This fact is not lost on cellular service providers, who use their networks to send promotional messages to their customers, nor is it lost on some advertisers, who send unsolicited commercial messages to random users via the internet.

Even the government is using phone messaging as a way to remind you to pay your taxes.

In August 2004, in the United States, the problem of unsolicited messages, or spam, on cellular phones was dealt a coup de grace when the US Federal Communications Commission voted to ban all commercial messages sent to devices without the user's permission.

But in Jamaica, cellular phone spam has sprung from the odd message from service providers, promoting an internal product to customers, to almost daily messaging of sundry contests and events.

There is, as it turns out, nothing to stop them.  No one is regulating the flow of cellphone content, and as it turns out, there is even a little bit of confusion over who should.

Jackson told Sunday Finance that regulation of cellular phone spam would amount to "content regulation", saying this was outside the purview of the OUR.

The OUR addresses technical issues regarding cellular phones, such as providing telephone numbers for service providers and regulating the introduction of new cellular services, not issues like customer annoyance.

"We have no jurisdiction over content," he said.  It was more the responsibility of the Broadcasting Commission, said the deputy regulator, adding that the OUR would be willing to work with the commission to bring order to the spammers.

The Broadcasting Commission, however, has a different take.The regulation of content, counters acting executive director of the Broadcasting Commission, Deidre English-Gosse, would fall within the OUR, saying the utilities watchdog had 'overall' responsibility for regulation of cellular services.

"Things related to cellular phones (are) related to OUR," said English-Gosse.  She did agree, however, that all broadcast content should be regulated by her group but noted that cellular phone regulation is presently not included in the Broadcasting and Radio Re-Diffusion Act that gives the commission its authority.

The act, established in 1995, covers radio, television and subscriber television or STV operators, better known as cable.

Programming content is not initially screened by the group but if it is not violent, false, misleading, libelous material, profane, obscene, racist, sexist, or indecent, it is not considered illegal and so can't be prosecuted under the act.

Licensees in breach of the law may be prosecuted in the Resident Magistrate's Court and penalties range from airing an apology to having the licence revoked.

The acting executive director said that there would have to be a change in the regulation to give the commission the authority to use the act to regulate cellular content.

Jackson admitted that there is indeed a gap in the regulation through which cellular content, so far, has slipped.

So, with nothing to stop them, the spam mail proliferates.  Some local cellular service providers have taken steps to reduce the amount of spam sent to their customers by third party advertisers, such as blacklisting users and applying computer spam filters.

But the service providers also send unsolicited messages in the form of internal promotions.  These promotions include contests which require text message responses ranging from $10 to $40.

Among the latest was a chance to win cash and free credit by playing the 'Read and Win Game', $20 per text message.  Such contests are regulated by the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Commission (BGLC).

Roderick Black, an inspector at the commission, said that prize contests on cellular phones are addressed by the general prize competition section of the law, requiring that service providers must have their contests vetted by the commission.

"You have to route it through us," said Black.  But even with this type of regulation, some contests are transmitted without appropriate age riders restricting players to '18 years and over'.

The BGLC has no jurisdiction over unsolicited cellular messages that are not contests.

Roderick Black, an inspector at the commission, said that prize contests on cellular phones are addressed by the general prize competition section of the law, requiring that service providers must have their contests vetted by the commission.

"You have to route it through us," said Black.  But even with this type of regulation, some contests are transmitted without appropriate age riders restricting players to '18 years and over'.  The BGLC has no jurisdiction over unsolicited cellular messages that are not contests.

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/magazines/Business/html/20050703T010000-0500_83543_OBS_FREE_TO_SPAM.asp