The Communications Alliance and the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) have given their broad support to the Productivity Commission’s proposals and aims to increase the availability and use of data in Australia.
In a submission to the PC’s investigation into the use of data the two organisations argued, however, that data generated in the course of network and traffic management, operations and data – and the use of devices generated in the course of the provision of a telecommunications service - is proprietary information and ought not to fall under the definition of “consumer data”.
In addition, the associations said the envisaged definition of consumer data is very open-ended and lacking a time dimension – and also noted that there is “no sufficient consensus as to what de-identification entails and the various methods available to transform data to remove identifiable elements”.
“Consequently, the associations strongly suggest that minimum standards be developed to guard against transformed data being linked back to a consumer,” they told the Commission.
In their submissions the CA and ATMA also said:
• The suggested definition of the comprehensive right, including the right to transfer data to competitors, and the definition of consumer data work together to create “serious disincentives to innovation and value creation through proprietary data analytics and manipulation”.
The submission requests that “value-added data, including network, traffic management and operations data”, be excluded from the definition of consumer data.
• The Associations also argued that some best practice principles - e.g. a thorough cost-benefit analysis as well as clear, evidence based rules - have not received adequate consideration.
This is particularly relevant in the context of the comprehensive right which includes the right to access and transfer data. It appears that insufficient consideration has been given as to whether such a universal right is actually useful across all sectors and kinds of data - i.e. it is questionable whether those rights are of “sufficient benefit to consumers and outweigh the significant costs, including costs arising from reduced competition and innovation, that are associated with this right”.