|
Thursday January 24, 2013 |
While there is no shortage of fear mongering about Canada's anti-spam
legislation,
Ottawa-based law firm LaBarge Weinstein recently demonstrated what most
organizations need to do in order to comply with the law as Canada
transitions to an opt-in consent requirement for commercial messaging.
The key requirement for those companies that have long relied on
electronic marketing is pretty simple: just ask for consent.
The firm recently sent messages to its current mailing list to obtain
opt-in consent for continuing to send commercial electronic messages.
The firm notes:
In anticipation of Canada's new anti-spam laws, we would like to
ensure that we have your consent to receive our publications,
announcements, event invitations, and other communications we send from
time to time for the purpose of: (i) sharing information with you; and
(ii) establishing, developing and/or managing our relationship with you.
Accordingly, if you wish to continue to receive communications
from us, please provide the information requested below and click on the
"Give Consent Here" button. If we do not receive your consent once the
new anti-spam laws have come into effect, we may be unable to continue
sending you updates. If you have any questions, or if you wish to
withdraw your consent at any time, please feel free to contact us
For thousands of Canadian organizations with mailing lists and active
marketing activities, once they ask for and obtain consent, there is no
need to focus on exceptions or loopholes in the law. Simply ask your
customers for consent - the slow pace of implementation means that all
organizations have years to do it - and you've met the major requirement
to continue electronic marketing to them in compliance with
Canada's new law. casl, compliance, privacy, spam Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareThursday January 24, 2013 |
|
|
Tuesday January 15, 2013 |
Canada's anti-spam legislation was back in the news last week as the
government unveiled revised regulations that may allow for the law to
finally take effect next year. Canada is one of the only developed
economies in the world without an anti-spam law and lengthy delays have
created considerable uncertainty.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that calls for Canadian anti-spam legislation date back to 2005, when a
national task force recommended enacting laws to target spam, spyware,
and other online harms (I was a member of the task force). The
government passed the anti-spam law in December 2010, with many
expecting a quick introduction of the accompanying regulations that
would allow the law to take effect. After business groups criticized
draft regulations released in June 2011, however, the government hit the
pause button, leaving the law in limbo.
paradis, privacy, spam Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday January 15, 2013 |
|
View
|
|
|
Tuesday January 15, 2013 |
Appeared in the Toronto Star on January 13, 2013 as Government Caves to Lobbying Pressure on Anti-Spam Law
Canada's anti-spam legislation was back in the news last week as the
government unveiled revised regulations that may allow for the law to
finally take effect next year. Canada is one of the only developed
economies in the world without an anti-spam law and lengthy delays have
created considerable uncertainty.
Calls for Canadian anti-spam legislation date back to 2005, when a
national task force recommended enacting laws to target spam, spyware,
and other online harms (I was a member of the task force). The
government passed the anti-spam law in December 2010, with many
expecting a quick introduction of the accompanying regulations that
would allow the law to take effect. After business groups criticized
draft regulations released in June 2011, however, the government hit the
pause button, leaving the law in limbo.
Critics used the delay to spread fear about "job losses" and "regulatory
red tape", yet the reality is that the battle over the anti-spam battle
boils down largely to a single issue: whether businesses should be
required to obtain explicit, opt-in consumer consent before sending
electronic commercial messages. The law says they should and much of the
intense lobbying for new exceptions is premised on avoiding this
requirement.
The new law unquestionably sets a high bar for consent. It envisions a
marketing framework where consumers reassert some measure of control
over their email in-boxes by opting-in to commercial messages, rather
than being required to opt-out. Moreover, the law establishes email
form requirements to simplify opting-out of future messages should
consumers change their minds and backs the new framework with stiff
penalties for violations the law.
While an opt-in consent system should be relatively uncontroversial -
businesses benefit by sending messages to consumers who clearly want to
receive them - the vociferous criticism makes it plain that many
marketing organizations fear that if Canadians are asked directly for
their email marketing consent, many will decline.
Given those fears, Industry Minister Christian Paradis faced
considerable lobbying pressure to water down the law through the
regulatory process. Earlier this month, he caved to some demands by
introducing a host of new exceptions that limit the effectiveness of the
opt-in model.
For example, the regulations include a broad new exception for third
party referrals that will allow businesses to send commercial electronic
messages without consent based merely on a referral from a third party.
This issue was hotly debated when the law was being drafted and, at the
time, the government rejected claims that such an exception was
warranted.
The new regulations also include an expansive definition for a "personal
relationships" exception that is likely to be used by organizations to
send unsolicited commercial messages based on limited contact. The
flexible definition of personal relationship may open the door to claims
that Facebook "likes" or similar social media contact is sufficient to
constitute a personal relationship.
Industry groups had asked the government to pre-approve existing
consents obtained under PIPEDA, the private sector privacy law, arguing
that obtaining new consumer consents will be disruptive. The government
rightly rejected those requests, however, since the PIPEDA consents
will often have been implied from consumer activity and not based on an
actual, informed consent.
Those businesses concerned by the new consent standards may find comfort
in the assurance that some requirements are unlikely to take effect
until 2017. The law features a lengthy transition period that will
allow businesses to rely on their existing consents for three years
after the legislation takes effect. Assuming the regulations are
finalized in 2013 and the law becomes operational in 2014, businesses
will have been given seven years to ask Canadian consumers if they
consent to the use of their personal information for marketing purposes.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and
E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can
reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
pipeda, privacy, spam Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday January 15, 2013 |
|
|
Tuesday November 06, 2012 |
The fall of 2007 was a particularly bleak period for Canadians
concerned with digital policies. The government had just issued a
policy direction to the CRTC to adopt a hands-off regulatory
approach even as consumer prices for Internet and wireless services
were increasing. Meanwhile, the Department of Public Safety held a
semi-secret consultation on Internet surveillance where mandatory
disclosure of subscriber information was assumed.
Moreover, the CRTC had largely rejected mounting concerns with the
way Internet providers managed their networks (often called network
neutrality), there were doubts about new wireless competitors
entering the marketplace, Industry Canada had seemingly no interest
in developing anti-spam laws or updating privacy legislation, the
government agreed to participate in negotiations on the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, and a copyright bill with
virtually no user-oriented provision was being prepared for
introduction.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto
Star version, homepage
version) notes that fast forward five years later and the CRTC
has now positioned itself as a staunch defender of the public
interest with consumer concerns at the centre of its policy making
process, a lawful access bill was introduced in the spring but is
viewed as politically dead, the CRTC has crafted and enforced new
net neutrality rules, anti-spam legislation has been enacted, there
are several new wireless providers and the removal of most foreign
investment restrictions, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is
discredited after being rejected by the European Parliament, and
copyright reform is set to take effect this week with a host of user
safeguards and rights.
acta, copyright, crtc, public interest, spam Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday November 06, 2012 |
|
View
|
|
|
