Over the holidays I got an email from one of my relatives visiting Toronto. She asked me to recommend a dental surgeon for an unexpected tooth extraction. She also asked me to refer her to other dentists to get additional recommendations. I sent her an email with a recommendation to get treatment from a dental surgeon who I encouraged her to see and also provided the name of a family dentist who could make other recommendations. My email included a link to a website of the clinic operated by the dental surgeon. My wife sent a similar email when I told her my relative was looking for a dentist. Later that day I started wondering whether responding to this type of inquiry would be legal or illegal under Canada’s anti-spam law (CASL), once it is proclaimed into force.
Posts Tagged ‘spam’
Will it be illegal to recommend a dentist under Canada’s new anti-spam law (CASL)?
January 3rd, 2012Canada’s new anti-spam Law: too much of a good thing?
October 17th, 2011Here is a copy of the op-ed published by The Hill Times today on CASL.
Most people would agree that unwanted commercial emails – commonly called spam – are awful. Spam wastes our time. It clogs our inboxes and can be full of scams, malware and fraudulent, false and misleading messages. So who wouldn’t have cheered when Canada finally decided to outlaw spam and related afflictions?
With the September 7 conclusion of the public comment period on the new anti-spam law, known as CASL (for Canada’s anti-spam law), Canada has taken a major step toward finalizing legislation designed to outlaw practices such as sending commercial electronic messages without recipients’ consent or using misleading information in the online promotion of products. Reason to celebrate, one would think.
Electronic Commerce Protection Regulations – Much Work Remains
September 20th, 2011Canada’s new anti-SPAM/anti-malware law, or CASL, was passed by Parliament in late 2010. The draft Electronic Commerce Protection Regulations, which were intended to clarify and flesh out the law, were published for public consultation earlier this summer. Fifty-seven organizations and individuals filed comments by the September 7, 2011 deadline. The message from these commentators is clear: while all support the goal of reducing unwanted commercial electronic messages (CEMs) and malware, the draft regulations miss the mark, and much work remains before CASL can be proclaimed into law.
Draft FISA (Anti-SPAM) regulations published by CRTC and Industry Canada (updated)
July 18th, 2011The Canadian Anti-SPAM law (CASL or FISA) contemplated that regulations would need to be promulgated before the Act is proclaimed into force. CASL contemplated two sets of regulations: one from Industry Canada and the other from the CRTC. The CRTC published draft regulations for comment purposes on June 30, 2011. The Commission will accept comments from interested persons that it receives on or before September 7, 2011, a date extended by the CRTC from the original date of 29 August 2011.
The CRTC draft regulations are as follows:
Naming Canada’s Anti-Spam/Anti-Spyware Law
February 14th, 2011Last week in a blog post I asked for suggestions to help name Canada’s new anti-SPAM and anti-spyware law, Bill –C-28. The Bill has no short title and needs one.
You clearly had fun trying to come up with a name. Some of you suggested a few names. Some suggestions were serious (more or less). Others were hysterical, many reflecting your thoughts about the Bill, or about SPAM. Here are your proposals to name the Bill.
Name Canada’s Anti-Spam/Anti-Spyware Law
February 6th, 2011Canada has a new anti-SPAM and anti-spyware law, Bill –C-28. It is a law with an inordinately long name: “An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Competition Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act”.
The Bill has no short title. As a result different terms and acronyms are being used to refer to it including the ECPA, FISA, FIWSA, the SPAM Bill, the Anti-SPAM Legislation, and the Anti-SPAM and Anti-Spyware Bill.
Impacts of Bill C-28 (the new anti-SPAM and anti-spyware legislation)
January 26th, 2011The new anti-SPAM and anti-spyware legislation (Bill C-28) will have significant implications for entities carrying on business in Canada and for entities doing business with Canadians. Its scope is very broad. Its approach to tacking the challenges posed by SPAM, malware, spyware, false and misleading representations associated with electronic messages, and harvesting of electronic address and personal information, is comprehensive.
The legislation creates significant vicarious and accessorial liability for companies and for their officers and directors with the potential for administrative penalties of up to $10 million and damages awards which can reach $1 million per day or per breach.
Canada Passes Anti-Spam and Anti-Spyware Law
January 6th, 2011Organizations that conduct business online should start preparing for Canada’s new anti-spam and anti-spyware legislation, which was passed in mid-December and is expected to come into force later this year.1 As the Act is complex and the penalties for violating the new law can be severe, organizations should review and modify their online practices, where necessary, at an early opportunity.
Developments in Computer, Internet and E-Commerce Law (2009-2010)
May 26th, 2010Here are the slides used in my presentation to the Toronto Computer Lawyers Group earlier today, The Year in Review: Developments in Computer, Internet and E-Commerce Law (2009-2010). It covers significant developements since my talk last spring.
The slides include a summary of the following cases and statutory references:
Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia, 2010 SCC 4
Internet Broadcasting Corporation Ltd. v Mar LLC [2009] EWHC 844 (Ch)
Gammasonics Institute for Medical Research Pty Ltd v Comrad Medical Sysytems Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 267 (9 April 2010)
Kingsway Hall Hotel Ltd. v Red Sky IT (Hounslow) Ltd. [2010] EWHC 965
Government introduces bills to fight SPAM and spyware and to amend PIPEDA
May 25th, 2010Earlier today the Government introduced two important Bills – Bills C-28 and C-29.
Bill C-28, Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act, is the re-introduction of the Electronic Commerce Protection Act (ECPA). It is essentially the Bill as passed by the House of Commons just before the olympics with a few changes. Most of the changes are to harmonize the language to drafting conventions or to clarify the legislative intent.
The Bill is a major improvement over the initial version of the ECPA which was significantly improved during the Industry Committee review.
The Bill would do the following:
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio 