پیام های تجاری ناخواسته( اسپم): ممنوعیت یا آزادی ارسال؟

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• مصطفی بختیاروند ¹
• سیدمحمدهادی قبولی درافشان ²

¹ دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی و حقوق مالکیت فکری دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران.

² دانشیار گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.

10.22067/economlaw.2024.85568.1331

چکیده

پیام‌های تجاری ناخواسته (اسپم) به‌صورت الکترونیکی و انبوه، بدون رضایت گیرنده، از طریق ابزاری چون رایانامه یا پیامک ارسال می-شود. اسپم در کنار مزایایی که برای تبلیغ‌کنندگان دارد، می‌تواند موجب نقض حریم خصوصی کاربران اینترنت و تلفن همراه شود و زیان اقتصادی و نارضایتی گسترده مصرف‌کنندگان و حتی تجار را در پی داشته باشند. امری که در کنار احتمال اخلال در عملکرد سامانه‌هایی از قبیل رایانامه و پیام کوتاه، ممکن است به بی‌اعتمادی نسبت به تجارت الکترونیکی و اقتصاد دیجیتال منجر شود.
نتایج این مقاله توصیفی-تحلیلی نشان می‌دهد برخی کشورها ارسال اسپم را حتی بدون رضایت مخاطب مجاز و مخالفت بعدی وی را مانع ارسال می‌دانند که شیوه کناره‌گیری نامیده می‌شود.کشورهای دیگر، اعلام رضایت قبلی مخاطب را ضروری می‌دانند که به شیوه مشارکتی معروف است. دو شیوه یادشده، از طریق سه رویکرد تقنینی همراه با تساهل، معتدل و سختگیرانه اعمال می‌شود که با توجه به نحوه برخورد با ارسال‌کنندگان اسپم و ضمانت‌اجراها، تقسیم‌بندی و نامگذاری شده‌اند. موضع حقوق ایران راجع به ممنوعیت یا مجازبودن ارسال اسپم چندان واضح نیست. در این مقاله، تصویب قانون یا برخی مواد قانونی صریح و شفاف راجع به اسپم، با اتخاذ شیوه مشارکتی و پیش‌بینی ضمانت اجراهای کارآمد در ایران پیشنهاد شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• : اسپم
• تبلیغات تجاری
• پیام تجاری ناخواسته
• رویکرد مشارکتی
• رویکرد کناره‌گیری

مراجع

• APT (2022), Collaborative Response Measures to Prevent Unsolicited Commercial Messages (Spam) in the Asia Pacific Region, available at:  https://www.apt.int/sites/default/files/2023/05/20220220-Collaborative_Response_Measures_to_Prevent_Unsolicited_Commercial_Messages_in_Asia_Pacific_Regionfinal-clean.pdf. (last visited: 12/15/2023).
• Arunkrishna, M, Mukunthan, B (2020), Evolutionary Traits In Digital Spam: History ,Types, Techniques and Anti Spam Solutions, International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, v.29, n.3s, pp. 825-834.
• Asscher, L. F. (2004), Regulating Spam: Directive 2002/58 and Beyond, available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=607183. (last visited: 12/13/2023).
• Australian Spam Act of 2003.
• Bambauer, D. et al. (2005), A Comparative Analysis of Spam Laws: The Quest for a Model Law, ITU.
• Bender, M. R. (2006), Australia’s Spam Legislation: A Modern-Day King Canute?, Working Paper No. 2, Monash University.
• Boyne, Sh. M. (2018), Data Protection in the United States, Oxford University Press.
• Commission of the European Communities (2004), Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on unsolicited commercial communications or 'spam', available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52004DC0028. (last visited: 11/10/2023).
• CompuServe Incorporated v. Cyber Promotions, Inc. and Sanford Wallace 962 F. Supp. 1015, Case No. C2-96-1070 (S.D. Ohio, Feb. 3, 1997).
• Congressional Research Service (2008), “Spam”: An Overview of Issues Concerning Commercial Electronic Mail, available at: https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20080514_RL31953_f6f8e72738bad07a686e2e488581e7b381875096.pdf (last visited: 12/15/2023 ).

 

• DEED (2023), A Legal Guide To Privacy and Data Security, available at: https://mn.gov/deed/assets/a-legal-guide-to-privacy-and-data-security-2023_ACC_tcm1045-560279.pdf. (last visited: 12/10/2023).
• Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (E-Privacy Directive).
• DIRECTIVE 2009/136/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 25 November 2009.
• Dong, X. S., Jayakar, K. (2013), Can We Can Spam? A Comparison of National Spam Regulations, Telecommunications Policy Research Conference 2013.
• FCC (2023), Targeting and Eliminating Unlawful Text Messages, available at: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-391239A1.pdf . (last visited: 12/15/2023).
• Ferrara, E. (2019), The History of Digital Spam, Communications of the ACM, v.62,n.8,pp.82-91.
• Figliola, P. M. (2007), “Spam”: An Overview of Issues Concerning Commercial Electronic Mail, Congressional Research Service.
• Figliola, P. M. (2008), Text and Multimedia Messaging: Emerging Issues for Congress, Congressional Research Service.
• FRA (2018), Handbook on European Data Protection Law, FRA.
• Hedley, S. (2006), A Brief History of Spam, Information & Communications Technology Law, v.15,n.3,pp. 223-238.
• https://195.cra.ir/. (last visited: 11/11/2023).
• https://focus.namirial.global/gdpr-privacy-spam-emails/. (last visited: 10/17/2023).
• https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=LG_Heidelberg_-_4_S_1/21 (last visited: 11/14/2023).
• https://mci.ir/not-receiving-promotional-sms. (last visited:11/14/2023).
• https://sentenze.laleggepertutti.it/sentenza/cassazione-civile-n-3311-del-08-02-2017 . (last visited: 11/13/2023).
• https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2015/08/candid-answers-can-spam-questions. (last visited:11/15/2023).
• https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/can-spam-act-compliance-guide-business. (last visited: 10/10/2023).
• https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commercial_speech. (last visited:11/10/2023).
• https://www.lexisnexis.com/lexis-practice-advisor/thejournal/b/lpa/archive/2016/11/08/complying-with-the-can-spam-act.aspx. (last visited: 10/12/2023).
• https://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/business/gates-predicts-that-spam-will-go-away.html. (last visited: 11/14/2023).
• https://www.statista.com/statistics/1270488/spam-emails-sent-daily-by-country/. (last visited: 12/15/2023).
• Internet Society (2012), Combating Spam: Policy, Technical and Industry Approaches, available at: https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2012/combating-spam-policy-technical-and-industry-approaches/. (last visited: 11/10/2023).
• Iranian Electronic Commerce Act of 2002.
• Ju, J. et al. (2021),Can It Clean Up Your Inbox? Evidence from South Korean Anti-spam Legislation, Production and Operations Management Society, v.0,n.0, pp.1-17.
• Juneja, P. G., Pateriya, R.K. (2014), A Survey on Email Spam Types and Spam Filtering Techniques, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), v.3, issue 3, pp.2309-2314.
• Korean Act on the Promotion of Information and Communications, Network Utilization and Data Protection of 1999.

 

• LG Heidelberg - 4 S 1/21.
• Loi n° 2004-575 du 21 juin 2004 pour la confiance dans l'économie numérique.
• Manwaring, K. (2009), Canning the Spam Five Years on: a Comparison of Spam Regulation in Australia and the US, Computers & Law November 2009, pp.5-11.
• Mathews, K. J. (2004), Understanding & Complying with the “CAN-SPAM” ACT, Washington Legal Foundation.
• Milliet, M. (n.d), The regulation of spam A theoretical and practical analysis, available at: https://www.e2m.lu/sites/default/files/files/spam.pdf. (last visited: 12/15/2023).
• Moore, Roy L, May, Carmen, Collins, Eric L (2011), Advertising and Public Relations Law, Routledge.
• Mosing, M. W. (2014), Spamming in the EU Solutions for Unsolicited Electronic Mail Ahead ?, available at: https://www.it-law.at/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/mosing-spam-eu.pdf. (last visited: 12/10/2023).
• Moustakas, E. et al (2005), Combating Spam through Legislation: A Comparative Analysis of US and European Approaches, International Conference on Email and Anti-Spam.
• NG, K. (2005),Spam Legislation in Canada : Federalism, Freedom of Expression and the Regulation of the Internet, University of Ottawa Law & Technology Journal, v. 2, n. 2, pp. 447-491.
• Pakzad, B., Azadikhah, M.H. (2016), The Foundations of Criminalization of Sending Unsolicited Electronic Messages, Penal Law and Criminology Studies, v.3, n.2, pp.195-217. (In Persian).
• Papakonstantinou, V. (2011), The Amended EU Law on ePrivacy and Electronic Communications. New Rules on Data Protection, Spam, Data Breaches and Protection of Intellectual Property Rights, J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. v.29, issue 1, pp. 29-74.
• Parker, Y. M. (2006), Unsolicited Commercial E-mail, Privacy Concerns Related To Social Network Services, Online Protection of Children, and Cyberbullying, Journal of Innovations in Digital Marketing, v.3,n.1, pp. 1-11.
• Practical Law (2023), Direct Marketing in the US: Overview, available at: https://www.privacyworld.blog/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2023/07/Direct-Marketing-in-the-US-Overview-5-500-4203.pdf. (last visited: 11/7/2023).
• Prasetia, A. R., Istambul, R. (2021), The Problems of Sending Spam E-Mails To People In Indonesia, Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, v.12, n.8, pp.681-686.
• REGULATION (EU) 2016/679 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural

 

• persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation).
• Revar, P. et al (2017), A Review on Different types of Spam Filtering Techniques, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, v.8 n.9, pp. 2720-2723.
• Reyero, J. (2017), The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003: A False Hope, SMU Science and Technology Law Review, v. XI, pp. 195-226.
• Serna, F. J. A. (2022), The Legal Regulation of Spam: An International Comparative Study, Journal of Innovations in Digital Marketing, v.3,n.1, pp.1-11.
• Smith, M. S. (2004), “Spam”: An Overview of Issues Concerning Commercial Electronic Mail, Congressional Research Service.
• The Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography And Marketing (CAN-SPAM) Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM Act).