Advertising and Marketing
This theme is now closed for comment. An announcement on Red Tape Challenge plans will be made in due course.
You can read comments made on this sub-category below.
Advertising, digital content services and telecommunications play a key role in business services. These regulations cover the rules that apply when marketing and advertising by electronic means such as by telephone, fax, email, text message and picture (including video) message or by using automated calling systems. This theme also covers other rules relating to privacy, including use of cookies on websites, telephone directories and traffic and location data.
Tell us what you think should happen to these regulations and why, being specific where possible:
- Should we scrap them altogether?
- Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (e.g. through a voluntary code?) How?
- Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?
- Can we reduce their bureaucracy through better implementation? How?
- Can we make their enforcement less burdensome? How?
- Should they be left as they are?
You can view the regulations relating to this part of the theme from the scroll box below the menu on the left hand side of this page.
If you want to share your experience privately, then you can comment through our private inbox here. Visit the Business Services landing page here.
|
Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008 This prevents businesses from advertising products in a way that misleads traders and set out conditions for comparative advertising to consumers and business. Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
The Privacy and electronic communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2003 These regulations concern a number of areas for the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
The Privacy and electronic communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 These Regulations enabled corporate subscribers to register their telephone numbers with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) register to avoid unsolicited marketing calls. Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
The Privacy and electronic communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2011 This amendment, amongst other things, established new rules for websites using “cookies” and similar technologies, which required websites to obtain users’ consent. It also enabled the ICO to fine a company £500,000 for breaching the PECR. Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Trading Schemes Regulations 1997 These Regulation set out the rules which a trading scheme (e.g. direct selling schemes, multi-level marketing or pyramid schemes) must follow. Rules included providing a 14 day cooling-off period and not being asked to pay more than £200 at the beginning of the scheme. Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
A general comment on the Information Commissioner’s Office:
There is too much focus on the powers of the ICO to punish offenders for breaches of the various DP regulations/ legislation. This negative focus on enforcement and punishment is counterproductive and achieves compliance only (and arguably not a lot of that). Surely the whole point of the Data Protection Act and Privacy Regs is to try and raise the standards by which companies and organisations interact with the consumer/ data subject? There should be a greater focus on best practice and perhaps the ICO should communicate more widely the work it does with interested parties and associations?Comment Tags: ICO
A comment on the Cookie Directive and the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2011:
The perception amongst colleagues with expertise in the digital sector is that, whilst recognising the genuine concerns over the accessing and retention of consumer’s data, there is a view that the shift to obtaining consent will lead to lost opportunities as technologies develop elsewhere where this requirement does not exist. In particular, there is a view that these rules could mean that digital services within the EC will lose their competitive edge as developers outside it develop new ways of understanding users not available to those within.
In addition there is a perception that these regulations have not fully addressed the general problem and the regulations will therefore distort the market rather than protect the consumer.
On the implementation of the directive, much of what was written about the new rules was misleading or incomplete and caused a lot of concern when it need not have done. This may be because there was a gap in communication between the closing stages of the consultation and its implementation. Although the consultation was widespread and considered numerous proposals, and although there was fairly wide knowledge that new rules were being brought in, there was a lot of confusion as to what this meant and a lot of conflicting advice. In addition the advice from the ICO itself was very unclear – even after the 1 year delay. More should have been done to communicate developments in the intervening period between consultation and implementation, and the advice given at implementation should have been much clearer and less ambiguous.Comment Tags: Cookies, The Privacy and electronic communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2011