Mythbuster: Communications Alliance Codes aren’t ‘the law’

There’s a myth around that industry codes, formerly known as ACIF Codes but these days generated by the Communications Alliance, are merely voluntary.  They are not ‘the law’.

This myth is based on a misunderstanding of the process behind codes and the reasoning behind the process.

Communications Alliance Codes sure aren’t just voluntary.

The confusion arises because the Telecommunications Act tries not to be heavy-handed on this topic.  But there’s a gloved hand not far away.

The process

The Act allows for industry codes to be worked out by an industry group, and then submitted to ACMA.  If ACMA approves the code, it registers it.

After that, the hope is that CSPs will fall into line.  And it’s true that there’s no immediate penalty if they don’t.

What if an ISP won’t comply with a code ?

Once a code is registered, section 121 of the Telecommunications Act allows ACMA to issue a direction to a CSP to comply with it.

A breach of a direction then becomes a breach of the Telecommunications Act as well.

After that, failure to comply isn’t healthy for the CSP.  Penalties for breaching an ACMA direction to comply run up to attracts penalties of up to $250,000 for companies and $50,000 for individuals who are involved.

Are ACMA directions common ?

ACMA only issues directions when a CSP won’t ‘voluntarily’ comply.  Even then, it probably only acts on the basis of customer complaints.  The code scheme is indeed intended to be ‘light touch’.

But for instance, in February 2008 ACMA directed Dodo to comply with the complaints handling and billing codes.  This followed a TIO request to look at Dodo because of a rising number of complaints it was receiving.

Quoting from ACMA’s media release:

Industry codes bind industry participants to agreed processes and behaviours that should result in improvements in consumer’s experience with the telecommunications industry.

ACMA will take all steps necessary to ensure that consumers receive appropriate and adequate protection and that industry participants are meeting their obligations.

So, ACMA certainly believes its codes are ‘the law’

This is a myth that should be thoroughly buried

The myth is widespread, and some amateur ‘experts’ loudly assure novices that CSPs can’t be held to account for code non-compliance, since the codes are ‘just industry codes’.

We’ve also seen arguments that the codes only apply to telcos (and not ISPs) or vice versa.  Nonsense.  Unless a code specifically says otherwise, ‘CSP’ means a ‘carriage service provider’ i.e. a telco and / or ISP.

Finally, we’ve seen people advising others that codes only apply to telcos that hold carrier licences.  Bunkum.  A ‘carrier’ and a ‘carriage service provider’ are different things.  Sure, many carriers also act as CSPs, but not all CSPs are carriers.  In fact, most of them are not.

Misinformation is unhelpful

The problem with this myth is that it discourages aggrieved customers from asserting their code rights.  So they don’t complain.  So TIO / ACMA never get the full picture.  So the CSP gets away with non-compliance.  So the ‘experts’ assume that the codes are voluntary, and advise more aggrieved customers accordingly.

It’s time to start giving out accurate information about the codes and their status.