Tag: address harvesting

Impacts of Bill C-28 (the new anti-SPAM and anti-spyware legislation)Impacts of Bill C-28 (the new anti-SPAM and anti-spyware legislation)



The 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.

Government introduces bills to fight SPAM and spyware and to amend PIPEDAGovernment introduces bills to fight SPAM and spyware and to amend PIPEDA



Earlier 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.

Industry Committee Amends Anti-Spam Bill (ECPA)Industry Committee Amends Anti-Spam Bill (ECPA)



By Barry Sookman and James Gannon

In May of this year, we sent an e-Alert that reviewed the concerns many Canadian businesses had expressed with the first draft of Bill C-27 – the Electronic Commerce Protection Act (ECPA). The Bill was criticized for containing overly broad anti-spam and anti-spyware provisions that would have rendered illegal many common legitimate commercial practices. It would have potentially exposed businesses to millions of dollars in fines and liabilities for activities that were unrelated to sending spam emails or installing spyware programs.