Australian Communications and Media Authority

Australian Communications and Media Authority
Agency overview
Formed 1 July 2005[1]
Preceding agencies
Jurisdiction Commonwealth of Australia
Employees 625 (at April 2013)[2]
Minister responsible
Agency executive
Website acma.gov.au

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) is an Australian Government statutory authority within the Communications portfolio. The ACMA is tasked with ensuring media and communications works for all Australians. It does this through various legislation, regulations, standards and codes of practice.

The ACMA is a 'converged' regulator, created to oversee the convergence of the four 'worlds' of telecommunications, broadcasting, radio communications and the internet. The ACMA was formed on 1 July 2005 by a merger of the Australian Broadcasting Authority and the Australian Communications Authority. It is one of only a handful of converged communications regulators in the world.

Organisation

The ACMA is an independent agency with the Authority composed of the Chairman, Deputy Chair, one full-time Member, five part-time Members, and one Associate Member. The ACMA is managed by an executive team comprising the Chairman (who is also the Chief Executive Officer of the agency), the Deputy Chair, the full-time Member, six general managers and 16 executive managers. The corporate structure comprises five divisions - Communications Infrastructure, Digital Economy, Content, Consumer and Citizen, Corporate Services and Coordination, and Legal Services.

The ACMA has responsibilities under four principal Acts - the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, the Telecommunications Act 1997, the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 and the Radiocommunications Act 1992. There are another 22 Acts to which the agency responds in such areas as spam, the Do Not Call Register and interactive gambling. The ACMA also creates and administers more than 523 legislative instruments including radiocommunications, spam and telecommunications regulations; and licence area plans for free-to-air broadcasters.

The ACMA collects revenue on behalf of the Australian Government through broadcasting, radiocommunications and telecommunications taxes, charges and licence fees. It also collects revenue from price-based allocation of spectrum.

The ACMA's main offices are located in Canberra, Melbourne and Sydney.

Convergence and change

Communications convergence is the merging of the previously distinct services by which information is communicated - telephone, television (free-to-air and subscription) radio and newspapers - over digital platforms. The ACMA also works with industry and citizens to solve new concerns and mitigate risks arising in the evolving networked society and information economy, recognising that Australians are interacting with digital communications and content in changing ways. Not only does the ACMA address a wide and disparate range of responsibilities, it does so against a backdrop of rapid and disruptive change.

Many of the controls on the production and distribution of content and the provision of telecommunications services through licensing or other subsidiary arrangements, or by standards and codes (whether co-regulatory or self-regulatory) are subject to revision and adaptation to the networked society and information economy. Moreover, there are new platforms, applications, business models, value chains and forms of social interaction available with more to come in what is a dynamic, innovative environment. Other challenges for regulators include cross-jurisdictional issues and the need for engagement and collaboration with stakeholders locally, regionally and internationally. The ACMA's response to these pressures is to remain constantly relevant by delivering on its mandated outcomes and its statutory obligations, and by transforming itself into a resilient, e-facing, learning organisation, responsive to the numerous pressures for change that confront it.

The ACMA has developed a 'converged communications regulator' framework which seeks to bring to the global discussion a 'common ground' which can capture the fundamental tasks any regulator in a convergent environment will engage with to deliver outcomes in the public interest. The four cornerstone parts to the framework, each divided into two sub-streams, are outlined below along with the main functions of the ACMA under each task.

Bridging to the future - active engagement with the currents of change and proactive development of responses through thought leadership and regulatory development:

Transforming the agency - adapting the organisation to the changing world of convergence by ensuring a structural fit with convergence and a focus on agency innovation:

Major program delivery - undertaking major development work or program implementation through resource and program management with fully effective corporate governance:

Effective regulation - doing the 'day job' of the regulatory agency with effective and efficient regulatory administration and operations coupled with extensive stakeholder engagement:

The Convergence Review Committee[3] set up by the Government in 2011 was independent of the ACMA and its final report in 2012 suggested the ACMA be replaced with a new regulator to implement a different approach to regulation.[4] These changes were not enacted by the Labour Government and the new Coalition Government has not made major decisions on the future of the ACMA.[5]

The ACMA Hotline for reporting offensive or illegal online content

The ACMA administers a complaints mechanism for Australian residents and law enforcement agencies to report prohibited online content, including child sexual abuse material. Within the scheme, which operates under Schedules 5 and 7 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, content is assessed with reference to the same criteria within the National Classification Scheme that applies to films and computer games in Australia.

The ACMA Hotline is one of a global network of international bodies within INHOPE – the International Association of Internet Hotlines that exchange information on child abuse images, pinpointing the hosting countries to help eradicate them from the web.[6] INHOPE consists of 44 members in 38 countries, with members including the Internet Watch Foundation (UK), the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), Cybertip (Canada), Friendly Runet Foundation (Russian Federation) and the Internet Hotline Center Japan.

If prohibited online content is found in Australia, it is issued with a take-down notice after being formally classified; if it is hosted overseas it is notified to optional end-user family friendly Filters that are accredited by industry through the Internet Industry Association (these are available at cost from ISPs). All potentially illegal content is reported by the ACMA to law enforcement in Australia, or, in the case of child sexual abuse material hosted overseas, through INHOPE for rapid police notification and take-down in the host country.[7]

The ACMA publishes comprehensive statistics and information about the ACMA Hotline on its website. The majority of investigations the ACMA conducts concern online child sexual abuse material.[8] Complaints to the ACMA Hotline are usually made via a webform on the ACMA's website.

Popularly held misconceptions about the ACMA's regulatory role include that investigates and takes action on whole websites (it investigates specific URLs, images or files) and that the ACMA causes blocking of content at an ISP level (it notifies overseas hosted content to optional end-user filters).[7]

In February 2013, the ACMA and Australian Federal Police announced a new agreement for sharing of information about serious child abuse material, including an arrangement whereby the ACMA can report content through INHOPE based on where content may be produced, as well as hosted[6]

During National Child Protection Week 2013, the ACMA Hotline conducted 418 investigations involving over 4,700 images of abused children to Australian police agencies or through the INHOPE international network for action overseas[9] During the week, the ACMA announced it is now working more closely with CrimeStoppers in Australia to make it easier to report illegal online content[10]

The ACMA's online role is not connected to ISP blocking 'worst of the worst' child abuse material operated by ISPs and the Australian Federal Police[11]

The Do Not Call Register

The Do Not Call Register (DNCR) is a database where Australians can register private and domestic telephone (including mobile) and fax numbers to reduce unsolicited telemarketing calls and marketing faxes. As of November 2013, the Register has nine million numbers listed.

The Australian Government made the Do Not Call Register Act 2006 to give Australians the opportunity to 'opt-out' of receiving most telemarketing calls and marketing faxes. It is against the law for telemarketers to make unsolicited calls or to send marketing faxes to a number on the register without consent. The best way a telemarketer or fax marketer can ensure they comply with the DNCR Act is to check their list against the register at least every 30 days, prior to making marketing calls or faxes.

The Telemarketing and Research Calls Industry Standard 2007 sets out rules about when and how telemarketing calls can be made and applies regardless of whether numbers called are on the Do Not Call Register or not. Some exemptions apply. The Fax Marketing Industry Standard 2011 sets out rules about when and how marketing faxes can be sent.

The ACMA oversees and enforces compliance with the DNCR Act and related industry standard. Members of the public can make complaints about telemarketing calls and marketing faxes to the ACMA. It may conduct formal investigations and take enforcement action.

The Spam Act

The ACMA is responsible for enforcing the Spam Act 2003 which prohibits the sending of unsolicited commercial electronic messages with an Australian link. A message has an Australian link if it originates, or was authorised, in Australia, or if the message was accessed in Australia. Anyone who sends commercial email, SMS, or instant messages must ensure that the message is sent with consent, contains sender identification and contact information and includes a functional unsubscribe facility. Some exemptions apply.

Members of the public are able to make complaints and reports about commercial electronic messages to the ACMA which may conduct formal investigations and take enforcement actions.

The Australian Internet Security Initiative and malware

The ACMA developed the Australian Internet Security Initiative (AISI) to help address the problem of computers being compromised by the surreptitious installation of malicious software. 'Malware' enables a computer to be controlled remotely for illegal and harmful activities without the owner's knowledge.

What malware can do is limited to the creator's imagination, but includes: - accessing sensitive personal information stored on the computer such as resumes, sensitive documents, photographs/videos, and banking and other login or password details - gaining remote access to the computer's camera and microphone - forming part of a larger group of computers known as 'botnets'. Among other things, botnets are used to help with the mass distribution of spam and other malware, the hosting of phishing sites and distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on websites.

The AISI collects data from various sources on computers exhibiting 'bot' behaviour in the Australian internet space. Using this data, the ACMA provides daily reports to internet service providers (ISPs) identifying IP addresses on their networks that have generally been supplied to the ACMA in the previous 24-hour period. ISPs can then inform the customer associated with that IP address that their computer appears to be compromised and provide advice on how they can fix it. The ACMA does not know who the user of an IP address is, so the ISP is a critical link in the process of customer notification.

Internet censorship and criticisms

Since January 2000, internet content considered offensive or illegal has been subject to a statutory scheme administered by the ACMA.

Established under Schedule 5 to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992,[12] the online content scheme evolved from a tradition of Australian content regulation in broadcasting and other entertainment media. This tradition embodies the principle that – while adults should be free to see, hear and read what they want – children should be protected from material that may be unsuitable for (or harmful to) them, and everyone should be protected from material that is highly offensive.

The online content scheme seeks to achieve these objectives by a number of means such as complaint investigation processes, government and industry collaboration, and community awareness and empowerment. While administration of the scheme is the responsibility of the ACMA, the principle of 'co-regulation' underpinning the scheme reflects parliament's intention that government, industry and the community each plays a role in managing internet safety issues in Australia. The ACMA has a significant cyber safety education program called CyberSmart which provides resources for youth, parents and teachers.

Some people strongly disagree with this approach. They say the Australian constitution does not clearly provide either the states or the Federal Government power to censor online content, so internet censorship in Australia is typically an amalgam of various plans, laws, acts and policies. The regulator has been criticised for its role in examining internet censorship in Australia and how it is enabled and might further be enabled.[13] Particular criticism has been leveled at the regulator's technical understanding of what is involved overall in internet regulation and censorship.[14]

On 10 March 2009, the ACMA issued the Australian web-hosting company, Bulletproof Networks, with an "interim link-deletion notice" due to its customer, the Whirlpool internet community website, not deleting a link to a page on an anti-abortion web site.[15] The web page, which is the 6th of a series of pages featuring images of aborted babies, had been submitted to the ACMA, who determined it was potential prohibited content, by the user whose post on Whirlpool containing the ACMA's reply was later subject to the link-deletion notice.[16] This came with an A$11,000 per day fine if the take down was not actioned after 24 hours. In order for other URLs contained on the same website to be 'prohibited', a separate complaint would need to be submitted and reviewed by the ACMA.[17]

As indicated above (the issuance) of an "interim link-deletion notice" is a consumer and business protection mechanism that ACMA has the authority to issue to a media or telecommunications provider, as required by the Telecommunications Act 1997, section 110 despite providers adopting it voluntarily or not - through the Communications Alliance process. This gives ACMA access to consumer personal details such as name, phone number, address and other details. It is not known thoroughly for which purpose this information is required, protected and used (Citation needed) by other governmental departments and law enforcement agencies.

ACMA blacklist leaked

On 19 March 2009 it was reported that the ACMA's blacklist of banned sites had been leaked online, and had been published by Wikileaks.[18] Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, obtained the blacklist after the ACMA blocked several Wikileaks pages following their publication of the Danish blacklist. Assange said that "This week saw Australia joining China and the United Arab Emirates as the only countries censoring Wikileaks." Three lists purporting to be from the ACMA were published online over a seven-day period.[19]

The leaked list, which was reported to have been obtained from a manufacturer of internet filtering software, contained 2395 sites. Approximately half of the sites on the list were not related to child pornography, and included online gambling sites, YouTube pages, gay, straight, and fetish pornography sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions, Christian sites, and even the websites of a tour operator and a Queensland dentist. Colin Jacobs, spokesman for lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia, said that there was no mechanism for a site operator to know they got on to the list or to request to be removed from it. Australia's Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy later blamed the addition of the dentist's website to the blacklist on the "Russian mob".[20]

Associate professor Bjorn Landfeldt of the University of Sydney said that the leaked list "constitutes a condensed encyclopedia of depravity and potentially very dangerous material". Stephen Conroy said the list was not the real blacklist[21] and described its leak and publication as "grossly irresponsible" and that it undermined efforts to improve "cyber safety". He said that ACMA was investigating the incident and considering a range of possible actions including referral to the Australian Federal Police, and that Australians involved in making the content available would be at "serious risk of criminal prosecution".[22]

Conroy initially denied that the list published on Wikileaks and the ACMA blacklist were the same, saying "This is not the ACMA blacklist." He stated that the leaked list was alleged to be current on 6 August 2008 and contained 2,400 URLs, where the ACMA blacklist for the same date contained 1,061 URLs. He added that the ACMA advised that there were URLs on the leaked list that had never been the subject of a complaint or ACMA investigation, and had never been included on the ACMA blacklist. He was backed up by ISP Tech 2U, one of six ISPs involved in filtering technology trials.[21]

Conroy's denial was called into doubt by the Internet Industry Association (IIA), who publicly condemned the publishing of the list, chief executive Peter Coroneos saying, "No reasonable person could countenance the publication of links which promote access to child abuse images, irrespective of their motivation, which in this case appears to be political."[23]

Conroy later claimed the leaked blacklist published on Wikileaks closely resembled the official blacklist, admitting that the latest list (dated 18 March) "seemed to be close" to ACMA's current blacklist.[19]

In an estimates hearing of the Australian Federal Government on 25 May 2009 [24] it was revealed that the leak was taken so seriously that it was referred to the Australian Federal Police for investigation. It was further stated that distribution of further updates to the list have been withheld until recipients can improve their security. Ms Nerida O'Laughlin of the ACMA confirmed that the list has been reviewed and as of 30 April consists of 997 URLs.

See also

References

  1. ↑ CA 9024: an Communications and Media Authority, Central Office, Canberra, National Archives of Australia, retrieved 9 December 2013
  2. ↑ Australian Public Service Commission (2 December 2013), State of the Service Report: State of the Service Series 2012-13 (PDF), Australian Public Service Commission, p. 254, archived from the original (PDF) on 6 December 2013
  3. ↑ /http://www.archive.dbcde.gov.au/2013/august/convergence_review
  4. ↑ Over-regulation is stifling Australia's media - Holding Redlich Lawyers - Law Firm Melbourne Sydney Brisbane. Holdingredlich.com. Retrieved on 2014-04-12.
  5. ↑ http://www.gtlaw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/The-state-of-convergence-regulation-in-Australia.pdf
  6. 1 2 The Australian Financial Review http://www.afr.com/p/technology/coping_with_the_internet_worst_job_6K1elaxYqns5RSlzPyIylJ
  7. 1 2 ACMA Hotline FAQ http://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Internet/Internet-content/Internet-content-complaints/acma-hotline-frequently-asked-questions
  8. ↑ ACMA Online Investigation Statistics http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/ACMAi/Investigation-reports/Statistics/online-statistics
  9. ↑ The Australian http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/acma-fights-online-child-abuse/story-e6frg996-1226716057512#
  10. ↑ Mumbrella http://mumbrella.com.au/acma-conducts-record-number-investigations-online-child-sexual-abuse-material-177332
  11. ↑ The Australian Financial Review http://www.afr.com/p/technology/internet_filter_backflip_is_an_opportunity_wcHhHkL6DhFBxUg2klH3zL
  12. ↑ "Broadcasting Services Act 1992 - Schedule 5". Commonwealth of Australia. Australasian Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 18 February 2010.
  13. ↑ "A Brief History of Internet Regulatory Proposals/Activity in Australia". Electronic Frontiers Australia. January 2000. Retrieved 18 February 2010.
  14. ↑ "Internet Censorship Laws in Australia". Electronic Frontiers Australia. 31 March 2006. Archived from the original on 11 February 2010. Retrieved 18 February 2010.
  15. ↑ Foo, Fran (13 March 2009). "ACMA takes aim at Whirlpool, supplier". The Australian. Retrieved 18 February 2010.
  16. ↑ Foo, Fran (24 February 2009). "Row over web blacklist". The Australian. Retrieved 18 February 2010.
  17. ↑ Moses, Asher (17 March 2009). "Banned hyperlinks could cost you $11,000 a day". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 26 July 2011.
  18. ↑ Tung, Liam (19 March 2009). "Wikileaks spills ACMA blacklist". ZDNet Australia. Archived from the original on 11 February 2010. Retrieved 18 February 2010.
  19. 1 2 Lake, Chloe (25 March 2009). "Stephen Conroy says leaked list of banned websites 'seems like ACMA's blacklist'". news.com.au.
  20. ↑ Moses, Asher (27 March 2009). "Conroy admits blacklist error, blames 'Russian mob'". The Age.
  21. 1 2 MacBean, Nic (19 March 2009). "Leaked blacklist irresponsible, inaccurate: Conroy". ABC News.
  22. ↑ Moses, Asher (19 March 2009). "Blacklisted websites revealed". Brisbane Times.
  23. ↑ Luscombe, Belinda (27 March 2009). "A Blacklist for Websites Backfires in Australia". TIME.
  24. ↑ "Official Committee Hansard" (PDF), Commonwealth of Australia, Australian Parliament House, 25 May 2009, retrieved 18 February 2010

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 10/5/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.