If it was not clear enough before that there are many problems with CASL, it became evident when Industry Canada released the final regulations and the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (the RIAS). CASL takes an extremely broad “ban all” approach to regulating commercial messages and the installation of computer programs. This structure makes the exceptions particularly important because every CEM sent without consent (and following the prescribed rules) and every computer program installed on any computer (machine or device) without consent (and making the required disclosures) as part of a commercial activity will be illegal. The regulations purport to address some of the major necessarily inadvertent consequences with CASL’s breadth and structure. See, CASL Industry Canada regulations: summary and comments. However, they fall short in many very important respects.
- Subscribe
-
- Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2019-10-05 https://t.co/PVpqtWpYWz 2019-10-06
- Japan's Four Top Publishers Share New Stand Against Manga Piracy https://t.co/aZkStaB0eq 2019-10-07
- No Laughing Matter: Court Dismisses Copyright Claims Against Jerry Seinfeld's Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee Show… https://t.co/m4xHfaH7wE 2019-10-07
- Prince Harry to sue 2 UK tabloids over alleged phone hacking – ABC News https://t.co/zhxGbiphTh 2019-10-07
- MPA’s Logo Goes Global—Reflecting the Association’s Global Reach https://t.co/jIHsOtKMKT 2019-10-07
- U.S. And UK Sign Landmark Cross-Border Data Access Agreement to Combat Criminals and Terrorists Online https://t.co/KDaxEAnQAt 2019-10-07
- Copyright and trademark infringement found Popsockets LLC v. Case World Enterprises Ltd., 2019 FC 1154 https://t.co/UMfh1CJYZP 2019-10-08
- Highlighted Posts
- Browsewraps, fair dealing and Blacklock’s Reporter v Canada: a critical commentary
- CASL: the unofficial FAQ, regulatory impact statement, and compliance guideline
- Change and the Copyright Modernization Act
- Contracting for a cloud computing deal?
- Democracy under threat: Parliament must act
- Developments in computer, Internet and e-commerce law: the year in review (2018-2019)
- Fact checking Michael Geist’s criticisms of the FairPlay site blocking proposal
- Google v Equustek: worldwide de-indexing order against Google upheld by Supreme Court
- Hyperlinking and ISP liability clarified by Supreme Court in Crookes case
- Intellectual property education: are Canadian law schools doing enough to support innovation?
- Is Google a publisher according to Google? The Google v Equustek and Duffy cases
- Law and Innovation: Is Intellectual Property a Path to Progress
- Michael Geist: A question of values
- Michael Geist’s attack on artists over Tariff 8
- Michael Geist’s defense of Canada’s indefensible anti-spam law CASL
- Most popular intellectual property and technology law blogs
- OPC position on online reputation: search engines must de-index privacy violating personal information
- PIPEDA’s global extra-territorial jurisdiction: A.T. v. Globe24h.com
- TPP, copyright, e-commerce and digital policy: a reply to Michael Geist
- US court thumbs its nose at Supreme Court of Canada: Google v Equustek
- Why the CRTC should endorse FairPlay’s website-blocking plan: a reply to Michael Geist
- TwitterMy Tweets
- Interesting Links
- 1709 Copyright Blog
- Canadian Privacy Law Blog
- CanLii
- Copyhype
- Copyright Alliance
- Copyright Board
- Copyright See-Saw (Dr. Ficsor)
- eLegal Canton
- Entertainment & Media Law Signal
- Fight Spam (Government of Canada)
- FOSS Patents
- FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT
- Inforrm’s Blog
- Intellectual Property Blog
- Intellectual Property Watch
- Internet cases
- IP Osgoode
- IP Whiteboard
- IPBlog.ca
- IPKat
- Kluwer Copyright Blog
- Music • Technology • Policy
- Patently-O
- Plagiarism Totday
- Rebecca Tushnet’s 43(B)log
- Spicy IP
- Technology & Marketing Law Blog
- The Trichordist
- ABOUT
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio here. - Archives
