Canada’s anti-spam legislation took effect at the beginning of the month, sparking a steady stream of critical opinion pieces calling it an absurd solution to a mostly non-problem or “ludicrous regulatory overkill.” The criticisms generally boil down to three claims: spam isn’t a big problem, the law is ineffective because most spam originates outside Canada, and the law is overbroad because it targets legitimate businesses alongside fraudulent spam. I think all three criticisms are wrong. This post addresses why spam is still a problem and how the law will help. A second post tomorrow tackles the broad scope of the law, arguing that it is better understood as privacy legislation that fairly apportions the costs associated with electronic marketing.
Archive for July 9th, 2014

Law Bytes
Episode 276: Information Commissioner Caroline Maynard on Canada’s Access to Information Failures and Why Access Delayed is Access Denied
byMichael Geist

June 22, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
A Surveillance Treaty in Disguise: The Trouble With Canada’s Quiet Decision to Sign the UN Cybercrime Convention
Rushing Lawful Access Backfires: Wyden Letter on Bill C-22 Highlights Political, Trade and Business Risks
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 276: Information Commissioner Caroline Maynard on Canada’s Access to Information Failures and Why Access Delayed is Access Denied
Why the Government’s Plan for a Social Media Ban in Bill C-34 Is Unconstitutional
Outdated Data and Dubious Comparisons: Digging into the Government’s AI Strategy Adoption Claims

