I’m taking part in a 4 part video series about CASL that deals with both Canadian and American perspectives on the anti-spam act. Here are the details:
How To Avoid The CASL Right HookLet’s face it – a lot of Canadians don’t know all the facts about the new Canada Anti-Spam Law (CASL)… and its evolving. But what you don’t know – CAN hurt you.
Helping us learn more about CASL and how to prepare for it, is Canadian lawyer, +David Canton
focusing on CASL, and American lawyer, Sean A. Moynihan, focusing on American Marketing. They’ll be informing, discussing and weighing in on the facts about this new law and how it opens to the doors to Class Action suits that can shut down your business – even businesses outside of Canada.
Round 1: David informs us about CASL and recent, new developments – Sean weighs in
Round 2: Sean gives us “The American Perspective” – David weighs in
Round 3: Things That Will Catch You Off Guard – Social Media & Other Surprises
Round 4: Best Practices – How To Win – Sean and David share winning strategies with us
Celebrating Small Business Owners Month!
Sign up for this complimentary, 30 minute, 4 part series, open to viewers on Facebook, LinkedIn and Google+, taking place on October 1st, 8th, 15th and 22nd at PST: 1:00 p.m. / MST: 2:00 p.m. / CST: 3:00 p.m. / EST: 4:00 p.m. (check your timezone here: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/).
Sign in early and post your questions ahead of time and we’ll see if David and Sean can answer them. If you miss a Show – we’ve got you covered, you can view and ask questions even after the “Live” Show.
Click here to register: http://goo.gl/asZ229
Share with anyone who has questions or concerns about CASL
See you there!
#casl #smallbusiness #antispam #ns
Perhaps the most difficult compliance challenge arising from CASL – the new Canadian anti-spam law – is how to deal with one-off emails sent by individual employees. A new online service called CASL-cure provides an outbound email filter solution to this problem.
CASL requires either express consent, or one of a complex series of implied consents, before you can send email that is even slightly promotional in nature. Just 1 non-compliant email sent by 1 employee can put a business at risk for significant sanctions, including multi-million dollar fines, personal director and officer liability, and starting in 2017 private rights of action including class action suits. The onus is on the sender to prove compliance, so records must be kept to show how and when express consent was obtained, or how the recipient fits into an implied consent category. The email itself must contain specified contact info and an unsubscribe mechanism.
That is a lot to expect any employee to understand, let alone comply with, regardless of how much training they get.
CASL-cure solves this challenge in two ways. First, it automatically adds CASL compliant contact information and an unsubscribe mechanism to every email. Second, it compares the outbound email addresses to a whitelist of emails that have consent. If it detects an address that is not listed, it holds the email and sends a reply to the sender saying that the intended recipient is not on the CASL approved list, and offers a menu that the sender can use to enter the details of the nature of the consent. Once the sender completes that information, that consent detail is added to the whitelist and the email is released.
This solution significantly reduces the risk of sending non-compliant emails. And since it records how and who added the consent details to the database, it is easy for the business to deal with an employee who tries to cheat the system. It also helps immensely with a defense under CASL if an investigation results from a complaint. First, because the system records consent details. Second, if a non-compliant email does get through for some reason, such as an employee entering false information, it provides a due-diligence defense showing that the business did as much as it possibly could to prevent a violation.
Transparency disclosure – the providers of CASL-cure are clients of mine.
I participated in a Google+ video hangout that has been turned into a 3 part video series answering some questions about CASL.
The first one is now available on the HP website.
Check out this new iPhone app (Android app coming soon) that helps solve the CASL problem of getting and proving you have consent to send email to people that you have just met, such as at a networking event.
Sometimes when legislation like CASL comes in like a freight train, it gives rise to opportunities for entrepreneurs and problem solvers. This is an example of an innovative solution to help solve some of the difficult challenges that CASL brings.
(Disclosure – this was developed by a client.)
You may be tired of hearing about CASL, and tired of getting the consent requests that people were sending out before July 1. The pre July 1 scramble was done because sending an email to request consent is now itself considered spam. But we may still see requests, which can be sent if the recipient fits into one of the exceptions.
In hindsight, I wish I had kept track of the number of consent requests I got, how many of those were not technically compliant with CASL, and how many were from entities I’d never heard of that were just trolling for contacts.
There are uncertainties over the interpretation of many parts of CASL, but it can’t be ignored. Businesses need to do the best they can to comply and demonstrate diligence. CASL compliance will be an iterative process over time as the interpretation hopefully becomes more clear. While the CRTC will no doubt focus on real spammers, anyone can complain, and you never know who they might choose to make an example of. Don’t set yourself up to be that example.
For more detail on CASL check out the HP CASL page, or search for CASL on my blog.
Cross posted to Slaw
CASL – Canada’s new anti-spam legislation – becomes law on July 1. It is a sledgehammer to kill a fly approach to spam that requires attention by almost every business and not for profit. In my view, the significant amount of time, effort, and money that it will take for legitimate businesses and not for profits to comply with the act will come nowhere close to justifying any meagre benefit.
Many business have complied, many are just waking up to it now, and many are ignoring it. It doesn’t help that the act has a broad definition of spam that goes way beyond the drugs, diets and deals emails that the average person would consider spam – then picks away at it with a myriad of convoluted exceptions. Many can’t believe that such an act was passed in the first place. But CASL is not going away any time soon. At some point someone is going to take a run at the constitutionality of it – but that could take years.
Given the significant potential sanctions for non-compliance, resistance is futile.
If you have not taken steps to comply yourself, do it now.
When you get an email requesting consent, do the sender (and yourself) a favour and grant your consent if it is something you want to keep getting. If the email is for something you don’t want, or from someone you have never heard of before that is trolling for new contacts, consider unsubscribing instead of just ignoring it – ignoring it is not the same as unsubscribing.
For more detail on CASL check out the HP CASL page, or search for CASL on my blog.
Cross posted to Slaw.
The CRTC just released another bulletin regarding CASL – Compliance and Enforcement Information Bulletin CRTC 2014-326. It sets out “Guidelines to help businesses develop corporate compliance programs”.
The bulletin sets out CRTC thoughts on best practices for the development of corporate compliance programs for both CASL and the do not call rules. It is worth taking a look at, because having a proper compliance program in place reduces the likelihood of a violation, helps establish a due diligence defence (a due diligence defence may not give a complete pass on a violation, but will reduce the consequences), and helps avoid director and officer personal liability.
Keep in mind that these bulletins do not have the force of law, and don’t bind the CRTC. And as the bulletin rightfully points out, all businesses are different, and small businesses don’t have the same resources as large one.
For more information on CASL search my blog for “CASL”, or visit the HP CASL page.
Far too often – at least in my opinion – courts and legislators don’t seem to understand technology related issues or how the law should fit with them. The Supreme Court of Canada, however, got it right with Spencer, which basically says that internet users have a reasonable expectation of anonymity in their online activities. Last Fall the SCC sent a similar message in the Vu case saying that a general search warrant for a home was not sufficient to search a computer found there. And that trend will hopefully continue with its upcoming Fearon decision on the ability to search cell phones incident to arrest.
While the SCC seems to now “get it” when it comes to privacy and technology, the federal legislature doesn’t seem to. It has continually tried to erode privacy with a series of “lawful access” attempts, the latest of which may be unconstitutional given the Spencer decision. Another example of the federal legislature not “getting it” is the CASL anti-spam legislation, which imposes huge burdens on normal businesses and software providers.
Cross posted to Slaw
Imagine Canada has published an Issue Alert resulting from discussions it had with Industry Canada about the charitable exemption to the anti-spam legislation. They say Industry Canada is interpreting this exemption broadly, which would be good news for charities.
The regulations contain an exemption that says the act does not apply to messages ” … sent by or on behalf of a registered charity as defined in subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act and the message has as its primary purpose raising funds for the charity”.
It was unclear how broad that exemption is in practice, given the broad definitions of CEM. Did it, for example, apply to fundraising events, or for tickets being sold by a theatre or orchestra?
Imagine Canada says Industry Canada has advised them that the exemption does apply to messages selling those things, and that ” .. “if the commercial activity is undertaken to carry out the charity’s mission, and the funds go directly to the charity to support its work, then it likely falls under the exemption.”
This is not a complete free pass for charities on CASL. The act may still apply to some commercial activities of a charity, and might apply if a newsletter is laden with third party ads.
Lets hope Industry Canada or the CRTC adds this clarification to their own FAQs soon to give us further comfort on this.
I was at a conference on CASL (anti-spam) last week chaired by Barry Sookman. His summary of conference highlights is worth reading. Below are some of my observations based on both that conference and my CASL dealings with clients so far.
Large companies are spending millions of dollars to comply with CASL. Small business is struggling to comply and to make sense of how to comply and why it is even needed. But you can bet that the true spammers will just continue to try to hide from the regulators.
Opt-in rates for attempts to get express consents so far have in some cases been abysmal – low single digit %. I suspect there are a number of reasons for that. Many on the mail list don’t care (meaning it’s a waste of time to send to them anyway). But many actually do want it and are not paying attention, who will eventually wonder why they stop getting things. The challenge is to request consents in a way that will encourage a quick and easy yes – meaning that the use of marketing professionals may be key to getting a good response rate.
There is so much uncertainty around CASL interpretation that CASL compliance will be an iterative process.
No software solutions are available for the average business to track CASL compliance. There is a business opportunity to develop affordable mini-CRM software that meets CASL rules and evidentiary requirements and can tie in with bulk mail programs and contact management systems such as Outlook.
The CASL software consents that kick in in January 2015 have the potential to cause real havoc. They are being overshadowed now because of the looming July 1 date for CEM, and that the software consent issue only applies to those creating software. These rules are unprecedented, and there is a danger that many offshore software developers will simply not offer their products to Canadians rather than taking the time and effort to comply.
(Cross posted to Slaw)