% companies/firms agree that there should be a greater parity in data protection norms
    • 4% of all stakeholders, including 56.25% industry associations, 90% telecom service providers, 25% civil society and 16.6% companies/firms did not agree to the proposal of data parity.
    • 64% of all stakeholders including 25% industry associations, 10% telecom service providers, 16.66% civil society organisations, 33.33% individuals and 41.6% companies/firms did not provide a response.

     

     

     

    Q2.What are the various options that may be considered in this regard?

     

     

    • 6% of all stakeholders including 31.25% industry associations, 30% telecom service providers 50%% civil society organisations, 33.33% individuals, and 66.66% companies/firms agree on a uniform/horizontal framework.
    • 9% of all stakeholders, including 18.75% industry associations, 20% telecom service providers and 8.33% civil society organisations believe in a sector oriented regulatory approach.
    • 1% of all stakeholders including 18.75% industry associations and 20% telecom service providers feel government body controlled functions would be the most effective option.
    • 8% of all stakeholders including 18.75% industry associations, 20% telecom service providers, 25% civil society organisations, 33.33% individual and 25% companies/firms provided varied options to the question.
    • 6% of all stakeholders including 18.75% industry associations, 20% telecom service providers, 16.66% civil society organisations, 33.33% individual and 41.66% companies/firms provided no clear answer.

     

    Detailed Mapping of Responses

    A detailed mapping of the responses of all the fifty-three (53) stakeholders, including the stances of the stakeholders, their response to question nine(9) of the Consultation Paper and the suggestions they have made to the TRAI in view of the question, is available here.

    [This post is authored by Aakash Khatri, a third year student at ILS, Tejas Rao, a third year student at GNLU and Sushma S. Babu, a fourth year student at HNLU, Raipur. Pushan Dwivedi (Associate, TRA) gave inputs].

     

    Consent, Consultation, Consultation Paper, Data Controllers, Data Protection, Data Subjects, Digital Ecosystem., Government, Ikigai Law, Indian government, Infrastructure, Personal Data, Privacy, Recommendation, Responsibilities of Data Controllers, Srikrishna Committee, Stakeholders, Tech Policy, Telecom Service Providers, Telecommunications, TRAI, User Empowerment

    Ikigai Law

    More posts by Ikigai Law

    Related Post

    • Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part X of XII): Safety and security of telecommunications infrastructure and digital ecosystem

      By Ikigai Law | 0 comment

      This is the tenth post, in a twelve (12) part series of posts, to map the opinions of all the stakeholders on the basis of their responses to the consultation paper on Privacy, Security, andRead more

    • Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part XII of XII): Technological solutions to monitor compliance

      By Ikigai Law | 0 comment

      This is the twelfth post, in a twelve (12) part series of posts, to map the opinions of all the stakeholders on the basis of their responses to the consultation paper on Privacy, Security, andRead more

    • Stakeholders’ Responses to the TRAI Privacy Consultation Paper: Part IX of XII – Key Issues Pertaining to Encouraging the Creation of New Data Based Businesses

      By Ikigai Law | 0 comment

        This is the ninth post, in a twelve (12) part series of posts, to map the opinions of all the stakeholders on the basis of their responses to the consultation paper on Privacy, Security,Read more

    • Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part VIII of XII): Key issues pertaining to personal data collection and use

      By Ikigai Law | 0 comment

      This is the eighth post, in a twelve (12) part series of posts, to map the opinions of all the stakeholders on the basis of their responses to the consultation paper on Privacy, Security, andRead more

    • Stakeholders’ responses to the TRAI privacy consultation paper (Part VII Of XII): Definition of personal data, permissible grounds and empowerment of users

      By Ikigai Law | 0 comment

      This is the seventh post, in a twelve (12) part series of posts, to map the opinions of all the stakeholders on the basis of their responses to the consultation paper on Privacy, Security, andRead more

    Leave a Comment

    Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    NextPrevious

    Tags

    #DataProtection #Fintales bitcoin Blockchain Budget Consent Consultation Consultation Paper cryptocurrency data Data Controllers data governance Data localisation Data Protection Data Subjects digital economy Digital India Drones E-Commerce Facebook Fintech Government Government of India healthtech Ikigai Law India Indian government Innovation MeITY Notice Payments Personal Data policy Privacy RBI Recommendation Regulation Srikrishna Committee Stakeholders Startups Surveillance Technology Tech Policy TechTicker TRAI

    Connect with Ikigai Law

    Copyright 2018 Ikigai Law | All Rights Reserved             

    Information

    • Practice Areas
    • Blog
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy

    Contact us

    Office
    T-7/402, Commonwealth Games Village Apartment,
    New Delhi, Delhi 110092 India.

    Email Address

    contact@ikigailaw.com

    • About Us
      • About
      • Our Team
      • FinTales
      • Tech Ticker
    • Practice Areas
    • Blog
    • News & Events
      • Ikigai Law in the news
      • Ikigai Law at events
      • Ikigailaw on the social media
    • Careers
    Ikigai Law