My earlier posts on Canada’s anti-spam law focused on claims about restrictions involving family and personal relationships as well as the exaggerated concerns about the impact on small and medium sized businesses. This post tackles one of the strangest criticisms of the Canadian anti-spam law to date: the claim that it discriminates against charities, schools, and other not-for-profit organizations. In fact, the opposite is true since the law features additional protections for these groups that are not otherwise available to conventional commercial businesses.
Post Tagged with: "spam"
Does Canada’s Anti-Spam Law Really Stop Small Business From Using Email Marketing? No.
The criticism against Canada’s anti-spam legislation extends beyond absurd claims about restrictions involving family and personal relationships. Indeed, much of the discussion has focused on the impact of the law on small and medium sized businesses. Barry Sookman catalogs a wide range of supposed concerns, most of which appear to envision a world in which the only way for a new business to develop a customer base is to obtain marketing lists and send unsolicited commercial emails to potential customers.
It is true that the starting point of the law is that businesses must have consent before sending commercial emails. Canada is moving to an opt-in world that gives consumers greater control over their in-boxes and will ultimately provide businesses with higher quality lists of people who genuinely want to receive their messages. Notwithstanding the default requirement for opt-in consent, however, the law contains numerous exceptions that are available to businesses of all sizes and which allow small and medium sized businesses to engage in active (and likely more effective) email campaigns. The exceptions include:
Does Canada’s Anti-Spam Law Really Make It Illegal To Promote a Child’s Lemonade Stand? No.
Yesterday’s post on the fears associated with Canada’s anti-spam legislation focused on emails between extended family members. This post will examine personal relationships and the absurd claims that the current rules will stop everything from emailing a teacher to promoting a lemonade stand. Barry Sookman writes that the following would all likely be illegal under CASL:
Complying With Canada’s Anti-Spam Law: Just Ask For Consent
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 […]
Government Caves to Lobbying Pressure on Anti-Spam Legislation
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.
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 201: Robert Diab on the Billion Dollar Lawsuits Launched By Ontario School Boards Against Social Media Giants 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 200: Colin Bennett on the EU’s Surprising Adequacy Finding on Canadian Privacy Law 
Debating the Online Harms Act: Insights from Two Recent Panels on Bill C-63 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act 
AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions
