OTTAWA – The Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology fast-tracked proposed anti-spam legislation last week with very little debate. Bill C-28, which proposes a number of new provisions on how to deal with unsolicited commercial email, is essential the same as the previously debated Bill C-27.
Industry Canada introduced two minor changes that govern how the new law will interact with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). Bill C-28 (Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act, or FISA) will take precedence over PIPDEA with respect to any consent conflicts and the new bill includes more precise language in reference to accessing someone’s computer “without authorization.” Rather than this term, the new bill uses the phrase “in contravention of an act of Parliament.”
“It is our hope that the adoption of this bill will provide an opportunity through a concerted and cooperative approach involving the public sector and the private sector to reduce spam and related online threats. At the same time, the bill will permit us to work more effectively with our domestic and international partners to address threats to online commerce,” said Janet DiFrancesco, director general of Industry Canada’s Electronic Commerce Branch.
Some of the larger and potentially economically damaging provisions of C-28 weren’t debated and were left unchanged. Liberal MP from Nipissing – Timiskaming Anthony Rota raised the issue of sending emails to people referred through a third party. Speaking specifically about real estate agents, he noted that many have considered this proposed aspect as causing damage to their businesses.
DiFrancesco acknowledged that this is a challenging area for the bill, but she said allowing third-party referrals could open recipients to spam. An easy way around this provision would be to have the intended recipient contact the real estate directly as opposed to the other way around, she added.
“We do recognize that in some instances business models will have to change to accommodate the new legislation, but we think it’s practical, and reasonable, and necessary to obtain the objectives of the bill,” she stated.
Rota asked if this third-party prohibition counts even if one-off situations.
André Leduc, a policy analyst for electronic commerce policy, responded that the bill covers those circumstances as well, noting that in the case of a real estate agent, contact will have to be initiated by the recipient not the agent.
“Sending of the first commercial electronic message, even if it’s just seeking consent, counts as an unsolicited commercial electronic message,” he said. “What we’re saying is that’s not acceptable. That’s just another form of spam.”
While the business model used by real estate agents was sole case discussed during this 45-minute committee meeting, there are many other industries that will be greatly affected by the provisions of the new bill, if passed into by Parliament. Any business seeking consent to send email to potential customers regarding commercial products and services will be prohibited from doing so. In other words, a business can’t send an email to a person asking for consent to send additional emails to that person.
C-28 has illegal spammers in its cross hairs, and rightly so. But legitimate businesses that rely on email as their primary marketing tool will see their ability to drive revenue growth significantly hampered by the increased costs associated with having to rely on snail mail. Without the ability to make first contact via email, businesses will have to resort to buying stamps and sending letters.
C-28 was introduced in committee after first reading and will now have to go through second and third readings in the House of Commons before being passed to the Senate. Royal assent will come after the Senate has studied the proposed legislation.
