> Information and Communication Law
Back
Next The Research on Cybersecurity Risks in 5G network: Perspectives on Global strategy

Research on the Introduction of Privacy Protection Management Mechanisms and Data Value-Added Services into Communications Enterprises in 2020

Research on the Introduction of Privacy Protection Management Mechanisms and Data Value-Added Services into Communications Enterprises in 2020

2021/12/09

I. Introduction

　　The global economy is shifting away from traditional economic models towards an emerging digital era as technology advancement and new applications are introduced. The rapidly changing digital age has led to a gradual transformation in the way digital technology is used in the industry, thereby driving the overall growth of the global digital economy. The digital economy is driven by "data," and how data is used, its purpose, risks and regulation are all inextricably intertwined with industrial development and application, as is the case for the communications industry.

　　As such, while the free circulation of data has become central to international free trade and economic operations, it is not only conducive to the promotion of transnational business and economic and trade interactions, but also fraught with worry and concern over how to ensure the protection and security of personal data and privacy. As a result, the issue of how to adapt the data risk control mechanism and related complementary measures so that they can be applied to the industry and comply with regulatory requirements has become a global reality that must be actively addressed. As far as Taiwan is concerned, when considering how to cope with industry needs, there is a pressing need to strike a balance between personal data and international regulatory requirements, and to expedite the legitimate utilization of personal data protection and data value-added service in the sector in an effort to facilitate the development of the digital economy.

II. Recommendations on Data Governance and Innovative

　　Application Planning. According to the aforementioned international data strategies and strategies for innovative data applications, the development of the data economy as a whole is driven by the formulation of overall superior policies, with a view to fully utilizing the potential value of data and building a vibrant ecosystem suited for innovative data applications. With the outbreak of COVID-19 this year, the application of data will be crucial in the post-pandemic era. It is also observed that data applications are gradually moving towards cross-boundary sharing and reuse, and empowerment of data subjects, and therefore, in light of the above observations and findings, we offer recommendations on data governance and innovative application planning. First, as for the establishment of a ministry and mechanism for data application and communication, since there is no single dedicated authority in Taiwan, and the formation of a ministry for science and technology development is now under intense discussion, data application may become an important function of the ministry, so we have to consider an authority for data application and communication. Further, there is currently no sandbox mechanism for data application in Taiwan. Reference should be made to the British data communication mechanism for providing legal advice and consultation sought on data application regulation.

　　Second, with regard to the formulation of regulations and amendments to existing laws relating to data applications, the most noteworthy is the EU Data Governance Act 2021. Taiwan does not have a complete and appropriate legal framework for data application, except for the Freedom of Government Information Law, the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) and the relevant laws and regulations distributed in various fields, and the nation is currently seeking an adequacy decision from the EU, and therefore our PDPA needs to be amended accordingly, yet no progress has been made at this stage. Consequently, a comprehensive strategy should be developed by taking into account both the formulation of the basic data application regulations and the amendments to the current PDPA, in order to achieve long-term data governance and application and sharing.

　　Lastly, in terms of the incorporation of the concept of data empowerment and the design of the mechanism, the international trend moves towards data empowerment to give data subjects more control over their data. The Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) of Taiwan has also incorporated this idea in its open banking, so has the National Development Council’s (NDC) MyData program. As such, it is suggested that the government should provide guidelines or devise the relevant system, or even make reference to the Japanese data bank mechanism regarding the establishment of intermediaries to assist consumers in managing their data, which could be used as a reference for the design of the mechanism in the future.

III. Accountability for and Management of Data Use in Enterprises

　　Among the countries studied regulation of Singapore and Taiwan are similar and have adopted the development of digital economy as their main economic strategy, but Singapore has been more proactive than Taiwan in the design of the legal system to facilitate the use of data. Therefore, with regard to the control of data use in businesses by the competent authorities, this Project, by looking at the amendment to the Singaporean PDPA, aims to reinforce the regulation of the accountability system and the operation of the existing series of guidelines. From the changes in Singapore's PDPA, it can be observed that the competent authorities can refer to the practices of enterprises in the use of data.

　　First of all, the existing regulations in Taiwan tend to have more about compliance than accountability, with emphasis being placed on data security maintenance and compliance with the PDPA. For instance, Taiwan’s “Regulations Governing Security Measures of the Personal Information File for Non-government Entities Designated by National Communications Commission” focus on following the law on the use of personal data. Nonetheless, the so-called accountability means that the competent authorities must oversee the implementation of data protection measures and policies of enterprises, not just pro forma compliance with the letter of the law.

　　The second observation is that Singapore is quite proactive in addressing the need for data use in the development of its digital economy by making an exception to innovative uses regarding informed consent. The inclusion of data portability also represents a heightened control of the data subject. These amendments are all related to Singapore's policy of actively developing its smart nation initiative and signify a more proactive approach by the authorities in monitoring the use of data by businesses. Taiwan needs to be more open and precise in regulating the use of data for the development of its digital economy.

　　Finally, there is increased flexibility in enforcement, as authorities can resolve disputes between subjects over data use more quickly through the introduction of mediation or other alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. Meanwhile, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) has developed industry-specific consultation guidelines, recognizing that there may be specific issues for different industries. The PDPC noted that these guidelines are based on the partnerships, consultations and feedback associated with the relevant industries, and close collaboration with the industry's authorities of target businesses.

IV. Conclusion

　　Despite the lack of a dedicated authority for personal data protection, Taiwan can first build a cross-industry coordination and communication platform, and then collaborate across ministries to primary integrate standards in personal data protection to facilitate the needs of industrial innovation in the digital economy.

※Research on the Introduction of Privacy Protection Management Mechanisms and Data Value-Added Services into Communications Enterprises in 2020,STLI, https://stli.iii.org.tw/en/article-detail.aspx?no=55&tp=2&i=169&d=8762 (Date:2024/04/27)
Quote this paper

Hsu, Chia-Fang
 Associate Legal Researcher

Release： 2021/12
Tag
Read with phone
Back
Next The Research on Cybersecurity Risks in 5G network: Perspectives on Global strategy
You may be interested
Norms of Critical Infrastructure Protection in Japan

The approaches to promote critical infrastructure protection in Japan The approaches to promote critical infrastructure protection in Japan are illustrated below: 1. Coverage of Critical Information Infrastructure In the "Action Plan on Information Security Measures for Critical Infrastructure" promulgated by the Information Security Policy Council (ISPC) in 2005, critical infrastructure is defined as: Critical infrastructure which offers the highly irreplaceable service in a commercial way is necessary for people's normal lives and economic activities, and if the service is discontinued or the supply is deficient or not available, it will seriously influence people's lives and economic activities. Based on the definition of the action plan, the critical infrastructure contains: telecommunication systems, administration services of the government, finance, civil aviation, railway, logistics, power, gas, water, and medical services 2. Promoted Relevant Policies of The Past The issues regarding the CIIP are gradually being developed with the norm of information social security policy in Japan. Adopting the Action Plan of the Basic Guidelines Toward the Promotion of an Advanced Information and Telecommunications Society of 1998 proposed by the Japanese government in 1998 as a basis. The Japanese government keeps presenting polices of improvement for the relevant issues in order to acquire the stable development of telematics and telecommunications. Several years later, the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) announced the Comprehensive Strategy on Information Security in 2003. The formulation of the strategy not only emphasizes the possible telematics-related risks and protection against threats that may be encountered in the information society, but it also enhances the level of information security to the level of national security and presents a comprehensive information security improvement program. Furthermore, the submission of the strategy has identified government’s responsibility in the development of information security Therefore, a division which is solely responsible for information security was established in the Cabinet Secretariat and is devoted to the development of it. In 2005, the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) amended the Comprehensive Strategy on Information Security and announced the First National Strategy on Information Security based on the creation of a policy of a long-term information security task in Japan which is also the foundation for the policy of guidelines and action security concerning critical information infrastructure. This is in addition to being the most important basis for the policy of information security development. The strategy is different from the Comprehensive Strategy on Information Security in connotation. In the range of information security protection, it not only maintains information security from the perspective of the government; for instance, to divide the rights and duties on information security protection practices between the central government and the local government, and to strengthen the capacity of the government to solve emergencies such as cyber attacks, but it also tries to employ the public-private partnership on the CIIP issue to construct an extensive information security protection and to develop a Capability for Engineering of Protection, Technical Operation, Analysis and Response (CEPTOAR): one similar to the ISAC of America, to strengthen the information sharing and analysis of information security of all industry involved. According to the strategy, the METI established the Information Security Policy Council (ISPC) and the National Information Security Center (NISC) under the subordination of the Cabinet Secretariat in order to reach a goal of dependable society of information security.1 Finally, the information security policies more directly related with the CIIP are the Action Plan on Information Security Measures for Critical Infrastructure and the Standards for Information Security Measures for the Central Government Computer Systems, both of which regulate CI-related threats, information security standards, public-private partnership information sharing system, and the levels of information security standards between different governments and critical infrastructures, respectively. 3. Oraganization Framework Generally speaking, the Cabinet Secretariat is the main division of the CIIP and the information security for the Japanese government, while the ISPC and the NISC established under the Cabinet Secretariat in 2005 are the core organizations for the development of the CIIP policy. In addition, the National Policy Agency (NPA) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) also played an important role in assisting the Cabinet Secretariat with critical infrastructure protection. The part of public-private partnership is covered by the CEPTOAR which takes the responsibility for information sharing and analysis of information security between the government and private organizations. 4. Notification System For critical infrastructure protection, Japan has set up a warning and notification system in addition to the emphasis on fundamental information security protection. With the concept of public-private partnership, various messages related with information security are analyzed and shared in order to prevent information security incidents from occurring. The network of notification system in Japan mainly consists of several organizations as listed below. (1) National Incident Response Team The National Incident Response Team (NIRT) which is the information security office under the Cabinet Secretariat in the organization framework belongs to the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT)2 and is first in line in the government to handle internet emergencies. According to the Action Plan for Ensuring e-Government's IT Security, the NIRT which consists of 17 experts from the government and the private organizations is responsible to (1) accurately understand and analyze emergencies, (2) develop technical strategies to solve and rehabilitate emergencies to prevent incidents from reoccurrence, (3) provide other governmental organizations the assistance to solve the information security issue, (4) collect and analyze information or intelligence so that effective solutions and strategies may be provided when an incident happens, (5) provide the governmental organization with professional knowledge and information, and (6) enhance and improve all knowledge pertinent to information security. (2) Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Center The Japan Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Center (JPCERT/cc) is the first Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT) established in Japan. It consists of internet service suppliers, security products/service suppliers, governmental agencies, and associations of industry & commerce. The JPCERT/CC is also a member of the Asia Pacific Computer Emergency Response Team (APCERT) and a member of the Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST). It coordinates and integrates prevention measures pertinent to information security and is consistent with other CSIRTs. (3) Telecom Information Sharing and Analysis Center In Japan, besides the mechanism responsible to notify the government, which functions as a bridge for communication between it and all those outside of it, the mechanism of information sharing and notification is also established among industries to provide each with a channel for information exchange and consultation. In 2001, Japan established the Telecom Information Sharing and Analysis Center Japan (Telecom-ISAC Japan). In addition to real-time inspection for computer intrusion incidents and conducting information collection and analysis, the Telecom-ISAC Japan proposes to e-government many suggestions related with the Transact-SQL issue as well. The reasons for launching the Telecom-ISAC are to instantaneously detect a computer intrusion incident, and to instantaneously gather and analyze its information, and then exchange this with other telecom carriers and offer them relevant countermeasures for precaution; so that in can reach the goal of ensuring telecom security since it is an important infrastructure concerning social economy. (4) Cyber Force The reasons for launching the Cyber Force are to maintain the security to use the internet by regularly "patrolling" it, searching for evidence of internet crime, and to notify the critical infrastructure operators about any unusual internet use so as to prevent the occurrence of cyber terror attacks. The Cyber Force also assists operators to solve and diminish the damage and influences when an incident occurs. (5) Portal Site of National Police Agency The National Police Agency owns the portal site "@police". It exists to prevent large-scale cyber emergencies and to provide gathered information concerning information security to government. In addition to providing the techniques related with the safe use of computer networks, @police is also dedicated to educating internet users about the concept of information security and to increase security awareness. (6) Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry Since 1990, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) has cooperated with the JPCERT/CC and the Information Technology Promotion Agency (IPA) to provide reports on virus, intrusion, and the damage caused by them, to remind the public to pay attention. 5. Legal Norms The laws regarding critical infrastructure protection in Japan are illustrated as follows: (1) Unauthorized Computer Access Law of 1999 The Unauthorized Computer Access Law includes various conducts such as cyber intrusion, and data thefts, into the norms of criminal punishment to deter cyber crimes from spreading in order to ensure the safety of the critical information infrastructure. (2) Act on Electronic Signatures and Certification Business of 2000 With the formulation of the Act on Electronic Signatures and Certification Business, the smooth promotion of the electronic signature system is ensured and the circulation and process of electronic communication can be fostered further. (3) Basic Law on Formation of an Advanced Information and Telecommunication Network Society of 2001 Through the formulation of the Basic Law on Formation of an Advanced Information and Telecommunication Network Society, the legal basis to execute an information technology policy is enhanced, and the direction and job content for the government to execute this policy is explicitly stated. 1.http://www.nisc.go.jp/eng/pdf/national_strategy_001_eng.pdf(last accessed date: 2009/07/20). 2.http://www.nisc.go.jp/en/sisaku/h1310action.html(last accessed date: 2009/07/20).

 Legal issues of Third-Party Payment in Taiwan

Although third-party payment is already one of the most popular ways to do the payment online in many countries, for example, Alipay of China and Paypal of USA, third-party payment in Taiwan is just about to start. For these days, the legislation of third-party payment has become a highly debated issue. However, due to many reasons, the legislation of third-party payment eventually has not been realized. And in fact, the third-party payment in Taiwan is not mature yet. A third-party payment system in Taiwan is unable to deposit stored value in advance. This is one of the basic functions of third-party payment system abroad, such as Alipay in China and Paypal in USA. Mainly, what third-party payment provides in Taiwan is money transmission based on real trade. 1. Latest progress of third-party payment in Taiwan. (1)Credit card payment for third-party payment system. Recently, third-party payment has a breakthrough development. According to the resolution of the meeting “Obstacles of using credit card in third party payment” held by Executive Yuan in September this year, Financial Supervisory Commission has made the commitment that the third party payment is allowed to be a “contracted merchant” under “Regulations Governing Institutions Engaging in Credit Card Business”, and personal entity or small business which is not provided with the qualification of “contracted merchant” are allowed to accept credit card payment though third party payment system. This is a very important progress in third-party payment in Taiwan. It means credit card payment is available for C2C transaction now. This will improve the safety of C2C transaction and reduce the quantity of fraud transaction. In other way, boost the prosperity of E-commerce. (2)Evaluation Requirements for Data Processing Services Industry Performing Trans-border Internet Transaction. In response to the Central Bank’s request, MOEA (Ministry of Economic Affairs) approved and announced the “Evaluation Requirements for Data Processing Services Industry Performing Trans-border Internet Transaction” on October 3rd, 2012. Any Data Processing Services Industry Performing Trans-border Internet Transaction would like to obtain the qualification as a mandatory under Article 8 of “Regulations Governing the Declaration of Foreign Exchange Receipts and Disbursements or Transactions”, should pass the evaluation according to the “Evaluation Requirements for Data Processing Services Industry Performing Trans-border Internet Transaction”, and get the compliance certification. The “Evaluation Requirements for Data Processing Services Industry Performing Trans-border Internet Transaction” has set up several requirements for a business which would like to run the payment service for trans-border internet transaction. Mainly, basic requirements are as the followings. 1-2-1　The applying data processing service enterprise should be a limited company or a company limited by shares. 1-2-2　The applying data processing service enterprise should open a special purpose deposit account to deposit the entire transmitting amount received from consumers. And the transaction of this account should be only based on the consumers’ directions of money transmitting. 1-2-3　Users of the third-party payment service provided by the data processing service enterprise should register for the first time usage. And the user’s name, birth and ID number are required for registration. The applying data processing service enterprise has the liability to check the reality of the information provided. 1-2-4　The contract between the data processing service enterprise and the user should be in writing. If the contract is performed in electronic way, it should follow the requirement of “in writing” according to Article 4 of “Electronic Signatures Act”. In addition, the contract should contain the mandatory articles about foreign exchange declaration listed in the “Evaluation Requirements for Data Processing Services Industry Performing Trans-border Internet Transaction”. 1-2-5　The data processing service enterprise should be equipped with sound information security system and operating regulations, comply with “Personal Information Protection Act” and the related directives, join ECTSA (E-commerce Trust Security Alliance), and get the ISO27001 certificate or PCI-DSS validation. 1-2-6　The data processing service enterprise should keep detailed transaction information for at least 5 years. 1-2-7　The data processing service enterprise should set up money laundering prevention operating regulations, and provide money laundering prevention employee training annually. Once MOEA receives the application, MOEA will set up a special team, which assembles legal professionals, information engineering experts and financial experts, to conduct the evaluation. The compliance certification of the evaluation will be valid for 5 years. During these 5 years, the data processing enterprise has the duty to accept the annual examination and non-timed examination by MOEA. 2.Three-Party Legal Relationship under Third-Party Payment The nature of a third-party payment service is “service of payment collection and forwarding”. Generally, payment collection and forwarding refers to the transfer of a transaction payment performed by a third party in its role of assisting the buyer and the seller. The current practice in Taiwan of making payment to and collecting product from a convenient store pursuant to online transaction or of paying for product upon delivery by shipping company is a type of “payment collection and forwarding” business. In a relationship of payment collection and forwarding service, the legal relationship between the buyer and the payment collector/forwarder is a “contract of mandate” under Article 528 of the Civil Code. Refer to Article 8 of the Regulations Government the Use of Uniform Invoices: “When a business entity is engaged to handle collection and payment on behalf of another party, if there is no difference between the amount collected and the amount paid, and the purchaser specified on the payment receipt voucher is the engaging party, then the business entity may deliver the voucher to the engaging party and is exempt both from issuing a uniform invoice and from including the payment as a sales amount.”. Article 18-2 of the Profit Seeking Enterprise Income Tax Audit Standard also has similar stipulations. As to whether or not a contract of mandate is formed between the seller and the payment collector/forwarder, depends on the agreement between the parties. If it is agreed that the buyer has completed payment when the payment collector/forwarder receives the fund, then the payment collector/forwarder receives the fund on behalf of the seller and a contract of mandate is formed. Under the contract of mandate, the seller grants the payment collector/forwarder the right of agency and the right of processing. Generally speaking, it is deemed that when the buyer pays the fund to the payment collector/forwarder, the buyer has completed the obligation of payment. Therefore, both the buyer and the seller form a contract of mandate with the payment collector/forwarder and grant the right of agency under such contract of mandate. Diagram 1 Three-party relationship diagram under collection/forwarding of transaction payment Source: Prepared by author The payment collector/forwarder under online transaction acts as the agent of the buyer and the seller at the same time with regard to the act of payment and collection. This constitutes the legal issue of “acting as agent for both parties” under Article 106 of the Civil Code. However, the payment collector/forwarder performs the contract of sale and purchase for the buyer and the seller. Therefore the exception provided under Article 106 of the Civil Code is applicable. 3.Payment Custody Mechanism under Third-Party Payment (1)Overview The important value of a third-party payment mechanism is that it provides a credit guarantee between the buyer and seller. Through a third-party payment organization, the buyer receives the merchandize and then sends an instruction to the third party payer for the price previously provided to the third party payer to be forwarded to the seller. Although the buyer and the seller cannot verify each other’s creditworthiness and the quality of the merchandize face-to-face, through third party payment, the buyer can be assured that the merchandize will be received after the price is paid. The buyer can even be assured that he/she will receive the merchandize that he/she is satisfied with. For example, in “Alipay”, the after shopping, the consumer pays the transaction price to Alipay. Only when the consumer replies with “production received” will Alipay forward the money to the seller. So “third-party payment service” helps activate E-commerce and is especially helpful in C2C transactions. This is one of the important features that differentiate “third-party payment service” from “Internet banking”. Therefore, although the Central Bank of Mainland China introduced the function of “Super Internet Bank” in 2009, consolidating the consultation and account transfer systems of many banks, it is generally considered that this did not have a strong impact on the third-party payment service industry which is already flourishing in Mainland China, because it does not provide value-added services, such as a guarantee and delayed payment provided by third-party payment service. Although third-party payment service provides account transfer service, absorbing part of the functions of Internet banking, it also created new business opportunities for the banks. In reference to the experience of Mainland China, the tasks are divided between third-party payers and banks as follows: Source: Xi-Song Zhang, Choice of Development Model for Third-Party Payment in China – From the Perspective of Full Intervention by Commercial Banks, Review by Xi’An University of Finance and Economics, Volume 22, Book 2, Page 46 (March 2009). So the service provided by third-party payment and the service provided by Internet banking overlap to a certain degree. Both perform the function of fund transmission. However, instead of thinking that the two as competitors, it is better to think of them as a cooperative. (2)Relevant Legal System in Taiwan The feature of the above-described third-party payment is that the third party holds the property for the benefit for others until the satisfaction of certain conditions. A similar legal system in Taiwan is “trust”. In accordance with Article 1 of the Trust Act: “For the purposes of this Law, the term "trust" refers to the legal relationship in which the settler transfers or disposes of a right of property and causes the trustee to administer or dispose of the trust property according to the stated purposes of the trust for the benefit of a beneficiary or for a specified purpose.”. However, in accordance with Article 2 of the Trust Act, a trust must be done through a contract of trust. What is different from the contract of mandate formed under the payment collection/forwarding described above is that, in a contract of trust, the parties must specify the purpose of the trust in the contract. Otherwise, the contract of a trust is not formed. An exception is trust by declaration for the purpose of public interest under Article 71 of the Trust Act. Below we discuss the structure and feasibility of providing third-party payment service through trust. 3-2-1Third-Party Payer Acts as Trustee When a third-party payer acts as the trustee of under the contract of trust and the buyer that pays the price under an Internet transaction designates it as the principal and the beneficiary, a trust for self benefit is formed. It is a trust with a purpose. The purpose of the trust is to transfer the price of sale and purchase. The seller is also the beneficiary. According to the “principle of identified beneficiary” under the laws of Taiwan as long as the beneficiary is identifiable, even though many transactions may be formed with many sellers after the buyer registers to use third-party payment service, a contract of trust can still be formed. However, in accordance with Article 2 of the Trust Act, unless the principal has reservations in the contract of trust, the termination of a trust for the benefit of others is subject to the consent of the beneficiary. So it is simpler to process under a trust for one’s own benefit. Diagram 2 Diagram of trust relationship under third-party payment (where the third-party payer is the trustee) Source: Prepared by author To form a contract of trust, in accordance with Articles 9 to 12 of the Trust Act, the fund entrusted by the service user to the third party to be forwarded becomes trust property and can be effectively segregated from bankruptcy. If the trustee is bankrupt, the trust property will not be included in the bankruptcy property, and the creditors of the trustee cannot enforce upon the trust property, providing more protection for the user of third-party payment service. Also, in accordance with Article 24, the principal shall manage the trust property and the principal’s own property separately. A monetary trust can be managed by keeping separate accounts. So if a contract of trust is formed under a contract of third-party payment service, it can ensure proper accounting of trust property by the service provider. Also, in accordance with Paragraph 2, Article 9, property right acquired by the trustee through the management, disposal, loss, destruction or other event of the trust property remains part of the trust property. Therefore, proceeds received from the deposit by third-party payer with the bank of any fund before it is forwarded become part of trust property and belong to the buyer, i.e., the principal and beneficiary. Certain doubts as to whether the Trust Enterprise Act is applicable to third-party payment service provider. In accordance with Article 2 of the Trust Enterprise Act, “trust enterprise” referred to in this Act means an organization approved by the competent authority in accordance with this Act to operate trust activities. There are 4 targets regulated by the Trust Enterprise Act: Trust companies that operate trust activities with approval by the competent authority, banks they also operate trust activities, securities investment trusts, investment consulting businesses and securities dealers that also operate trust activities and trust investment companies. A third-party payer is not a trust enterprise approved by the Banking Bureau of the Financial Supervisory Commission. Therefore, the contract of trust formed under third-party payment service is a general trust under civil law and is subject to supervision by the court in accordance with Article 60 of the Trust Act. The court may select an inspector and impose other necessary disposition by order pursuant to the petition for inspection on trust activities filed by an interested party or a prosecutor. However, the court has a role of passive supervision and does not have the general authority of supervision and management by the Bureau of Banking. Third-party payment is a service provided to unidentified members of the society. Including third-party payers into the system of financial supervision for trust will provide better protection for interest of the general public. Also, in accordance with Article 34 of the Trust Act, trust enterprises have the obligation of provisioning compensation reserves. No such obligation is imposed under general civil-law trust. So if third-party payers are included as trust enterprises, better protection will be available to the consumers. Also in accordance with Article 19 of the Trust Enterprise Act, a trust contract must be done in writing. In case of an electronic document, requirements under Article 4 of the Electronic Signature Act must be met: “the content of the information can be presented in its integrity and remains accessible for subsequent reference, with the consent of the other party”. Under third-party payment service, the third-party payer must make payment in accordance with the user’s instructions. So the trust that is formed is “a trust where the trustee does not have discretion over utilization of trust property”, as referred to under Paragraph 2, Article 7 of the Enforcement Rules for Trust Enterprise Act. It is also “a monetary trust under specific centralized management and utilization” under Article 8 of the Enforcement Rules for Trust Enterprise Act. However, in accordance with Article 9 of the Trust Enterprise Act: “A trust enterprise's name shall indicate the word, ‘trust.’ This rule does not apply to an entity which conducts a trust business concurrently with the approval of the Competent Authority.” If the third party payer adds the word “trust” in the company name, it will create a difference from the scope of business of third-party payment service. So an approval from the competent authority, the Bureau of Banking of the Financial Supervisory Commission, allowing third party payers to also operate the trust activity, seems to be a better solution. 3-2-2Bank Acts as Trustee As mentioned above, in a payment collection/forwarding relationship, the underlying legal relationship between the third-party payer and buyer is a “mandate”. Under a separate relationship of mandate, the buyer can grant the third-party payer the right of agency to sign a contract of trust with the bank on behalf of the buyer. The bank will act as the trustee and the buyer will act as the principal and beneficiary. The third-party payer will be the agent of the principal. Same as above, the beneficiary can also be the seller here. Under the current structure of the Trust Act of Taiwan, almost all rights that can be exercised by a principal can also be exercised by a beneficiary, including the rights under Articles 23, 24, 32, 35 and 65. Therefore, it is more convenient for a bank, with the qualification of trust enterprise, to serve as the trustee. However, trust related fees may be payable to the bank, raising the cost of third-party payment service. The relevant cost will most likely be transferred to the user of third-party payment service. The third-party payment service fee is generally paid by the seller, i.e., the payee. Under the structure where the third-party payer acts as the trustee, the relationship between the third-party payer and the bank is solely one between a depositor and a depository account. Therefore the third-party service provider does not need to pay any fee to the bank. It may even receive interest from the deposit, constituting proceeds from trust property which belong to the principal. So if the bank acts as the trustee, the cost of transaction flow is higher. On the other hand, it may obstruct the development of the industry. However, it is more consistent with the model of trust management. Diagram 3 Diagram of trust relationship under third-party payment (bank being the trustee) Source: Prepared by author 4.Conclusion There is currently no legal restriction against simple payment collection and forwarding. The contract of mandate under the Civil Code can process the tri-party legal relationship (buyer, seller and payment collector/forwarder). The transaction guarantee for third-party payment and the mechanism of custody and delayed payment of price can be processed with the structure of trust. As mentioned above, under the structure of a trust, the third-party payer can act as the trustee and the bank can act as the principal (at which time the third-party payer represents the principal and signs a contract of trust with the bank on behalf of the buyer). The formation of trust ensures account management, avoiding improper utilization of the transaction price under custody. When the third-party payer is the trustee, a general civil-code trust is formed, which is only subject to inspection by court pursuant to petition by interested party or the judge. The supervision and management are more relaxed. However, third-party payment serves an unidentified public of society and has an extensive impact. It is suggested that the competent authority, the Financial Supervisory Commission, allows third-party payers to also operate the business of trust and include third-party payers into the scope of financial supervision. When the bank acts as the trustee, the transaction cost is higher. However, the supervision and management of its business activities under the current legal system is more complete. Currently, a more feasible way is when the bank serves as the trustee and the third-party payer serves as the agent of the principal. In the long term, it can be studied to open up for third-party payers to also operate Internet transaction trust business, acting as the trustee. Third-party payment replaces bank’s fund settlement function to a certain extent. Contrary to the traditional industry of payment collection and forwarding, third-party payment provides the convenience of fund collection/payment function and can fall prey to money laundering criminal activities. For the purpose of protecting the consumers and prevention of money laundering crimes, it is indeed necessary to include third-party payment into legislative management. The priority focus of such control is to require that the operator possesses a sound corporate structure and financial status. The requirement regarding capital is different depending on the country. The flexible requirement of capital amount in the EU can be used as a reference. For smaller operators with lower transaction volumes, a lower capital amount should be required under flexibility. In 2011, the Internet shopping market in China was 773.5 billion CNY. The amount of Internet payment was approximately 70 billion CNY. In 2011, the Internet shopping market in Taiwan was only 562.7 billion NT Dollars. If the minimum capital amount required of third-party payment operators in China is applied to third-party payment operators in Taiwan, it would not be reasonable. We can refer to the US method and ask operators to take out insurance to lower the risk and avoid market monopoly or oligopoly due to high capital amount barrier, blocking full competition. With the capital amount requirement, it is highly possible that the operators will increase the amount of transaction processed in accordance with the development of E-commerce, creating the necessity to increase the capital. It is best to choose the form of limited stock companies in order to answer to capital placement requirement swiftly. Regarding the issue of money laundering prevention, third-party payment institutions are currently not the “financial institutions” under Article 5 of the Money Laundering Prevention Act of Taiwan. However, it should be a “payment tool” under Article 9, with only an obligation to freeze the payment account and cooperate with investigation as required by prosecutors. At the same time of developing third-party payment services, the Bureau of Investigation of the Ministry of Justice should also develop a money laundering prevention reporting system for third-party payment services. In reference to the US legal system, third-party payers should be included into the network of money laundering crime prevention of Taiwan for management. In addition, third-party payment services should be performed on real-name basis. The general public should be required to register and use third-party payment services with their true identities. As for verification of identity, the so-called KYC process, the banks’ KYC can be relied upon to a certain degree, such as comparison of account name information of the credit card holder or the deposit account. In reference to the legal system of different countries and the current financial legal system of Taiwan, third-party payment operators should have the obligation to maintain payment transaction information in order to facilitate criminal investigation. To protect consumers, the rights and obligations between the consumers and the third-party payers should be specified in a written contract. If it is displayed in electronic form, the written requirement should be consistent with Article 4 of the Electronic Signature Act of Taiwan. In addition, the consumers’ funds should only be used in accordance with the consumers’ payment instructions. To avoid other uses by the operators, there should be a requirement to deposit into special bank accounts to provide clear trace of transaction history. In reference to Article 24 of the Trust Act, separate account management is required under trust. So if a trust is formed, then the requirement for special deposit account can be waived. Furthermore, to avoid insolvency by the operators, operators can be required to take out insurance and acquire full performance guarantee. Prevention is better than a cure. We should take precautions about possible issues that may arise from third-party payment. In addition, clear rules of the game will encourage industry development. On the other hand, with the new type of money flow payment activities in the Internet era, traditional financial industries should see it as a new opportunity of business development, and not a threat. What third-party payment system processes is information flow; the actual flow of funds is still dependent on the banking system. Internet payment operators are still dependent upon the finance industry to provide financial planning and new types of financial products (such as trust and insurance) in order to promote their business. Building a sound Internet payment system indeed requires contributions from the information industry, the finance industry and the legal industry.

Open Government Data in Taiwan

In the recent years, the tide of open movement has pushed vigorously from the open source software, open hardware and the recent open data. More and more countries have joined the global initiative of open government data in order to achieve the ultimate goal to promote the democratic governance. National government adopts open data policy to enhance the transparency, participation and collaboration of the citizen into the government operation. Meanwhile, fueled by the knowledge economy and the statistical analysis of the big data technology, open government data could work as the catalyst to individuals, industries and government agencies to transform data into potential knowledge-based services. Up to the end of 2013, there are around 77 countries have adopted the Open Government Data policy. Taiwanese government also declared to take part in the open data revolution. The government had officially launched the open data policy in 2012. In Resolution No. 3322, the Executive Yuan prescribes that open government data could enhance the transparency of the government; improve the quality of life of people; and meet the needs of the industry. Governmental agencies under the authority of the Executive Yuan shall to recognize the importance of the empowerment brought from open government data to the quality of the decision-making process and asked the agencies to implemented the policy from the perspectives of the user’s needs and applications, and also the consider to include machine readable format for the data. The Executive Yuan directed the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission (RDEC)（行政院研究發展考核委員會） to develop related principles and measures to support government agencies of the Executive Yuan to plan, execute and open up their data. At the same time, it also directed the Industrial Development Bureau（IDB）, Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) （經濟部工業局）to develop responsive strategies to cope with the industrial development. Pursuant to the Resolution No. 3322 of the Executive Yuan, RDEC worked through the open government data related laws and regulations, proclaimed the “Open Government Data Operating Principle for Agencies of the Executive Yuan”（行政院及所屬各級機關政府資料開放作業原則）and the “Essential Requirements for Administrate Open Government Data Datasets” （政府資料開放資料集管理要項）in the early 2013. All government agencies of the Executive Yuan have to adopted the following 3 open government data steps："open up government data for public use”, “provide data free of charge subject to certain exemptions”, "automated systematic release and exchange data”, and work in with 4 open government focus strategies: “release data actively and by the priority in the field of daily necessity”, “develop the norm of open government data”, “promote the use of Data.gov.tw”, and “demonstrate and advocate open government data services”. Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) （經濟部工業局）also provided grants ($9,200 NTD) to the open government data value-added applications and development. The open government data platform (data.gov.tw) was launched in July, 2013, as the official Taiwan government site providing public access and reuse of government data sets from 62 government agencies of the Executive Yuan, including the Ministry of Interior (MOI)（內政部）, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA)（外交部）, Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA)（經濟部）, Council for Economic Planning and Development (CEPD)（行政院經濟建設發展委員會）, Hakka Affairs Council (HAC)（客家委員會）, Water Resources Agency, Ministry of Economic Affairs (WRA) （經濟部水利署）, and 4 local governments. At the end of 2013, each government agency is required to release at least 55 data sets. In addition, the rising tide of private-sector (individual or enterprise) also aims to mine the gold in open government data. Act upon the National Information and Communication Initiative (NICI)（行政院國家資訊通信發展推動小組）in the consultation of the open government data policy, Taipei Computer Association (TCA)（台北市電腦同業工會）organized the “Open Data Alliance” (ODA)（Open Data聯盟）as a bridge between the information provide-side (public sectors) and the demand-side (private sectors), to communicate and coordinate the expectations and needs from communities (bottom-up) towards open government data. On Dec. 11, 2013, Taiwan took one more step in the global open data initiative. Open Data Alliance (ODA) and the Open Data Institute (ODI) in UK signed the memorandum of understanding (MOU) and announced the alliance established to promote and explore the potential opportunities of open data holds for the public, private and academic sectors. The engagement of ODA and ODI could bring another catalyst for the open movement in Taiwan to take one big step in the international community. According to a survey from ODA, the biggest challenge so far is the available data sets do not really meet the needs of the industry. And most of the feedback reflects the concerns in licensing, charge, frequency of updates, data formats and data quality. These voices echo the open government data issues encountered in many countries. There are still some obstacles with the applicable laws and regulations (for example, Charges and Fees Act, Personal Data Protection Act, Accoutability & Liability etc.) wait to be solved before both public and private sectors to go onto the next level of open data development.

 Introduction to the compulsory licensing mechanism of US music copyrights

With digital music industry rising and flourishing these years, in 1995 the US Congress amended the compulsory licensing regulations in the US Copyright Act to include digital music service in the scope of compulsory licensing. By doing so,it tries to save the industry from deprivation in copyright negotiations and to prevent detrimental effects on music circulation. By introducing the compulsory licensing regulations for music copyrights in the US Copyright Act, this paper wishes to provide a reference for the Taiwanese government to amend Taiwan’s copyright act to promote the development of the digital music industry. I. Exclusive rights in digital music copyright According to the US Copyright, the copyright owner has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following1: To reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; To prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work; To distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; In the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly; In the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and In case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of digital music transfer. If it is to be enforced by law that musical works can only be provided after the approval and authorization of the copyright owner, this will be unfavorable for the circulation of musical works. In terms of users, this may mean additional difficulties in providing musical works. Therefore, in addition to negotiating with the copyright owner of the licensing affairs, the US Copyright Act prescribes the compulsory licensing system. As long as the form of use does not violate any terms specified in the Copyright Act, service providers may obtain a license by means of compulsory licensing in order to lawfully “distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.2” 1. Scope of compulsory license According to Section 115 of the US Copyright Act, limitation on compulsory licensing comprises two sections3: (1) The scope of compulsory licensing is limited to the “exclusive rights provided by clauses (1) and (3) of section 106”; i.e. “to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.” (2) A compulsory license can only be applied for unless the copyrighted works are Non-dramatic musical works; phonorecords of a non-dramatic musical work which have been distributed to the public in the United States under the authority of the copyright owner; and phonorecords made by a person whose primary purpose is to distribute them to the public for private use. (1) The scope of compulsory licensing is limited to the “exclusive rights provided by clauses (1) and (3) of section 106”; i.e. “to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.” (2) A compulsory license can only be applied for unless the copyrighted works are Non-dramatic musical works; phonorecords of a non-dramatic musical work which have been distributed to the public in the United States under the authority of the copyright owner; and phonorecords made by a person whose primary purpose is to distribute them to the public for private use. (1) The scope of compulsory licensing is limited to the “exclusive rights provided by clauses (1) and (3) of section 106”; i.e. “to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.” (2) A compulsory license can only be applied for unless the copyrighted works are Non-dramatic musical works; phonorecords of a non-dramatic musical work which have been distributed to the public in the United States under the authority of the copyright owner; and phonorecords made by a person whose primary purpose is to distribute them to the public for private use. Later on, to facilitate the application of the emerging digital sound delivery technology and the development of the digital music industry, in 1995 the US Congress passed the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recording Act of 1995 (DPRA) by which Section 115 of the Copyright Act was amended and the Digital Phonorecord Deliveries (DPD) was added. Based on these, the DPD can enjoy compulsory licensing to deliver digital music service. 2. Entitlement of compulsory license Any person who wishes to obtain a compulsory license shall, before or within thirty days after making the recording, and before distributing any phonorecords of the work, serve notice of intention to do so on the copyright owner. The notice shall comply, in form, content, and manner of service, with the requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation. If the registration or other public records of the Copyright Office do not identify the copyright owner and include an address at which the notice can be served, it shall be sufficient to file the notice of intention in the Copyright Office4. After obtaining the compulsory license, service providers shall deliver to the copyright owner or its designated collecting agent the information relating to the royalty of the month and the successes or failures of downloading within twenty days from the end of every month5. If service owners are unable to identify how to deliver the royalty to the copyright owner, the collecting agent shall keep the royalties for the compulsorily licensed nondramatic musical works for three years in an independent trust account. The collecting agent shall assume no responsibility for the safekeeping of such royalties if the copyright owner is unreachable within three years6. 3. Royalty for compulsory license The criteria for calculating the royalty of compulsory license are established by the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel formed by the Librarian of Congress. This panel updates the calculation criteria on a biennial basis. The calculation can be done by minute or by work. Applicants must pay the highest royalty calculated with either of the schemes7. 4. Limitation of compulsory license A compulsory licensee shall only reproduce or distribute specific sound recordings and shall not use the work in the making of phonorecords duplicating a sound recording fixed by another; unless the making of the phonorecords was authorized by the owner of the copyright in the sound recording or such sound recording was fixed lawfully.8 II. Conclusions Though compulsory licensing terms have been specified in the Copyright Law of Taiwan, users only need to apply for a compulsory license for sound recordings published for a full six months and the sound recording is used in the making of other musical works for sale9. In this case, the digital music industry will be unable to obtain a compulsory license to deliver lawful services, and negotiation with the copyright owner has thus become a prerequisite for service providers to deliver lawful services. As a result, service providers often become the weaker side of the negotiation and must pay the copyright owner a very substantial royalty. Consequently, the cost of the services will increase. In the future, if the government can amend the copyright law to include the reproduction and delivery of digital music in the scope of compulsory license of sound recordings with reference to the compulsory license terms for sound recordings in the US Copyright Act, service providers can have other access to obtain a license for sound recordings to deliver lawful digital music service other than negotiations with the copyright owner. It is believed that this will promote the fair royalties of sound recording licensing in Taiwan and the development of digital music application service industry in Taiwan. 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 106 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 115 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 115(a)(1). 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 115(b)(1). 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 115(c)(5). 68 FR 57815 See the following for details of royalty criteria for compulsory license: U.S. Copyright Office, Mechanical License Rates-Copyright Royalty Rates Section 115, the Mechanical License, available at http://www.copyright.gov/carp/m200a.html (last visited 2007/8/17) 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 115(a)(1). Article 69, Copyright Law.

Most read
[　X Close　]
Copyright © 2016 STLI,III. All Rights Reserved.
TOP