CASL is more privacy law than anti-spam law

Michael Geist, a law professor in Canada, writes about the new CASL law, why it’s necessary and why it’s more about privacy and consumer protection than just about spam.

The law has at least three goals: provide Canada with tough anti-spam rules, require software companies to better inform consumers about their programs before installation, and update Canadian privacy standards by re-allocating who bears the cost for the use of personal information in the digital environment.

There are a lot of marketers out there that are really in a tizzy about CASL and about actually having to ask for and receive permission before sending mail to people. These are the same marketers who will tell you that they only do permission email. I’ve not quite gotten past the cognitive dissonance. They already do permission email, now they just actually have to keep some accurate records and have an audit trail.
The more cynical side of me says that the problem is that these senders who are stomping around ranting about how awful CASL is and how unfair are just pouty because they can no longer pretend they have permission. They actually have to have permission. They can’t bury an opt-in somewhere in a privacy policy, they have to have a real opt-in. They can’t tell a complainant “well, you opted in at some point, we just don’t know when” they have to be able to demonstrate the opt-in. They can’t just collect an email address and assume that address is a viable target forever, they have to either have a demonstrable relationship with the recipient or stop mailing the address after a few years.
Whenever I read about how awful CASL is, the underlying issue seems to me to be that marketers don’t like being told to stop taking permission from recipients. The marketers don’t like begin told they have to respect consumers. Not only that, they really hate that if they violate the law they may be held accountable for that.
Canada was one of the last western, industrialized nations to adopt an anti-spam law. I do not think it’s coincidence that CASL is extremely consumer friendly. Canada saw what happened with other laws and wrote a law that was a lot harder for marketers to ignore.

Don't wait to address delivery problems
Facts about engagement

Related Posts

Happy Canada Day, CASL now in effect

It’s Canada Day, and this year it has special connotations for email senders who are in Canada or sending to Canadian residents.
CASL is now in effect. For in depth guidance, go visit Matt Vernhout’s excellent series on CASL.  But for those of you who just want the Cliff notes here’s the high points
If you are in Canada or you are sending to residents in Canada:

Read More

The DMA: Email marketing or spam?

A few weeks ago, I signed up for a webinar from the DMA. As is my normal process I used a tagged address. I don’t remember any notification that I would be signing up for mail, and I generally do look for those kinds of things. I also know a lot of webinars are used to drive sales processes and I prefer not to waste sales time if I’m not actually looking to purchase.
In recent weeks I have gotten an ongoing stream of marketing messages from the DMA. I’ve tried to opt-out, but the DMA don’t actually want me to opt-out. Each marketing message is a different type of message from a different list. Each list must be opted out of individually.
First it was Conferences, then it was Education, then it was Awards, then Events. I’m trying to figure out what’s next and how many more times the DMA is going to get to spam me before I just turn that address into a spam trap.
And before you tell me that I can’t make an address a spam trap, think about that a little bit. I never opted this mail in to receive anything but the webinar confirmation. I’ve dutifully opted out each and every time the DMA has mailed me. I’ve even tried to opt-out of all mail. Unfortunately, the DMA has placed the “opt-out of all mail” behind a registration wall, one I cannot get to as I do not have (or want) a DMA account.
DMASignOn
The DMA is sending me mail I did not request and do not want. They have made it impossible for me to determine how much mail I will get. They have made it difficult for me to opt-out of all their mail.
This is an example of bad email marketing. I’m sure that the DMA will tell me this is all permission based email. I disagree. This is an example of the DMA taking permission. This is not an example of a sender asking for permission. I didn’t give permission to be added to all these DMA lists, and I have no way to actually revoke the permission that they took from me.
I signed up for a second webinar with this email address, one related to CASL. The irony is that the DMA’s behavior here is a violation of a number of points of CASL. First, there was no clear opt-in notice on the website. Second, CASL requires parity between opt-in and opt-out. If I opt-in once then I should be able to opt-out once. CASL puts an end to this opt-in once, opt-out dozens of times process.
I wish I could say I was disappointed in the DMA. But I’m barely surprised. Their track record is poor and they have typically fallen on the side of “I have consent until you force me to acknowledge that I don’t.” In this case, the DMA is demonstrating that quite clearly. They will keep spamming and spamming and spamming. I have no doubt were I to actually register an account, they would continue to spam me with “account notifications” that I was unable to opt-out of because they are transactional, membership messages.

Read More

Ever changing filtering

One of the ongoing challenges sending email, and managing a high volume outbound mail server is dealing with the ongoing changes in filtering. Filters are not static, nor can they be. As ISPs and filtering companies identify new ways to separate out wanted email from unwanted email, spammers find new ways to make their mail look more like wanted mail.
This is one reason traps are useful to filtering companies. With traps there is no discussion about whether or not the mail was requested. No one with any connection to the email address opted in to receive mail. The mail was never requested. While it is possible for trap addresses to get on any list monitoring mail to spam traps is a way to monitor which senders don’t have good practices.
New filtering techniques are always evolving. I mentioned yesterday that Gmail was making filtering changes, and that this was causing a lot of delivery issues for senders. The other major challenge for Gmail is the personalized delivery they are doing. It’s harder and harder for senders to monitor their inbox delivery because almost every inbox is different at Gmail. I’ve seen different delivery in some of my own mailboxes at Gmail.
All of this makes email delivery an ongoing challenge.

Read More