Canada's Upcoming Anti-Spam Laws - IMPORTANT

[azgold]

Tonight, as per usual, I was looking for one thing and found another. This one is important for all of us Canucks and for anyone else who has Canadians on their email lists.

This is an explanation in layman's terms about Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL), which is due to take effect on July 1st.

All About CASL (Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation) in Plain English | Elite Email Blog

I think it goes to the point of ridiculous but the government didn't ask my opinion before having their geniuses draft the legislation.

Just in case you don't read it but do have Canadians on your list(s)

• Start documenting clear consent NOW. Be prepared to prove consent with time and date stamp, if necessary, as well as how your relationship with the list subscriber began.
• Remove ticks from any signup forms. That's considered trickery, let the consumer check the box.
• Remove all marketing language from any electronic purchase receipts. That's right - no post sale upsells or offers.
• Never, ever, ever send any kind of email after someone opts out. No, "Are you sure?" emails.

There's more, too.

All the ludicrous rules are meant to reduce spam and they apply to everyone, regardless of what country you're from.

If an email is sent to or comes from a computer that is located in Canada, you can be fined up to $1,000,000 and/or imprisoned for non-compliance.

And anyone can report you. Hence, start keeping records now, in case you have to prove somebody really did give you consent but just forgot they did.

Be sure to read the section entitled, What Should You Be Doing to Prepare for CASL? I don't think you'll be impressed. Not in a good way, at least.

The article on that site also compares CASL with CAN-SPAM, so you can see the differences.

Boy, I thought things were fairly relaxed here. That certainly is about to change.

 

[bofu2u]

Just in case you don't read it but do have Canadians on your list(s)

• Start documenting clear consent NOW. Be prepared to prove consent with time and date stamp, if necessary, as well as how your relationship with the list subscriber began.
• Remove ticks from any signup forms. That's considered trickery, let the consumer check the box.
• Remove all marketing language from any electronic purchase receipts. That's right - no post sale upsells or offers.
• Never, ever, ever send any kind of email after someone opts out. No, "Are you sure?" emails.

At least there's a spin-up time and it doesn't just roll out overnight, but yeah. It's utter insanity trying to have them enforce things that you can't prove either way.

Honestly, I have a feeling they're just putting this in place to make an example out of a few people over time and then go from there. In a way, reminds me of "California CAN-SPAM" re: a few litigators just getting a judgement here or there.

But if they actually do attempt to enforce this over everyone ... yeah. That won't end well for anyone.

After all, how does one "prove" that someone "consented"? Showing IP address and all of the standard opt-in record doesn't technically "prove" consent. It just shows they filled out a form somewhere - if that.

 

[azgold]

I agree with everything you said, Rob. All you can do is whatever you can do.

I'd like to know how they're going to police it. Will they target certain people? Or base infractions solely on complaints?

 

[bofu2u]

I agree with everything you said, Rob. All you can do is whatever you can do.

I'd like to know how they're going to police it. Will they target certain people? Or base infractions solely on complaints?

Honestly, it'd have to be complaint driven. But even then, it would have to be done very carefully as logs can be easily faked. Who knows, I see it starting out as a shit show and then becoming more and more refined over time.

 

[azgold]

Honestly, it'd have to be complaint driven. But even then, it would have to be done very carefully as logs can be easily faked. Who knows, I see it starting out as a shit show and then becoming more and more refined over time.

Perhaps this is nothing more than a jaded view but I have to wonder if both this law and the FTC one like it are, for the most part, a money grab. Also, a control thing. The internet is a very difficult venue for them to exert authority over. Mind you, there are some people that deserve to get caught up in these laws. Still, reminds me of what happened to Frank Kern and others. Sounds like they take way more than you'd expect for the situation.

Like I said, maybe my perspective is a bit cynical.