[In conversation with a mobile startup]
The recent TRAI guidelines about UCC (Unsolicited Commercial Communication) is causing more grief than doing anything useful to strengthen the regulatory framework to curb UCC.
While the motive is good, implementation sucks.
What’s the whole purpose of NDNC?
A reasonable answer would be to “cut down on spam, sms promotional marketing and such related messages”. But apparently, the regulatory body doesn’t think logically and prefers to use an axe to create ad-hoc rules. For a 2nd, 3rd tier SMS provider (e.g. ValueFirst) in India, it creates lot of problems. Their customers are forced to such ridiculous guidelines even when their customers are using the SMS delivery service for a productive application (say, banking or peer-2-peer message) wherein the end-customer (like you and me) wouldn’t mind getting such SMS.
Irony is that operator are not forced to scrub the same NDNC list instead the dirty job has been put on the shoulder of 2nd & 3rd tier providers. So if you are using international gateways (e,g. clickatell.com) to send to a sms, enjoy! hurray..who cares for NDNC.
So if you are a spammer, don’t lose heart yet. Choose an international SMS provider (e.g. Clickatell) and none of the above rules apply. Bit expensive but worth the price :).
For legitimate guys, things are bit messy though! What’s your opinion?
Related NDNC Article:
- Only 18 million registrations for Do Not Call Registry
- DNC for SMS
- 80% of Indian Mobile Phone Users Exposed to Ads
- Indian Politicians don’t give a damn to NDNC
- Consumer Policy gets tougher for Internet and SMS ads