The ACTA Internet Chapter: Putting Pieces Together
ACTA Guide, Part 1: The Talks To-Date
ACTA Guide, Part 2: The Documents (Official and Leaked)
ACTA Guide, Part 3: Transparency and ACTA Secrecy
Canada Introduces Electronic Commerce Protection Act (aka Anti-Spam Bill) |
| Print | |
|
Friday April 24, 2009
|
|||||||||||
|
Four years after the National Task Force on Spam unanimously recommended that the Canadian government introduce anti-spam legislation, the Government today took an important step forward by tabling Bill C-27, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act Based on today's release, the ECPA addresses many of the shortcomings of the current Canadian legal framework, including the need for stiff penalties (the bill includes possible penalties of up to $10 million), broad definitions of unsolicited commercial electronic messages (including text-message spam), targeted provisions against phishing and spyware, a private right of action to open the door to lawsuits againts spammers, as well as greater government cooperation, a "national coordinating body", and a Spam Reporting Centre. Many of these provisions are consistent with the recommendations of the Task Force and remain as relevant and valid today as they were four years ago. While the ECPA should receive all-party support (no one can possibly be supportive of spam), Canadians should be aware of its limitations. No legislation will eliminate spam from your in-box. Rather, the bill is designed to reduce spam that originates in Canada. In order to accomplish that goal, the law must be aggressively enforced, yet much of the enforcement responsibility lies with the CRTC, which has not inspired confidence based on its enforcement to-date of the do-not-call list. Moreover, it is worth comparing the differing approaches to unwanted email marketing vs. unwanted telemarketing. The ECPA adopts a consent based model - with few exceptions (charities, political parties, MP candidates with a prior commercial relationship), commercial email marketing without consent is treated as spam and subject to potential liability. Contrast that with the do-not-call list, where despite the clear indication that consumers do not want telemarketing calls (by registering their numbers on the do-not-call list), the law contains far more exceptions that allow the calls to continue (I note the inconsistency not to argue for exceptions under the ECPA, but rather to promote a similar approach for do-not-call). Clement and the Government have taken a positive step forward with anti-spam legislation and should consider whether this opens the door to addressing the obvious shortcomings that remain under do-not-call legislation. I'll have more to say on the ECPA in the days ahead. Comments (6)
marlboro coupons
said:
|
|||||||||||
|
http://www.marlborocouponssavi...e_coupons/ Really wonderful piece of information and I appreciate it that you share something so useful with the readers of this blog.thanks |
|
It's important that the CRTC work right The CRTC has a very important job to do. We badly need a CRTC that works. If the one we have is not working, how about some constructive suggestions as to what exactly it must do to improve? How do we fix this thing? |
|
Fixing the CRTC "How do we fix this thing?" Some things are too old and/or damaged and/or costly to repair, making the trash the only option. |
|
... Michael - Have you considered whether your web site would violate section 8 by installing software (javascript programming) on a visitor's computer (as it now does) and causing the visitor's browser to send electronic messages (cookies) back to your server (as it now does)? All of this would happen before any visitor would read any terms of service you might prescribe, unless every visitor were first diverted to a javascript and cookie free consent page and asked to click their consent before going on to any other page in your site. |
|
WRONG any exception that mention network management in a spam bill is just a slip in to try and end network neutrality, and give Bell Canada WHOM is being sued over DPI use a legal back frame to continue to SCREW Canadian internet |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
