4 ms·

Canada obsoletes CAN-SPAM and replaces with an Opt-In system

33 points by mike-cardwell 16y ago

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
jws 16y ago
Summary: Canada passed an email law[1] with teeth. It applies to anyone sending email to a Canadian and takes effect in September. (Still too long? Let's just call the Canadian law CAN'T SPAM.) There are three tests, any of which will allow unsolicited commercial email. • Existing relationship between sender and recipient. (purchase, contract, donor, volunteer, member) • The recipient prominently publishes their email address and the mail is related to the recipient's professional capacity. • Recipient signed up for it. The law and its enforcement will begin to be explained in January. [1] http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&Mode=1&Pub=Bill&Doc=C-28_3&File=47 http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?La... the meat is in section 6, but notice it is written in an "exception" model. It seems a little insane until you get to the end of the section and catch the exceptions.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  Exception 2 seems retarded - most people have their email on their webpage, but who the fuck wants to be contacted by a recruiter?
  - dmix 16y ago
    I wouldn't be depending on a government policy to protect my own privacy online. Just like posting to Facebook, anything you post online is up for grabs whether it's malicious or not.
    - tomjen3 16y ago
      Oh sure, but given that they would have to show who they are, it's a nice little after the fact thing.
- Naga 16y ago
  What happens if someone else signs someone up for commercial email? Who gets in trouble? Based on this, it seems like the company would.
  - acangiano 16y ago
    Somebody else can't, short of hacking into their account. In Canada, you are forced to do double opt-in newsletter sign ups.
jamie_ca 16y ago
Maybe I just skimmed wrong, but I didn't see anything in the whole bill about what they'll do if they find you breaking those rules...
- simonk 16y ago
  Administrative monetary penalties can be as high as $1 million per violation for individuals, and $10 million per violation for organizations. FISA also includes provisions for a private right of action that allows any person to seek damages in court resulting from a violation of the law. Out of this guide http://www.thindata.com/aboutus/resourcecenter/fisa/pdf/The_Marketers_Guide_to_Applying_FISA.pdf http://www.thindata.com/aboutus/resourcecenter/fisa/pdf/The_...
  - jamie_ca 16y ago
    Ah, thanks.
ataggart 16y ago
So, what's the over-under for the percentage change in the quantity of spam Canadians see due to this act of politicians? I'd wager about 0%.
- mike-cardwell 16y ago
  It wont have an immediate affect. What it will do is enable people to sue spammers that they couldn't previously sue. This may have a good long term affect. Not just for Canada but for the World in general.
the_unknown 16y ago
In similar news today: Telemarketer hit with $500,000 CRTC fine. Good to see that they are pursuing these major cases and forcing fixes. Still, I didn't sign up for the Do Not Call specifically because I believed it would increase my junk mail calls - never can trust the bad guys. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2010/12/17/crtc-xentel-do-not-call-penalty.html http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2010/12/17/crtc-xentel-do-not-...

33 points by mike-cardwell 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

jws 16y ago

Summary: Canada passed an email law[1] with teeth. It applies to anyone sending email to a Canadian and takes effect in September. (Still too long? Let's just call the Canadian law CAN'T SPAM.) There are three tests, any of which will allow unsolicited commercial email. • Existing relationship between sender and recipient. (purchase, contract, donor, volunteer, member) • The recipient prominently publishes their email address and the mail is related to the recipient's professional capacity. • Recipient signed up for it. The law and its enforcement will begin to be explained in January. [1] http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&Mode=1&Pub=Bill&Doc=C-28_3&File=47 http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?La... the meat is in section 6, but notice it is written in an "exception" model. It seems a little insane until you get to the end of the section and catch the exceptions.

tomjen3 16y ago
Exception 2 seems retarded - most people have their email on their webpage, but who the fuck wants to be contacted by a recruiter?
- dmix 16y ago
  I wouldn't be depending on a government policy to protect my own privacy online. Just like posting to Facebook, anything you post online is up for grabs whether it's malicious or not.
  - tomjen3 16y ago
    Oh sure, but given that they would have to show who they are, it's a nice little after the fact thing.
Naga 16y ago
What happens if someone else signs someone up for commercial email? Who gets in trouble? Based on this, it seems like the company would.
- acangiano 16y ago
  Somebody else can't, short of hacking into their account. In Canada, you are forced to do double opt-in newsletter sign ups.

jamie_ca 16y ago

Maybe I just skimmed wrong, but I didn't see anything in the whole bill about what they'll do if they find you breaking those rules...

simonk 16y ago
Administrative monetary penalties can be as high as $1 million per violation for individuals, and $10 million per violation for organizations. FISA also includes provisions for a private right of action that allows any person to seek damages in court resulting from a violation of the law. Out of this guide http://www.thindata.com/aboutus/resourcecenter/fisa/pdf/The_Marketers_Guide_to_Applying_FISA.pdf http://www.thindata.com/aboutus/resourcecenter/fisa/pdf/The_...
- jamie_ca 16y ago
  Ah, thanks.

ataggart 16y ago

So, what's the over-under for the percentage change in the quantity of spam Canadians see due to this act of politicians? I'd wager about 0%.

mike-cardwell 16y ago
It wont have an immediate affect. What it will do is enable people to sue spammers that they couldn't previously sue. This may have a good long term affect. Not just for Canada but for the World in general.

the_unknown 16y ago

In similar news today: Telemarketer hit with $500,000 CRTC fine. Good to see that they are pursuing these major cases and forcing fixes. Still, I didn't sign up for the Do Not Call specifically because I believed it would increase my junk mail calls - never can trust the bad guys. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2010/12/17/crtc-xentel-do-not-call-penalty.html http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2010/12/17/crtc-xentel-do-not-...